Why is anti-intellectualism so rampant?
Replies
-
Great thread....check out the Ayn Rand movie or read her works for a different take on the whole 'capitalism sucks' spiel.
If you don't support Ayn Rand at 19 and reject her by the time you're 30, there's something wrong
I actually agree with you - in part because things have so radically changed from the market forces she was writing about. Nonetheless, it's important to understand all sides, and I think her approach to holding entrepreneurs/capitalists in such high regard still commands a high priority in our understanding of the dynamics at work in a society.
The only book of hers that I continue to hold in any regard is The Fountainhead because it is about the rights of a man to his own thoughts and creations (in that case, architecture). Atlas Shrugged reads like a mix between Twilight and 50 Shades of Gray with trains and copper mines instead of whips and red rooms of pain.
Fountainhead is probably my favorite book. Atlas Shrugged...ehh, some parts are good (famous Francisco monologue comes to mind)
Fountainhead though...brilliant. Much less Objectivist ideology and better storytelling,
Exactly. Objectivism is too convoluted an ideology, and I don't think Rand made the best philosopher. She's identified all the time by young people just starting to exercise their brains, but she's such a bad example of good philosophy. I'd rather people started with Plato and Aristotle and actually spend time learning about how and why we engage in rhetoric (and why people like me engage in satire with the whole anti-intellectual intellectual remarks a few pages back to make a point of why the masses are so easily led to believe as they're/we're told, and why it is a necessity to have a society with things like fairness and charity and consideration for the poor - something Rand would rebuke in favor of a straight free-market society or pure capitalism).
Atlas Shrugged was full of her romantic notions of perfect capitalism mixed it with perfect romantic love mixed with kajillionaires who were the only ones who were able to see the true and the right way. It just doesn't work.
Fountainhead is a great book. Even if people don't agree with Rand, they should read it.0 -
I don't agree entirely. We do want to know stuff, but the way people who read 'wikipedia' learn is through a vast amount of incoherent material. People wanting to learn the basics of something still need a textbook format, be it paper or digital. And since many don't like to read books, they only ever scratch the surface of stuff. Such is the road to jack of all trades, master of none.The internet has played both a positive and negative role. People are more aware of how they present themselves because the vast amount of people who see what is put on the internet. But everything being so readily available has helped us become lazy. If we want to know something we look it up and we're done.
No longer do we want to understand what we learn.
I
wikipedia. I know it's user submitted content, so I don't think it's the be all, end all of everything, but it does lead me to new topics and new knowledge. It's like the shaky, unstable gate into wonderland.
I was taught by my professors to read everything with a critical eye and a thought to the author's bias and message. If anything, something like wikipedia is an opportunity for professors, not a hindrance, they just need to stop teaching ideology and restart teaching how to think critically.
I think this is a very good point. I often start with Wiki (and at least see what references there are). Sometimes, depending on how serious the research is, I'll delve deeper. But it is important to always keep in mind the authors' potential bias; even when the author is trying to be objective and the bias only creeps in unconsciously.
And in my opinion, the critical thinking should begin much earlier - even the upper grades in elementary school should be able to start teaching this kind of thing. It shouldn't wait until high school or college.0 -
Thanks for a fabulously peaceful sharing of thoughts and ideas, my heart is all warm and fuzzy now. Will stop by in the morning, it's way past my bedtime already.
I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread. It's made me think about myself and my own notions of intellectualism, nerdiness, ignorance, etc (which I haven't done in a long time, I'll admit). That it's been very respectful on all sides is a big bonus. Even though I haven't had a lot to contribute, I've benefitted a lot from this.
:flowerforyou: @ everyone0 -
I am not sure if I have misunderstood your comment - but it's not dumbing it down for someone less intelligent but usually for someone not knowledgable in that field.
Like in the example of doctors explaining in laymens terms to the patient - the patient may well be very intelligent and educated, but not in a medical field, and still need the dumbed down version.
Anyway,interesting thread - although I am not following all of it.
Because am not getting most of the American political references.
I agree with you. I should have used knowledgeable or educated in the subject rather than intelligent. I had something else typed there, and didn't edit well. And the "dumb it down" part was sarcasm
edited: words are hard
Yes I understood 'dumbing it down' to be a figure if speech, no offence taken to that.
Just wanted to clarify your comment - and in fact we agree on what was intended, so all good.
Somebody mentioned Jenny McCarthy and her anti vaccine crusades.
I work in field of vaccinations and the harm done by such self proclaimed experts in this field,who in fact have no expertise or understanding of the topic at all, is disgraceful.0 -
People are
a) afraid/intimidated by intelligence and ideas because it makes them feel bad about themselves for not having those thoughts. They feel inferior and don't want to. Also because
b) being an intellectual--one who enjoys thinking and ideas--takes work. It means not taking the easy route.0 -
If anything the Internet/digital age to me is helping the "average" "excel" far more than ever. There is so much information out there that actual knowledge is easier to find and because the search is easier more can be learned and applied by those less talented that may not have had the opportunity before.
That's an interesting thought. I'm probably the only one on this thread that doesn't have a degree (oops, is my insecurity showing?) and I feel like the internet has helped me quite a bit in my quest to learn ALL THE THINGS.
But, at the same time, a lot of that knowledge is opinion based rather than fact based, and that's where stuff gets dangerous. I never read only one article on anything I'm learning about - I need to consider all sides. But most people? I just don't think they do. I think they take the first result Google gives them and calls it day.
Degrees don't mean anything in terms of intelligence. Anyone who goes to college knows that they aren't sitting in classrooms full of particularly intelligent people. Just everyday people who are bothering to go to class. I studied chemistry and engineering in college...and you'd be shocked at the sorts of morons out building bridges and managing chemical reactors right now. Every time you drive into a parking structure, just remember it was probably designed by someone who spent 4 years crushing beer cans with his forehead. Someone like me.
90% of learning we do on our own through our own curiosity and reading. College just formalizes the basis and gives a credential that is supposed to prove you're trainable to potential employers.0 -
^^what amw said^^If anything the Internet/digital age to me is helping the "average" "excel" far more than ever. There is so much information out there that actual knowledge is easier to find and because the search is easier more can be learned and applied by those less talented that may not have had the opportunity before.
That's an interesting thought. I'm probably the only one on this thread that doesn't have a degree (oops, is my insecurity showing?) and I feel like the internet has helped me quite a bit in my quest to learn ALL THE THINGS.
But, at the same time, a lot of that knowledge is opinion based rather than fact based, and that's where stuff gets dangerous. I never read only one article on anything I'm learning about - I need to consider all sides. But most people? I just don't think they do. I think they take the first result Google gives them and calls it day.
Degrees don't mean anything in terms of intelligence. Anyone who goes to college knows that they aren't sitting in classrooms full of particularly intelligent people. Just everyday people who are bothering to go to class. I studied chemistry and engineering in college...and you'd be shocked at the sorts of morons out building bridges and managing chemical reactors right now. Every time you drive into a parking structure, just remember it was probably designed by someone who spent 4 years crushing beer cans with his forehead. Someone like me.
90% of learning we do on our own through our own curiosity and reading. College just formalizes the basis and gives a credential that is supposed to prove you're trainable to potential employers.
I have a VERY good job and my qualifications played absolutely no part in me getting it.
Life is a challenge and I see intellectualism as a very small part of whom anybody is!0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?0
-
there is no true measure of intelligence. you may be extremely good at one thing and I at another...How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
Does that make either of us any more intelligent than the other...0 -
there is no true measure of intelligence. you may be extremely good at one thing and I at another...How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
Does that make either of us any more intelligent than the other...
Each person has their own subjective idea of what an intelligent person possesses.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.
Another question, but this one is for you: do you believe education takes away from a child's natural curiosity?0 -
This thread made me think of the essay written by Nicholas Carr, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?"
I'm not throwing blame soley at Google. It just happens to be good prose and prompts critical thinking.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/0 -
For me I feel like I'm often misunderstood (which, obviously is on me) so I go over the top trying to find anything that might be misinterpreted to explain it before someone gets pissy at me.
It's really sort of ridiculous.
I'm the same way, but I think it's an overreaction to how quick to take offense most people seem to be these days.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.
Another question, but this one is for you: do you believe education takes away from a child's natural curiosity?
...Is this some kind of an interview?
I think it really depends on the style of education. Treating them all the same, ( in other words, making an entire class proceed at the speed of the slowest learner), and teaching them to pass a standardized test as opposed to letting them flex their brain muscles in a way that stimulates and motivates them can certainly destroy a child's natural drive to learn, imo.
In case its the direction your going with this, no, I don't think it has to follow that an adult needs to continue on that basis. Lots of kids were bored out of their minds and even oppressed by institutional education. Myself among them. Doesn't mean its a permanent outcome.0 -
VitaminSex:
Yes, I agree. Would you say that the Capitolism in the US is thriving? Does it serve us well? I didn't think so. I believe this to be directly linked to anti-intellectualism.
Can you expand on this further? Specifically, your thoughts on capitalism in the U.S. and how it serves us.VitaminSex:
I have to admit I'm not completely sure what you're talking about here. Although, in the US (my experience of capitolism "free market") capitolism, labor nor our practices in economics are well regulated. Again, something I think intellectuals would argue is leading to our rapid downfall.
Of course, the problem boils down to who is defining what "well regulated" means.0 -
So you guys don't agree that the importance of education and the general intelligence of people is declining? It's always been that way, we're just more aware of it now?
There's definitely been a decline in both the importance and the quality of public education. I think it began when teaching self-esteem became more important than math & science. We reap what we sow, and from appearances (and maybe the impetus for this thread) it is a generation that knows very little, is ignorant of much, and proud of it.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.
Another question, but this one is for you: do you believe education takes away from a child's natural curiosity?
...Is this some kind of an interview?
I think it really depends on the style of education. Treating them all the same, ( in other words, making an entire class proceed at the speed of the slowest learner), and teaching them to pass a standardized test as opposed to letting them flex their brain muscles in a way that stimulates and motivates them can certainly destroy a child's natural drive to learn, imo.
In case its the direction your going with this, no, I don't think it has to follow that an adult needs to continue on that basis. Lots of kids were bored out of their minds and even oppressed by institutional education. Myself among them. Doesn't mean its a permanent outcome.
Yes!
Not really. I'm just a curious pain in the butt.
Anyway...
So do you find that many intelligent kids are held back because of the boring curriculum?0 -
Great thread....check out the Ayn Rand movie or read her works for a different take on the whole 'capitalism sucks' spiel.
If you don't support Ayn Rand at 19 and reject her by the time you're 30, there's something wrong
I actually agree with you - in part because things have so radically changed from the market forces she was writing about. Nonetheless, it's important to understand all sides, and I think her approach to holding entrepreneurs/capitalists in such high regard still commands a high priority in our understanding of the dynamics at work in a society.
The only book of hers that I continue to hold in any regard is The Fountainhead because it is about the rights of a man to his own thoughts and creations (in that case, architecture). Atlas Shrugged reads like a mix between Twilight and 50 Shades of Gray with trains and copper mines instead of whips and red rooms of pain.
Fountainhead is probably my favorite book. Atlas Shrugged...ehh, some parts are good (famous Francisco monologue comes to mind)
Fountainhead though...brilliant. Much less Objectivist ideology and better storytelling,
Exactly. Objectivism is too convoluted an ideology, and I don't think Rand made the best philosopher. She's identified all the time by young people just starting to exercise their brains, but she's such a bad example of good philosophy. I'd rather people started with Plato and Aristotle and actually spend time learning about how and why we engage in rhetoric (and why people like me engage in satire with the whole anti-intellectual intellectual remarks a few pages back to make a point of why the masses are so easily led to believe as they're/we're told, and why it is a necessity to have a society with things like fairness and charity and consideration for the poor - something Rand would rebuke in favor of a straight free-market society or pure capitalism).
Atlas Shrugged was full of her romantic notions of perfect capitalism mixed it with perfect romantic love mixed with kajillionaires who were the only ones who were able to see the true and the right way. It just doesn't work.
Fountainhead is a great book. Even if people don't agree with Rand, they should read it.
Yep. What we need is 8 years of Progressivism. (The TV man says it's Communism without the hundreds of millions of dead people. Plus Jews are bad now, but not in a Naziism way.)0 -
Google. ...nobody has to think anymore0
-
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
Buzzfeed quizzes like this one:
0 -
If I answer correctly... do I get some sort of prize?
or is there a right answer...?
What counts as intelligence or valuable knowledge in some parts of the world... may not be so much in other places...
And then there are all the different personality types out there.... that plays into the factor.
besides are we not edumacated to be tolerable to everyone now a days?
isn't there like a zero tolerance rule placed on us ... I think that includes the "intellectual"
.......wait intellectual doesn't mean wise..... I wise person applies the knowledge they have in life and uses it....
And I would be wise to not comment on these boards where people can be so mean
plus I need a coffee and I don't really care about the topic... I guess I was filling time till my coffee was ready.
- tola0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
Buzzfeed quizzes like this one:
Who said I was an intellectual at all?
That question aside, I am pretty intolerable.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.
Another question, but this one is for you: do you believe education takes away from a child's natural curiosity?
...Is this some kind of an interview?
I think it really depends on the style of education. Treating them all the same, ( in other words, making an entire class proceed at the speed of the slowest learner), and teaching them to pass a standardized test as opposed to letting them flex their brain muscles in a way that stimulates and motivates them can certainly destroy a child's natural drive to learn, imo.
In case its the direction your going with this, no, I don't think it has to follow that an adult needs to continue on that basis. Lots of kids were bored out of their minds and even oppressed by institutional education. Myself among them. Doesn't mean its a permanent outcome.
Standardized testing is necessary to ensure that a foundation is built upon which intellectual creativity can flourish. Without the basics of mathematics, grammar, spelling, and the scientific method, children won't have the skills necessary to add to our research, knowledge, and creative literature. I view the anti-standardized testing arguments as nothing more than an excuse for failure. The solution to boredom is advanced and AP classes, and magnet schools, and they are available.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.
Another question, but this one is for you: do you believe education takes away from a child's natural curiosity?
...Is this some kind of an interview?
I think it really depends on the style of education. Treating them all the same, ( in other words, making an entire class proceed at the speed of the slowest learner), and teaching them to pass a standardized test as opposed to letting them flex their brain muscles in a way that stimulates and motivates them can certainly destroy a child's natural drive to learn, imo.
In case its the direction your going with this, no, I don't think it has to follow that an adult needs to continue on that basis. Lots of kids were bored out of their minds and even oppressed by institutional education. Myself among them. Doesn't mean its a permanent outcome.
Standardized testing is necessary to ensure that a foundation is built upon which intellectual creativity can flourish. Without the basics of mathematics, grammar, spelling, and the scientific method, children won't have the skills necessary to add to our research, knowledge, and creative literature. I view the anti-standardized testing arguments as nothing more than an excuse for failure. The solution to boredom is advanced and AP classes, and magnet schools, and they are available.
Hmm, I don't agree with this part. Passing a test does not mean that you fully grasp a concept, and failing one doesn't mean you didn't. Some kids test well, some kids don't. I'm not necessarily anti-standardized testing, but I don't think the way it's set up now is the best way.
My seven year old is one of those children that is *amazing* at recognizing patterns. When we initially started homeschooling, we used a computer based program that ended every lesson in a quiz of sorts. She would ace every quiz/test that came her way - but she was learning nothing. She was using her ability to find hidden patterns within the tests. I thought she was like a prodigy, but she was really just cheating the system.
Standardized tests aren't any part of the reason we chose to homeschool, but teaching all kids in one way, was. The same seven year old is a visual/spacial learner - which is a really hard learning style to teach and most kids who learn like this fall through the cracks at school.
So I don't test my kids when we finish a lesson. Since it's a 1 to 2 environment, I know when they do and do not understand what I've taught them. As they get older, I will test them more so they are prepared for college.0 -
How do you (meaning any one of you) measure intelligence?
I don't think there is a reliable way to measure it. Personally I think its best summed up as the basic curiosity that inspires a drive to want to learn, and the wherewithal to follow through and actually do it. The people I'd say are lacking are the ones who don't have any desire to know anything, and happy just drifting through, never thinking to question anything or anyone or to challenge themselves. The ones who just space off and watch things happen without ever asking why, or better yet wondering if there is a better way to make things happen.
Another question, but this one is for you: do you believe education takes away from a child's natural curiosity?
...Is this some kind of an interview?
I think it really depends on the style of education. Treating them all the same, ( in other words, making an entire class proceed at the speed of the slowest learner), and teaching them to pass a standardized test as opposed to letting them flex their brain muscles in a way that stimulates and motivates them can certainly destroy a child's natural drive to learn, imo.
In case its the direction your going with this, no, I don't think it has to follow that an adult needs to continue on that basis. Lots of kids were bored out of their minds and even oppressed by institutional education. Myself among them. Doesn't mean its a permanent outcome.
Standardized testing is necessary to ensure that a foundation is built upon which intellectual creativity can flourish. Without the basics of mathematics, grammar, spelling, and the scientific method, children won't have the skills necessary to add to our research, knowledge, and creative literature. I view the anti-standardized testing arguments as nothing more than an excuse for failure. The solution to boredom is advanced and AP classes, and magnet schools, and they are available.
Hmm, I don't agree with this part. Passing a test does not mean that you fully grasp a concept, and failing one doesn't mean you didn't. Some kids test well, some kids don't. I'm not necessarily anti-standardized testing, but I don't think the way it's set up now is the best way.
My seven year old is one of those children that is *amazing* at recognizing patterns. When we initially started homeschooling, we used a computer based program that ended every lesson in a quiz of sorts. She would ace every quiz/test that came her way - but she was learning nothing. She was using her ability to find hidden patterns within the tests. I thought she was like a prodigy, but she was really just cheating the system.
Standardized tests aren't any part of the reason we chose to homeschool, but teaching all kids in one way, was. The same seven year old is a visual/spacial learner - which is a really hard learning style to teach and most kids who learn like this fall through the cracks at school.
So I don't test my kids when we finish a lesson. Since it's a 1 to 2 environment, I know when they do and do not understand what I've taught them. As they get older, I will test them more so they are prepared for college.
sounds objective0 -
It's not "being a nerd", it's not being ignorant...
I wasn't aware that anti-intellectualism was rampant. It certainly isn't in my circles. Maybe you ought to reconsider the people with whom you socialize and the places you frequent.0 -
sounds objective
Just because I'm referencing a personal situation doesn't mean I'm being subjective about something. I've done lots of research on this - I had to before making such a drastic change in our lives. And during that research I was completely objective. I don't hate public school. My oldest was in public school and I'm thankful for the teachers she had in her life during that time. This isn't some personal hate agenda for the public school system.
Like I said, I don't think standardized testing is an inherently bad thing - it just shouldn't be the sole indicator of a fundamental understanding of a subject. And nor should the results indicate the success of the teacher.0 -
sounds objective
Just because I'm referencing a personal situation doesn't mean I'm being subjective about something. I've done lots of research on this - I had to before making such a drastic change in our lives. And during that research I was completely objective. I don't hate public school. My oldest was in public school and I'm thankful for the teachers she had in her life during that time. This isn't some personal hate agenda for the public school system.
Like I said, I don't think standardized testing is an inherently bad thing - it just shouldn't be the sole indicator of a fundamental understanding of a subject. And nor should the results indicate the success of the teacher.
I think testing is a necessary part of education. I don't particularly like home schooling for a variety of reasons, but my biggest worry, if I was to do it, would be making sure that my children exceeded objective markers for success and that my own personal bias wasn't the sole judgment I used to gauge their success. Kids either learn math or they don't. They either understand the scientific method or they don't. I'm all for creative thinking and pushing children to appreciate the arts, but there are certain things that absolutely can and should be objectively measured. They ultimately will be tested when it comes time to take the SATs and I'd rather have my children trained to be excellent test takers, in addition to learning how to think creatively. Those skills are absolutely not mutually exclusive.
Edit: I softened my wording. I am pro-testing but I'm not second guessing what you think is best for your kids. I simply disagree.0 -
You're not even testing your children. I don't particularly like home schooling for a variety of reasons, but my biggest worry, if I was to do it, would be making sure that my children exceeded objective markers for success and that my own personal bias wasn't the sole judgment I used to gauge their success. Kids either learn math or they don't. They either understand the scientific method or they don't. I'm all for creative thinking and pushing children to appreciate the arts, but there are certain things that absolutely can and should be objectively measured. They ultimately will be tested when it comes time to take the SATs and I'd rather have my children trained to be excellent test takers, in addition to learning how to think creatively. Those skills are absolutely not mutually exclusive.
My kids are 7 and 9 - why do I need to test them when I'm literally sitting right next to them as they complete their worksheets, writing prompts, and lessons? Once they show proficiency in a concept, we move on to the next (and we often revisit concepts to just reinforce the concept and show how it ties into other things). I know what they know and where their weaknesses are.
You're assuming that my approach to homeschooling is butterflies and Mozart - it's not. We meet or exceed the state standards for their grade level every year. I make sure their educational goals are similar to their peers - while having the luxury to include other things like art, music, etc.
I've said it previously, but I'll say it again. They *will* start tests when I feel it's age appropriate (likely middle school) so they are prepared for their SAT's and college.
Many people have a negative view of homeschooling. But they rarely consider that every family approaches it differently so sweeping generalizations aren't very accurate. My kids could easily "test" above their grade level - while they explain non-Newtonian fluids, how to measure density and how different joints in the body work.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions