Encountering anti-intellectualism

[Lord Legion]

Many good points.

As an American myself, I think I kinda have to agree. I am going to the university now keeping up a 4.0 gpa (it isn't easy...) and I am more than a little dismayed at the number of my fellow students that really just don't care. I overheard one kid's motto not too long ago, "All you need is a C."

You are exactly right, too many people here are too used to gettng something for free, and won't work, and even look down upon those that will work towards any goal.

However, at the same time, and this goes towards a few of the other posts, intelligent people are to be found all over. I worked with concrete, construction, and even had a stint where I helped out a sheep rancher, and quite a few of the people involved were extremely sharp and had very open viewpoints towards the world and politics. Many of them didn't look it, but it was a good reminder that each and every one of us is capable of a great deal.

I think there is a definite social stigma to be "average" and "just one of the guys" and therefore puts pressure on some people to stifle their own minds. But then again, if they fall for something as rediculous as that, they weren't much to begin with.

 

[Wise_Smiling_Panda]

Alot of actual medicine does come from herbs and so on.

Funny story. Once apon a time, some guys tested all the herbal medicine and random cures for things people claimed. They proved some work. We call it medicine now. People who believe in this stuff irk me. Its good to remember what the quotes poster said. We test things. We move on. Everything is evolution, if you like it or not.

On topic: Likely when, as the only athiest in a group of christian friends i was told id be a better person if i was christian. Backstabbed AND told morals cant exist without religion. Ouch.[/quote]

T_T I feel your pain mate - I feel it so bad. Was in a goddamn (note the lower-case) Christian High School...

 

[HT_Black]

Would you please define "Anti-intellectual" as used in your post?

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

I hate to be the bringer of bad news and be a downer, but that little piece of paper that you are trying to get, really has no effect on you getting a job in the career
Now I don't know where you live in the US, but that is the way things are in the Midwest.

texas, and you sort of need the little piece of paper to be a teacher or join any major arm of law enforcement, which are basically the two things I consider doing. And while having a degree is itself meaningless when it comes to the workforce, a shit-ton of office jobs wont give you a second glance if you don't have anything better than a high school diploma (although in my area, diplomas are gold, since everyone thinks G.E.D. means you are stupid)

 

[AnonymousTipster]

Worst I've ever encountered was while visiting a pretty rural area of Australia. I suppose the people in question would be called "bogans" by most other Australians.

 

[subfield]

Every day I am told by someone that believing in scientific proof over faith is the wrong choice and that they KNOW i'm wrong whereas I "only THINK" they are wrong, hard to argue sanely with idiots

[edited for length]

There realy s no arguing with those types, you can cite fact after method after theorum after report of provable, repeatable, observable, recordable evidence; but the [insert religious text of choice here] IS TRUE, no proof required, because they have 'faith'.

Ugh...

Dude. No.

Why do people do this? Why?

Can you not see that any result from any part of "science" (except a purely mathematical result...) is no more "provable" than any fact claimed by any religion whatsoever? Is it not blindingly clear to you?

Please, tell me you were both joking.

 

[Asuka Soryu]

I have. I call it YouTube.

 

[philosophicalbastard]

In South Africa our government is placing strong emphasis on education and having less kids. Watching the vast majority of American shows on TV is absolutely F'ing horrible. Then my encounters on the internet with most Americans is also an "intellectual" train wreck; it feels like most(qualifier, meaning NOT ALL) Americans know nothing about nothing. My experience of UK media and Europeans is different. On the internet and WoW I've had alot of exposure to the Irish, Scottish and British and I find that a 15 year old Irish kid on WoW is alot more knowledgable than the average 35 year old American. This is MY experience and yes, I'm generalizing.

Most Americans are completely capable of being intellectuals, they just chose not to be. I have noticed a void of inspiration in the country (or atleast the area I live in). People here lack any future to strive for, so they latch on to entertainment of the lowest common denominator to have a feeling of belonging. Oh, so much potential lost to aimlessness of a complacent country.

 

[Lordpils]

Only when the conversation turns to something that people get really emotional about. I've been called a robot and have been accused of thinking too logically (without using the word logically usually it's someway of covering it up). I've also been called an "elitist" as well as being critisized for siding with experts. The way I see it I'd rather listen to a doctor for medical advice then someone who tells me they believe in crystal healing.
Take your pick personally I consider all of that anti-intellectualism.

Yeah. I've been verbally attacked by a lot of the crystal healing types for preferring to take prescribed medication from a trained professional than choking on incense and being "healed by crystal energy". After all, the placebo effect (for that's all I believe it to be, at best) wouldn't work on me, because I don't believe.

I'm fine with incense it smells good alot of the times (it's really just a way to get rid of a stink), but I would never use a method that wasn't prescribed by a medical professional to fix a medical problem.
Hell I'll indulge in spiritual practices for personal amusement and to try to understand a perspective, but I don't believe it does anything. For me though being an intellectual is about looking at things from a logical perspective (The guy who studies biology knows more about evolution then the guy who studies theology) and respecting education. For some reason there are people out there who are anti-intellectuals and claim we don't understand what we're looking at or that we're coming from a perspective where we think we're better then everyone else. It makes no sense.

 

[OldAccount]

Maybe it's just where I live but I can't think of a single time where I've encountered anti-intellectualism (Outside of particularly crappy parts of the internet of course)...Maybe if you count someone rejecting evolutionism.

 

[TheXRatedDodo]

Well, let me put it this way.
I've known a lot of "smart" people that are total dumbfucks, for lack of a better word.
I know many more people who are far smarter than those "smart" ones could ever wish to be, and are drop-outs.

The "smart" ones are labelled as such because they did as they were told in school, the rest asked the most important question a person can ask: "But why?" That's the sign of someone who is truly inquisitive.

But mainly, all of these people that I know who are intelligent drop-outs are of a more philosophical/spiritual bent, but that's the thing, those words don't come into play, they're too busy getting on with just BEing.

For the most part I've found intellectual pursuits to be incredible de-humanizing. Science, for instance, has come to the point where people spout the same monologue about how human emotions are simply a series of complex chemical reactions, balances and imbalances, which to me, is a horrible idea. I believe we are more than that.
Also I find that science in particular has lead to many of this generation converting to Atheism. Now I'm saying nothing good or bad about Atheism itself, since fundamentally, it's just the lack of theism, thus the a- prefix, but how it pans out is a lot of people talking about how we are insignificant space dust drifting around on a rock, and that we are going to die and that our actions here are meaningless, and then they shove that viewpoint in everyone else's faces and bash the religious folk and tell them they're "wrong" (when of course, objectivity is nigh on useless, being a race of beings that percieves relatively.)
This strikes me as pretty destructive, only serves to create more voids between PEOPLE and other PEOPLE.

As for myself, I was once a hardcore, militant Atheist.
Over the past year or so I have started getting into Numerology, Astrology, Astronomy, and began noticing syncronicities on an incredibly minute level to the point where I am utterly convinced that everything is in a state of absolute and complete perfection and that everything happens for a reason, that our paths are laid out before us, yet we still have free will, chaos and order coming into a state of harmony where they are one and the same.
I also believe in some form of re-incarnation, not that I ever really use that word, it has connotations to world religions and belief systems which may not be inherently bad themselves, but I don't want my opinions and views being misconstrued as something taken from another belief system, as that isn't the case, so I tend to say "we've been here before."

And the wonderful thing is, nobody can say "that doesn't exist." Because, hey, I percieve it, thus, it is real to me.
And guess what, I have so much love and empathy for people of all shapes, sizes, colours, creeds, races, religions, sexes and sexualities and all that other tosh that we talk about to differentiate from one another when instead we should be focusing on how incredibly alike we all are.

Peace <3

 

[Zyphonee]

Yes, we live in a culture in which the natural order of things is to think as little as possible, so those that prefer to behave and talk in a slightly more intricate manner end up being constantly frowned upon, not because of anti-intellectualism, but simply because of a natural rejection towards all that is different, and in a society where everyone is conditioned to not use their brains, any kind of inteligent behaviour comes off as eccentric.


Elitism is of course the other side of the spectrum. People have pros and cons, and some would just rather become aquaintanced with those with similar traits.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I hate to be the bringer of bad news and be a downer, but that little piece of paper that you are trying to get, really has no effect on you getting a job in the career
Now I don't know where you live in the US, but that is the way things are in the Midwest.

texas, and you sort of need the little piece of paper to be a teacher or join any major arm of law enforcement, which are basically the two things I consider doing. And while having a degree is itself meaningless when it comes to the workforce, a shit-ton of office jobs wont give you a second glance if you don't have anything better than a high school diploma (although in my area, diplomas are gold, since everyone thinks G.E.D. means you are stupid)

Indiana here. I wish it was like that here. As I have said in previous posts, when I talk with employers they tell me that I need the experience working at their type of company and that even though I learned how to do everything they do in college, it doesn't count. The same goes from my engineer friend; unless he has held and engineering job, he can't get a job in engineering.

I was going for English Teaching awhile back, but I switched to just English when it turned out that teaching program was horse crap and stuffed full of nonsense that had nothing to do with teaching. And don't get me started with how much of a money pit it is for something that won't bring in good pay anyway. Now I know I made the right decision, because I found out that the schools lost 297 million in state funding last year, and are set to lose even more this year.

With how bad the idiotic employer mentality is out there, I think that colleges & universities need to start building their degree programs around experience. There are many class requirements, in degree programs, that can be removed because they are unneeded excess. They could be replaced with required internships that last for at least two years of a 4 year degree. Such internships by law will have to be counted as experience.

 

[Sgt. Dante]

Every day I am told by someone that believing in scientific proof over faith is the wrong choice and that they KNOW i'm wrong whereas I "only THINK" they are wrong, hard to argue sanely with idiots

[edited for length]

There realy s no arguing with those types, you can cite fact after method after theorum after report of provable, repeatable, observable, recordable evidence; but the [insert religious text of choice here] IS TRUE, no proof required, because they have 'faith'.

Ugh...

Can you not see that any result from any part of "science" (except a purely mathematical result...) is no more "provable" than any fact claimed by any religion whatsoever? Is it not blindingly clear to you?

Science does produce results, If you'll indulge me, take an object of your choice from your desk, and drop it. Do this a million times, and every time it will fall. The 'theory' of gravity states this. Now, as a matter of faith,

(New International Version, ©2010)

"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

Drop the same object a million times keeping this passage in mind, ask, pray , believe the object won't fall. I'd bet it still does.

Simple, repeatable, observable evidence. JUst Because you don't understand how something works doesn't mean there has to be a mystical explanation.

 

[Sion_Barzahd]

Yeah i've had it most my life really. Also those who believe being good at a sport is more important than being intellectual.

Anti-intellectualism is at it's best when i have to talk to my parent's friends or my parents for that matter. My mother even tried to prevent me going to uni 'cause she doesn't see the point in it.

 

[dibblywibbles]

haha you people live in weird places...the only time someone gets made fun of for having a degree is when they do nothing with it. that's really making fun of someone who's ambitionless and stupid, not the fact they went to school. I encourage people not to waste their degree

 

[GaryH]

Anti-intellectualism and public schools go hand in hand in the UK. Smart people get picked on and laughed at for succeeding (and also failure if they ever get something wrong), largely because the vast majority of children in those schools are made to look bad by the intellectual ones. Enjoying learning is grounds to be laughed at, reading for fun or being good at maths is tantamount to heresy. A part of me dies whenever I do or say something vaguely intellectual and a person asks me "HOW DO YOU DO THAT?!" as if I had just performed a magic trick. It happens more often than you'd think, and not for doing anything terribly impressive either. (Though that's a bit off topic as it's not "anti-intellectualism", just a frightening lack of intelligence). It's depressing that intelligence is seen as "odd", geniuses are always portrayed as mentally unstable or anti-social.

It's easy to understand why a person of lower intelligence would be an "anti-intellectual" though. If you do not understand what is being explained to you then it is easy to assume that the person is wilfully using vague, complicated language to mislead you. People distrust things that they do not understand, just look at how the media demonises things like chemical names (or even the word "chemicals", despite EVERYTHING being made up of chemicals.) and it isn't helped by companies using faux-scientific terminology to sell their products. How can we expect these people to know what to trust and what not to? They're getting conflicting messages, and the false ones are easier to understand.

Slightly Off-Topic: Does anyone find themselves subconsciously "dumbing down" their speech/behaviour depending on the people they are talking to for the above reasons? I do it sometimes, but I was wondering if it was more common than that.

 

[Duffeknol]

I am one. I quit university because of the snobbish attitude of absolutely everyone.

 

[subfield]

Science does produce results, If you'll indulge me, take an object of your choice from your desk, and drop it. Do this a million times, and every time it will fall. The 'theory' of gravity states this. Now, as a matter of faith,

[edited for length]

Drop the same object a million times keeping this passage in mind, ask, pray , believe the object won't fall. I'd bet it still does.

Simple, repeatable, observable evidence. JUst Because you don't understand how something works doesn't mean there has to be a mystical explanation.

Quite right - now you're talking sense. Almost. But you are not careful enough with your words.

You guarantee to me: "every time it will fall". I contest this assertion in the strongest possible terms. This is not logic, where a result once proved holds forever. It is not a first order system where true things are provable and vice-versa.

This is science, where a result once guessed, by that virtue alone, does not guarantee its truth. Laws are the basis of science, and good or bad, we must accept that they are simply guesses. It makes no matter if they are guesses that so far appear to be correct, or if these guesses have been correct in 100% of so-far observed cases.

It is my contention that because of this weakness, science is closer to religion than, say, first order logic. In fact, science becomes a religion when people are careless with their words in the way above.

 

[Sgt. Dante]

Science does produce results, If you'll indulge me, take an object of your choice from your desk, and drop it. Do this a million times, and every time it will fall. The 'theory' of gravity states this. Now, as a matter of faith,

[edited for length]

Drop the same object a million times keeping this passage in mind, ask, pray , believe the object won't fall. I'd bet it still does.

Simple, repeatable, observable evidence. JUst Because you don't understand how something works doesn't mean there has to be a mystical explanation.

Quite right - now you're talking sense. Almost. But you are not careful enough with your words.

You guarantee to me: "every time it will fall". I contest this assertion in the strongest possible terms. This is not logic, where a result once proved holds forever. It is not a first order system where true things are provable and vice-versa.

This is science, where a result once guessed, by that virtue alone, does not guarantee its truth. Laws are the basis of science, and good or bad, we must accept that they are simply guesses. It makes no matter if they are guesses that so far appear to be correct, or if these guesses have been correct in 100% of so-far observed cases.

It is my contention that because of this weakness, science is closer to religion than, say, first order logic. In fact, science becomes a religion when people are careless with their words in the way above.

Sorry, I didn't guarantee anything, I just pointed out that were I a betting man i'd favour the result that has been proven to be true in over 99% of cases. (Where the <1% can often be found to have serious outside influences.)

To say that science only uses guesswork is ridiculous, and to say that when we've decided something is true that it's true forever more is also nonsense. If tommorrow science were to find a flaw in the laws of gravity, it would be ammended to reflect this change, and the mistake would go down as with the thousand others as a mark of how we have improved our knowledge of the world over time. And scientists the world over will embrace this new information and adapt their theroies to them, learning more, and allowing for more advances in their feilds as this process continues. An idea is only held to be 'true' after it has been rigorously tested; as the mentioned theory of gravity has, since it was found to be consistant in the 16th-17th century. Since then the theory has been proven to hold true, if it hadn't then we wouldn't still use it.

Religion holds on stubbornly to it's beliefs and doctrines as change is often shunned and ostracised. With groups of (basically) the same people worshiping the same Gods being so polarly divised that people wage war over the 'true' interpritation of the [insert holy tome of preference here].

I'm sorry but could you, for my benifit, point out exactly what I said that was not "not careful enough with your words." That made you think that a belief in observable, repeatable results was akin to blind faith?