Poll: Outsmarting Teacher

[floppylobster]

I spent all of last year at university not experiencing this, but suddenly today I defeated my teacher's entire point about Edgar Allen Poe's 'Tell Tale Heart' because I was apparently the only one in the room, including the tutor, who had considered that maybe the narrator was a woman, invalidating the entire intended subject of our seminar. I had clearly thrown my tutor, and myentire group, who had been assuming the narrator was male.

I've seen papers written on the narrator being a woman so maybe the university you're going to ain't no good? You'll find plenty of tutors who aren't the smartest, that's why they're not professors. Also, university at a higher level should not be about proving how smart you are. Even though you?ll certainly encounter those type of people while you're there.

 

[Cody211282]

I AM a teacher, and a lot of my colleagues are twits. Does this count?

Yes it does, and thank you for admitting that. Just for the record what grades do you teach?

 

[Irishhoodlum]

Spoiler

Hate to burst your bubble about being "smarter than the teacher" but here's a quote from a study guide which debunks your theory about the gender of the narrator:

"The narrator's gender is not identified, but Poe probably intended him to be a man. Here is why: Poe generally wrote from a male perspective, often infusing part of himself into his main characters. Also, in major short stories in which he identifies the narrator by gender?stories such as "The Black Cat," "The Cask of Amontillado," and "The Fall of the House of Usher"?the narrator is male. Finally, the narrator of "A Tell-Tale Heart" exhibits male characteristics, including (1) A more pronounced tendency than females to commit violent acts. Statistics demonstrate overwhelmingly that murder is a male crime. (2) Physical strength that would be unusual in a female. The narrator drags the old man onto the floor and pulls the bed on top of him, then tears up floorboards and deposits the body between joists. (3) The narrator performs a man's chore by bringing four chairs into the old man's bedroom, one for the narrator and three for the policemen. If the narrator were a woman, the policemen probably would have fetched the chairs. But they did not."

*does a victory dance for teachers everywhere*

Also, all you kids got to remember that nobody is perfect, and teaching is a thankless job. Just because you're a teacher does not make you all knowing or infallible.

Victory, just victory, all the arrogant folks around here could really use a dose of this medicine.

are you serious?
because one theorist reckons it's probably a male, then it's definitely a male and the idea of the narrator being a female becomes entirely wrong?
you two are idiots

Nice job proving his point there buddy. He was saying that just because you corrected your teacher once or twice doesn't make you God of the Universe eligible to teach a college course on the subject while your teacher is a mentally retarded prat (and reading some of these posts this is the impression I received). And if you actually read that literary analysis you'd realise that it was a well thought out point that I can almost guarantee was better thought out than whatever defense the OP had for thinking to the contrary -no offense intended-, and infintely better than the one you failed to give. But you just call them both idiots without any evidence to back yourself up. You must be a right straight A Valedictorian here come to bless us with your presence.

I know those kids in real life who believe they know everything about physics because they read a few articles on nuclear bombs in their spare time and everyone else has a collective IQ of 12 compared to their ungodly knowledge. Incidentally they're generally D average students.

 

[Masterpsyker]

99.9% of the time when someone says they he/she is smarter then the teacher he/she are just showing off his/her giant ego and saying "look how clever I am, I'm so smart and you are all so dumb." This seems really immature to me. Nobody knows everything and every person knows something that you don't. I guess I may have come up with a good point during some discussion but I wouldn't remember because it was just a contribution to the group's debate.

Hey, I agree with this, just because you come up with an awesome point/fact in class that the teacher doesn't know doesn't mean your in any way smarter then them. In my few years in college life i've found some teachers will just let some things go rather than humiliate you in class, so while you think your philosophy argument was valid and a "victory" they won't then go all doctoral on your ass and make you look a fool. In my exp, my proffessors are brilliant. They do whatever they do for a living, and are exposed to it year in year out by 100s of other teachers and students. Trust me at an undergrad lvl there is almost no student capable of "outsmarting" a teacher.

I bet my chemistry professor that I could down three pints before he finished a shot glass with only two stipulations. Classic bar trick (also known as a sucker's proposition) which he WILLINGLY submitted to IN FRONT OF THE ENTIRE LECTURE HALL.

Yes, you CAN outsmart your teachers. They are human and ergo prone to failure JUST LIKE YOU AND I. For every teacher I could outsmart or who was less inherently intelligent than I there has been a teacher who could blow me out of the water.

Besides, this all eventually will boil down into a discussion on what intelligence is. Is it the ability to use creative thinking and logic or the ability to retain and store information?

If you define intelligence via the first method then I have been, to date, more intelligent than a VAST majority of my teachers; however, if you choose the second method then EVERY teacher I've had has been more intelligent than I simply because of experience and time.

Do I understand statistics? A cursory version, yes... but I'm no master. COULD I be a master of statistics? Yeah, but I haven't spent the time to do so. Does this make me more or less intelligent than the PHD of Statistics in the room? Maybe, and maybe not. Either way, you couldn't use the knowledge of statistics as the SOLE METRIC for your decision.

End Rant.

 

[feather240]

The smartest people are the ones are the ones who say, "I don't know." Another fact: intelligence measures your ability to learn, not what you have learned. Does anybody see what I'm getting at?

when i was younger i could outsmart most of my teachers, and as i got older i had wikipedia to totally humiliate them each time they gave wrong facts.

Yes. Thank god you have Wikipedia. Wikipedia is never wrong. There's only like an average of 4 errors per page. Not a big deal at all.

I'm a teacher and the level of arrogance and superiority in this thread is absolutely astonishing. Teacher's are first and foremost people. We are fallible, prone to having bad days, being over tired or over worked.

This is especially true of newer teachers. I spent my days teaching 3 classes, correcting work on my preparation period, staying well after school and then heading home to prepare lessons. My days were and still are 16,17,18 hour affairs where all I do is continuous work related to my students and the classes I teach.

I think Socrates said it best when he said "All I know is that I know nothing."

This best elucidates my point.

1)Those that haven't learned much are probably unable to learn much.

2) I've yet to have Wikipedia fail me in school, regardless of what teachers have been expecting.

3) I'm so tired of these kind of quotes being put at the end of arguments. The whole "a smart man realizes he knows nothing" crap. By its self it works, but whenever it's put at the end of anything its just a pointless safeguard to say arrogance is wrong even as the quoter is being arrogant. (Sure, I'm arrogant right now, but I'm not putting a quote to try and invalidate anything, and now I'm even more arrogant...)

 

[Yureina]

Teachers can't be expected to know *everything* even about their subject area. Even if they do, they can sometimes forget little details at moments that make it appear that they do not know what they are talking about. But, that's just me. I used to be pretty mean about my knowing more than my teachers did, but now I am more forgiving because its just so much information. Sometimes minor details get missed.

 

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

Nice job proving his point there buddy. He was saying that just because you corrected your teacher once or twice doesn't make you God of the Universe eligible to teach a college course on the subject while your teacher is a mentally retarded prat (and reading some of these posts this is the impression I received). And if you actually read that literary analysis you'd realise that it was a well thought out point that I can almost guarantee was better thought out than whatever defense the OP had for thinking to the contrary -no offense intended-, and infintely better than the one you failed to give. But you just call them both idiots without any evidence to back yourself up. You must be a right straight A Valedictorian here come to bless us with your presence.

I know those kids in real life who believe they know everything about physics because they read a few articles on nuclear bombs in their spare time and everyone else has a collective IQ of 12 compared to their ungodly knowledge. Incidentally they're generally D average students.

his original point was that theoretically the narrator could be female which the professor hadnt even considered
i mean it's true that the OP is being quite arrogant about it but he still has a point, the narrator could theoretically be female and to assume they are male shows ignorance - just cause some theorist reckons they're maled doesnt make any less of a noteworthy observation

if the OP had said that the narrator was definitely was a female and called his teacher stupid for thinking them male, id see your point but as it was he thought outside the box and thus out thought the teacher

or at least, that's how his post makes it sound
i have no idea how it actually went down

 

[imaloony]

Does beating a teacher at Halo 3 count?

 

[Doitpow]

I really dislike people criticising their teachers. All of us have knowledge that our teachers don't, but it's usually outside their area of expertise. I could probably lecture my lecturers on physics, but they teach anthropology. Every has things they like to focus on and things they ignore, knowing something someone else doesn't, doesn't make you smarter.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

.

His original point was that theoretically the narrator could be female which the professor hadn't even considered.
I mean it's true that the OP is being quite arrogant about it but he still has a point, the narrator could theoretically be female and to assume they are male shows ignorance - just cause some theorist reckons they're male doesn't make it any less of a noteworthy observation.

If the OP had said that the narrator was definitely was a female and called his teacher stupid for thinking them male, I'd see your point but as it was he thought outside the box and thus 'out thought' the teacher.

Or at least, that's how his post makes it sound.
I have no idea how it actually went down.

I don't quite know why this months old thread of mine has been brought back from the dead, but I saw it kicking around again so thought I'd have a read.

I'm sorry if in my original post I came across as being arrogant, that's just my usual writing style. The context of this 'outsmarting' actually came about as part of a class discussion, in which I raised the point that many of the assumptions that were being made about the story (killing a father figure to take his position of power was one of the major ones) could be utterly subverted if it turned out the narrator was female, since within the context of the story this would make it read much more like a spurned or abused lover seeking revenge.

The teacher acknowledged that she had never in her readings considered this viewpoint, and we discussed it, searching as a class for evidence within the text to support my claim (I had some evidence, but it wasn't like I had miraculously discovered a whole new reading) and then we spent the final ten minutes of the seminar exploring the story from the point of view of a female reader. I went away afterwards and found other essays, written by prominent feminist theorists that also showed this viewpoint, and were of course much more measured and in depth than mine (I can provide links to where you can download the theories, but it costs money so I didn't think people would be interested.)

It wasn't me standing up and saying 'Ha ha I have outsmarted you teacher, now bow before my incredible intellect' it was me saying as part of an ongoing discussion 'yes, but what if the narrator was female? Should we consider this viewpoint?' The thread title was chosen deliberately for shock value, to make people take notice of it and start posting, but basically everyone seemed to get the wrong end of the stick and assume it was about intellectual elitism. It's supposed to be about those wonderful moments where you have a sudden insight, and it gets validated further when even your teacher tells you that it's a good idea.

 

[G23K]

"Overconfidence can overide intelligence." Think of all the people who were intelligent but pushed it a little too far. As smart as you purport, I bet you can think of someone. Even though you exulted over your temporal juncture of outsmarting a teacher, it only asserts that you think you are intelligent. Even if you are really smart, you should not post your cerebral merit hoping to impress others.

The smartest people are the ones are the ones who say, "I don't know." Another fact: intelligence measures your ability to learn, not what you have learned. Does anybody see what I'm getting at?

when i was younger i could outsmart most of my teachers, and as i got older i had wikipedia to totally humiliate them each time they gave wrong facts.

Yes. Thank god you have Wikipedia. Wikipedia is never wrong. There's only like an average of 4 errors per page. Not a big deal at all.

I'm a teacher and the level of arrogance and superiority in this thread is absolutely astonishing. Teacher's are first and foremost people. We are fallible, prone to having bad days, being over tired or over worked.

This is especially true of newer teachers. I spent my days teaching 3 classes, correcting work on my preparation period, staying well after school and then heading home to prepare lessons. My days were and still are 16,17,18 hour affairs where all I do is continuous work related to my students and the classes I teach.

I think Socrates said it best when he said "All I know is that I know nothing."

This best elucidates my point.

1)Those that haven't learned much are probably unable to learn much.

2) I've yet to have Wikipedia fail me in school, regardless of what teachers have been expecting.

3) I'm so tired of these kind of quotes being put at the end of arguments. The whole "a smart man realizes he knows nothing" crap. By its self it works, but whenever it's put at the end of anything its just a pointless safeguard to say arrogance is wrong even as the quoter is being arrogant. (Sure, I'm arrogant right now, but I'm not putting a quote to try and invalidate anything, and now I'm even more arrogant...)

To rectify these statements
1)True in most cases but I have met people who may not be familiar with the work of Mark Twain but possess an almost infallible logic, limitless vocabulary, or ability to assemble anything.

2)Wikipedia is actually a good source for detailed pieces of information although it can be rife with errors.

3)I guess that I am providing evidence to counter what you said.

 

[feather240]

"Overconfidence can overide intelligence." Think of all the people who were intelligent but pushed it a little too far. As smart as you purport, I bet you can think of someone. Even though you exulted over your temporal juncture of outsmarting a teacher, it only asserts that you think you are intelligent. Even if you are really smart, you should not post your cerebral merit hoping to impress others.

The smartest people are the ones are the ones who say, "I don't know." Another fact: intelligence measures your ability to learn, not what you have learned. Does anybody see what I'm getting at?

when i was younger i could outsmart most of my teachers, and as i got older i had wikipedia to totally humiliate them each time they gave wrong facts.

Yes. Thank god you have Wikipedia. Wikipedia is never wrong. There's only like an average of 4 errors per page. Not a big deal at all.

I'm a teacher and the level of arrogance and superiority in this thread is absolutely astonishing. Teacher's are first and foremost people. We are fallible, prone to having bad days, being over tired or over worked.

This is especially true of newer teachers. I spent my days teaching 3 classes, correcting work on my preparation period, staying well after school and then heading home to prepare lessons. My days were and still are 16,17,18 hour affairs where all I do is continuous work related to my students and the classes I teach.

I think Socrates said it best when he said "All I know is that I know nothing."

This best elucidates my point.

1)Those that haven't learned much are probably unable to learn much.

2) I've yet to have Wikipedia fail me in school, regardless of what teachers have been expecting.

3) I'm so tired of these kind of quotes being put at the end of arguments. The whole "a smart man realizes he knows nothing" crap. By its self it works, but whenever it's put at the end of anything its just a pointless safeguard to say arrogance is wrong even as the quoter is being arrogant. (Sure, I'm arrogant right now, but I'm not putting a quote to try and invalidate anything, and now I'm even more arrogant...)

To rectify these statements
1)True in most cases but I have met people who may not be familiar with the work of Mark Twain but possess an almost infallible logic, limitless vocabulary, or ability to assemble anything.

2)Wikipedia is actually a good source for detailed pieces of information although it can be rife with errors.

3)I guess that I am providing evidence to counter what you said.

1. Yup

2. Also true

3. Yup-ish-er

Congratulations Valentine Wiggin, you're a manipulator, just like peter.

 

[G23K]

I take it that you accede to my intellectualer self.