Why is anti-intellectualism so rampant?

MrMax

Another sapiosexual here. Nerds rock.

amwbox

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even in the last century with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests at dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

ironanimal

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even in the last century with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests at dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

I am so strangely turned on right now.

SunofaBeach14

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even half a century ago with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests it dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

Okay, throw this in then, compare Reagan's speeches to Obama's. It's not a political party comparison, it's generational, at least in my opinion. We've become way too compartmentalized. A leader must be able to engage the masses. If you are only able to communicate with people in your own profession or party then your professors failed you.

AglaeaC

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even in the last century with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests at dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

I typed quickly and should have worded it as just one alternative explanation, you're right.

As for speeches, I first truly paid attention to them as Kofi Annan gave his last speech as Secretary-General. It is a genre that is unknown territory to me, but I'd love to jump into rhetoric at some point and examine speeches closer.

Did you know Teddy R did a morning exercise in the park daily? The story in some Runner's World is highly amusing.

TheVirgoddess

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even in the last century with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests at dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

I think he was pretty exclusively referring to said *kitten*.

I love language and I use "big" words all the time. In part because I want my kids to grow up surrounded by phrases other than "lolz" and in part just because I want to. I like the way certain words feel when rolling off the tongue - I'm also really interested in the etymology of words.

I don't think people are elitists because they use big words, but I think some people use big words to create the illusion of intelligence - which, whatever, do your thing.

AglaeaC

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even in the last century with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests at dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

I think he was pretty exclusively referring to said *kitten*.

I love language and I use "big" words all the time. In part because I want my kids to grow up surrounded by phrases other than "lolz" and in part just because I want to. I like the way certain words feel when rolling off the tongue - I'm also really interested in the etymology of words.

I don't think people are elitists because they use big words, but I think some people use big words to create the illusion of intelligence - which, whatever, do your thing.

I might be an old fart but for the life of me can't type text messages in spoken language.

BigVeggieDream

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even half a century ago with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests it dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

Okay, throw this in then, compare Reagan's speeches to Obama's. It's not a political party comparison, it's generational, at least in my opinion. We've become way too compartmentalized. A leader must be able to engage the masses. If you are only able to communicate with people in your own profession or party then your professors failed you.

Not a Reagan fan, but he had one of the most brilliant sentences ever spoke by a President. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall!" It still elicits a proud to be American emotion.

SunofaBeach14

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

It may have nothing to do with demonstrating superiority, or ego-tripping or whatever.

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Compare political speeches presidents gave even half a century ago with what they do now. G.W. Bush used to get up there and slowly drawl at about a 6th grade level. Compare that to Teddy Roosevelt, who said:

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

What sounds nicer to the ear...what is more inspiring, more eloquent...Teddy's speech, or Bush's?

We shouldn't be threatened by language...or call people elitists for it.

This isn't to say that *kitten* who pull out obscure latin etymology and puke it all over their guests it dinner don't deserve a beverage in the face, but language that today people dismiss as "superiority" was not very long ago perfectly commonplace.

Okay, throw this in then, compare Reagan's speeches to Obama's. It's not a political party comparison, it's generational, at least in my opinion. We've become way too compartmentalized. A leader must be able to engage the masses. If you are only able to communicate with people in your own profession or party then your professors failed you.

Not a Reagan fan, but he had one of the most brilliant sentences ever spoke by a President. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall!"

I'm not claiming to be a fan of anyone, but that is my point. We've bred a group of leaders who cannot communicate. They're too busy listening to themselves talk. And that goes for both sides of the aisle. Until we start pushing civic responsibility again and communication skills over ideology and conformity we will have more of the same. Take FDR, Lincoln, Reagan, and JFK together and you have great leadership skills through fantastic communication skills from both sides of the aisle.

TheVirgoddess

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

SunofaBeach14

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

No. I disagree. It is not that the internet has made us less intelligent so much as it has given an outlet for the less intelligent. In times past, only the best was published. Today, everything is put out there for our consideration.

paperpudding

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but one thing that really annoys me is when people try to demonstrate superiority through the vocabulary they choose.

A person with some kind of literary or economics degree suddenly sounds so fancy that I'd have to get the same degree to grasp what the point is that they are trying to make. So I have to ask them to "dumb it down" for me and just this once step down from that high horse.

They create barriers to boost the ego, but I highly admire people, who can discuss their area of expertise, whatever it may be, so that both professionals and laymen follow their train of thought.

Speak to the crowd, not as you speak to your peers?

I think he means an intentional use of obscure terms relating to their expertise in an effort to appear/feel superior, rather than "dumbing it down" for someone less intelligent.

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.

TheVirgoddess

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

No. I disagree. It is not that the internet has made us less intelligent so much as it has given an outlet for the less intelligent. In times past, only the best was published. Today, everything is put out there for our consideration.

Hmm, interesting point. So the internet is the spotlight rather than the cause?

SunofaBeach14

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

No. I disagree. It is not that the internet has made us less intelligent so much as it has given an outlet for the less intelligent. In times past, only the best was published. Today, everything is put out there for our consideration.

Hmm, interesting point. So the internet is the spotlight rather than the cause?

Imagine a pub in which everyone has the balls to stand on a table and state what they think/feel

TheVirgoddess

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

AglaeaC

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

No. I disagree. It is not that the internet has made us less intelligent so much as it has given an outlet for the less intelligent. In times past, only the best was published. Today, everything is put out there for our consideration.

Hmm, interesting point. So the internet is the spotlight rather than the cause?

The internet is a tool.
The search engine a filter.
The intelligence of the mind (generalised) a restricting factor for what one might find when filtering, and also what one will wade through and have to make decisions about (this activity or that), as well as take with a grain of salt or not. The mind also peoduces content. It's all our own fault and responsibility.

Galatea_Stone

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

No. I disagree. It is not that the internet has made us less intelligent so much as it has given an outlet for the less intelligent. In times past, only the best was published. Today, everything is put out there for our consideration.

Hmm, interesting point. So the internet is the spotlight rather than the cause?

Imagine a pub in which everyone has the balls to stand on a table and state what they think/feel

You mean like a pub full of drunks? Because if that's what you mean, then that is pretty much what happens. Particularly if United is playing Arsenal.

TheVirgoddess

Imagine a pub in which everyone has the balls to stand on a table and state what they think/feel

Okay, opinion = changed.

SunofaBeach14

Its a real problem that over time America has become more and more post-literate. People read less than ever, have less word knowledge than ever, and actually seem proud of it.

Perhaps this is a copout, but I really think the internet is at least partially at fault. While we have so much information readily at our fingertips, we also have the loss of face to face communication. If you're at a dinner party and someone says something, you generally don't just say "I agree" (or +1), you expand on the idea or explain why you agree. On forums and stuff, you don't have to do that - people aren't as eager to examine why they agree or how they came to the same opinion.

But yes, I agree with you. I'm always really happy to "meet" smart folks on forums (and, sadly, surprised) - because exchanging ideas with them makes *me* smarter. And I like being smart.

No. I disagree. It is not that the internet has made us less intelligent so much as it has given an outlet for the less intelligent. In times past, only the best was published. Today, everything is put out there for our consideration.

Hmm, interesting point. So the internet is the spotlight rather than the cause?

Imagine a pub in which everyone has the balls to stand on a table and state what they think/feel

You mean like a pub full of drunks? Because if that's what you mean, then that is pretty much what happens. Particularly if United is playing Arsenal.

bingo - the internet is a pub full of drunks