Anti-intellectualism

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy



I think a lot of it, on the part of the intellectuals irritation with anti-intellectualism is the disparity between the abuse and prejudice, and the perceived importance of their work. Yes, intellectuals see their work, and sometimes theirselves as important, but theres nothing wrong with that since they play such a crucial and individual role in human civilisation imo. That is something I have always thoguht. Furthermore, would you deny that as humans, we simplistically attack whom and what we do not understand? It is quite interesting that those who persist in denying the existence of anti-intellectualism, preferring to highlight arrogance or some grossly overgeneralised point on the part of intellectuals, are appearing as anti-intellectuals themselves.

so being a massively important intellectual all that lesbian porn u write is obviously helping us as a civilisation.

interesting.

[BeBro]

Originally posted by Drogue

No, he believes, IIRC, that war is bad, however he also believes that someone else thinking that war is good is an equally valid position. He is a relativist, in that he believes all views are equally valid, however he still has his personal views.

Yeah, but if all is equally valid, why do you (Whaleboy) think then that your believe is somehow relevant when it comes to a decision making about making war? Simply let those warmongers follow their (equally valid) beliefs!

PS. And, no, I don´t dislike you, I just disagree

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
How do we combat this unfortunate situation, since society needs intellectuals, people that know how to run a nation and the issues surrounding it, to change things, as well as making life a little more interesting than the daily drudgery that we see all around?

Can't answer for anybody but myself - basically, I ignore it and do my own thing.

If somebody is unwise to approach me and physically make an issue of it, I do my level best to beat the crap out of them.

Beat them at their own game... or go down trying.

[curtsibling]

Violence solves nothing.

But it's a great cure for morons.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Drogue

No, you asked if his novels have been published. He has been paid, because some were commissioned, IIRC.

God you are a moron. Go back and read the entire exchange, shitforbrains. He said he was paid for his writing. I asked for detail. He mixed in the unpaid "novelist" as part of his response. That was deceptive. Moron.

[Drogue]

TCO: He said he was paid for writing, you asked for detail, he gave it. WTF's your point?

He was paid for writing, which you denied, knowing absolutly nothing about it. And I'm the moron? Read what you've written before you start trying to go back on it

[TCO]

Originally posted by Drogue
TCO: He said he was paid for writing, you asked for detail, he gave it. WTF's your point?

He was paid for writing, which you denied, knowing absolutly nothing about it. And I'm the moron? Read what you've written before you start trying to go back on it

How does being an unpaid novelist have anything to do with being paid for writing. It doesn't!! So why cite it. It is dishonest. Slimy.

[Ramo]

Wake up on the wrong side of the bed?

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by loinburger
Practically everybody on this thread has stated that they dislike arrogant people.

Against.
I have nothing against people who believe they are competant if in fact they are indeed competant.

Like what -- more personal experience that doesn't count for squat since it's not your personal experience?

Why hell no! Since you posting your personal experience is scholastic learning, not experential learning, and it's learning from a biased source at that!

So you wouldn't be just a tad bit offended if somebody called you a meatbag? Interesting.

I associate myself with the class of 'intellectual' things.
If somebody termed me a 'meatbag' I would not be offended; I would merely think of that person as wrong.
And if enough people call me a meatbag I might care enough to pretend to debate with them.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo

Wake up on the wrong side of the bed?

I hang out on a site full of wannabe writers. I'm well acqaunted with the beasts.

"Novelist"? HA! That's like calling Vel a game designer.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Spiffor
2. And that's why I think Whaleboy's and especially Enigma_nova's attitude explain why they recieved such flak.

Works for me, if I could recall actually receiving any flak! :/
I've been called, most (thinks) ALL of the time for being a prima donna. I was the intellectual heavyweight taking most of the resources and teacher's attention.
T'was not my brilliance but the extent to which I showed my brilliance that offended others, primarily because they would have felt 'pushed out of the way'.

You'd be surprised that I receive more flak for being self-assured than I do for being homocidal; I think people want their selves to be osmosed as much as anyone, and my own ballooning(sp?) self gets in their way.

In their posts, they seem to believe the use of their brains make them magically able to know the Truth better than the others.

-almost-. I believe my brain is magically -more interested- in knowing the Truth better than others.

That their message is something worth listening, worth acknowledging,

Mate, I talk because I like to listen, not because I like to speak.
Of course I'd like other people to listen also but hey... they're not interested.
So I speak to those who listen and await to hear stuff that I can listen to and learn from.
Or I just calm myself down by hearing the theraputic(sp?) sound of my own voice.

and those who don't listen or don't want to listen are just ignorant or stupid people.

Don't want to listen == Ignorant.
Though I multiply define that word also to mean those who don't question what they hear - I think I'll use the word 'Nonquestioner' from now on.
/me hands Spiffor a cookie

They, OTOH, believe they have nothing to learn from the ognorant masses. Agathon too, as he openly says the opinion of ignorant people should not get any respect.

I've learnt quite a lot from watching you people. I won't say that there's nothing to learn from the masses - just that the masses aren't particularily interested in putting the material in an easily heard form!
(Of course this does not stop the smack talk that I sound whenever a nonquestioner is within 20 metres... I love the way I'm constantly attacking everything)

These guys have the pompous attitude that make them unpopular, unlike many other "intellectuals" on 'Poly (myself included) who can get along fine with people.

You hate me because I'm hostile, not because I'm arrogant. (Principally because I am hostile but NOT arrogant!)
If I wasn't so intense about yelling each of you down every time you posted something I disagreed with, perhaps I'd seem less like a fool who thinks himself eternally correct.
For I don't. I just act like I do because most of the time I'm not interested in taking the effort of explaining, because of a lack of trust or a simple lack of patience.

Now, I would calmly explain myself (like I'm doing now) but I'm pretty sure the quoted replies will speak for themselves as to why I'm disinterested.
Or not; perhaps there is -some- utility here to speak my mind without having The Swarm on my ass.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by loinburger
If everybody were so hellbent on forcing others to conform, then why do they go around celebrating athletes and actors rather than trying to force them to conform as well?

Conform to their values.
Again, Athletes aren't out to change the law; questioners are, and the Nonquestioning masses will go to extents to protect their empire.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova



You'd be surprised that I receive more flak for being self-assured than I do for being homocidal; I think people want their selves to be osmosed as much as anyone, and my own ballooning(sp?) self gets in their way.

ever killed anyone? maybe therein lies the reason.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
I should've known Enigma would have come to this thread....
I told Enigma his arrogant ways would make him unpopular. He told me he wasn't arrogant and that I was wrong

I got the last laugh

The future hasn't happened yet, you deluded fvck.

[Whaleboy]

Whaleboy, just from me, I like you. You have always presented your positions respectfully, not arrogantly, to me.

I suspect, but do not know, that many people are inately jealous of talented people regardless of the talent.

Think of the way the world reacts to the United States. We mean well, but we are still thought of as "arrogant." I think a lot of this attitude stems from our success.

Think also of the way the Republicans reacted to Clinton. It was not that Clinton was a liar or an adulterer. They reacted to his obvious talent. He was very intelligent, smooth and articulate.

Ned . Thats a very nice thing to say, thanks!

You're being a weasel now. You said you got paid for you're writing. I asked for detail and you cited being a novelist as support. But your novels have not been paid for. That's a bit slimy.

I said that I get paid for being a writer. Besides, give me a year .

A good thing that I pinned you down like a struggling butterfly.

The mood I'm in today, you're lucky I don't misinterpret

No I just don't understand them, since their alethic relativism in my view entails semantic relativism.

Well its contextual, relativism can still apply within a semantic holism.

If a relativist says to me "knowledge is relative" how am I supposed to know what those words mean to him. For all I know he could be saying "Ben Kenobi is right, Mariah Carey has a hot ass!" After all, it's all relative.

You are correct that language is based upon a common assumption, that we usually take as read. A different position need not mean misunderstanding in other words. You can never be certain what I say, but in the same respect that you cannot be certain that we are not brains in a vat, connected by electrodes to an old man reduced to incessant giggling by years of marijuana abuse. You make assumptions. You bloody need to!!

No, you asked if his novels have been published. He has been paid, because some were commissioned, IIRC. However he has not ad any published yet. His only source of income is his writing, IIRC, and so if he had to state a trade, that is what he would state. That's not slimy at all.

Indeedy, thanks!

If he is, then he would be wrong. Plain wrong

I assure you, I'm not. I am most certainly not!

Agathon, Whaleboy admits he is not a relativist anyway. He starts his philosophy from an emotive position that war is bad. All else follows from this.

No, he believes, IIRC, that war is bad, however he also believes that someone else thinking that war is good is an equally valid position. He is a relativist, in that he believes all views are equally valid, however he still has his personal views. At least, that's what it was last time we chatted about it

Gent's you are both correct. Drogue is correct in what my position entails and its logical place. Ned is correct in its genesis (though note that my hatred of war is only responsible for my pacifism, it is my respect of other's views that lead to my relativism). However, that is a personal, emotive disposition. When I am dead and buried and the only thing people know of me is my writings, they will say Ben Elijah was a pacifist, not Ben Elijah hated war. In other words, we have emotions and idiosyncracies. We enter philosophy on that basis, and as humans, it colours us, makes us interesting. We generate philosophies accordingly, but in a debate, or even in consideration, one only considers the generated philosophies. So I am a relativist because I and the philosophy represent each other. My motivation for that isn't strictly relevant.

so being a massively important intellectual all that lesbian porn u write is obviously helping us as a civilisation.

interesting.

Its not porn! Its philosophical erotica!

Yeah, but if all is equally valid, why do you (Whaleboy) think then that your believe is somehow relevant when it comes to a decision making about making war? Simply let those warmongers follow their (equally valid) beliefs!

Hypothetical situation. A man is about to go to war, and is consulting me and a hawk. We will both try to convince the man who is considering war, and I will certainly try to pull him in a pacifist direction. If the other view prevails over mind in his judgment, I will concede defeat, since as far as I am concerned it is merely a conflict in views. I'll say what I have to say and leave it to others to implement it. "There will be an answer, let it be". His beliefs are equally valid, and what he does with them is his business not mine, though I am of course free to criticise. I will not go to war. That is the relativist talking. Because I hate war, which is an emotion, I would be an amount of emotional duress should I lose, but my relativism ultimately would win out and I would not impose. So in answer to your question, yes.

Can't answer for anybody but myself - basically, I ignore it and do my own thing.

If somebody is unwise to approach me and physically make an issue of it, I do my level best to beat the crap out of them.

Beat them at their own game... or go down trying.

If there's ever a UK meet that we go to, remind me that I henceforth owe you a drink!

God you are a moron. Go back and read the entire exchange, shitforbrains. He said he was paid for his writing. I asked for detail. He mixed in the unpaid "novelist" as part of his response. That was deceptive. Moron.

TCO: He said he was paid for writing, you asked for detail, he gave it. WTF's your point?

He was paid for writing, which you denied, knowing absolutly nothing about it. And I'm the moron? Read what you've written before you start trying to go back on it

Thankyou!

How does being an unpaid novelist have anything to do with being paid for writing. It doesn't!! So why cite it. It is dishonest. Slimy.

You're going to have a lot of difficulty in refuting what I have said. I am a writer, I get paid for it, ergo, I am a professional writer (until a find a bigger source of income which shouldn't be too hard ).

I hang out on a site full of wannabe writers. I'm well acqaunted with the beasts.

Well aren't you the plucky one. Here, have a wowwypop.

"Novelist"? HA! That's like calling Vel a game designer.

I have written a novel, and am in the process of completing one. If there is a better definition of novelist, I am yet to hear it!!!

TCO, exactly what are you trying to say, and exactly how is it not spam?

On a more general note take it easy gents! This is just a debate, no need to get all flustered about it!!

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
In fact I've gained more respect for Enigma from reading this thread. Not that he would care, I don't expect him to.

Yes, I'm predictable.

Hmmm it comes across arrogant because you guys no want you want to say and aren't scared to say it.

All my communication is impromptu, sir. Save for perhaps a general intent of 'act calm' or 'act violent'.
I rarely have a general idea of what I say. What I -do- know, is what I think, and I try to express that.
The difficulty is that Emotions and Opinions are tangled in my mind, so my inherent frustration at being misunderstood translates into a hostile and self-assured way of communication, as if I end every sentence by implying that I'll kick all of your asses.
Of course, managing to imply that I'm going to assault you tends to make you hostile in retaliation, ergo you are hostile towards me.

People don't dislike me because I think I'm brilliant, people dislike me because I resent those who stand in the way of my brilliance agenda.
Not that I'm particularily self-assured for fighting for what I believe in (everyone loves Joan of Arc, right?), but that I attack a part of who people are - their desire to put the questions on the backburner and enjoy themselves.
Joan of Arc and I are in many ways similar (save for a gender difference) - but our marked difference is that people could see what Joan was fighting, and they had cause to support her.
When it comes to the deadly covert war on ignorance, people don't see it. What's worse, it's installed as a part of many people.
I'm fighting an invisible war in which I believe I must win for the future of the species.
Not surprisingly, the people that don't see what I see think I'm a doofus.

[TCO]

Whaleboy, I thought you were pretentious and duplitious for calling yourself a novelist in response to my question about what you had published. What you had been paid for. If I hadn't pursued you, I wouldn't have gotten the "I didn't inhale answer". You are a poseur.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
I must say that these cries of arrogance takes the form of this.

Whaleboy highlights an issue, referring to incidents in his own life.

People say "well you may be correct, but its six of one, half a dozen of the other, and the intellectual may be arrogant"

Whaleboy says "fair enough", but people seem to have a predisposition to attack the intellectual (later says people attack what they don't understand, though he would postulate that intellectuals should be respected for going against the grain, that being his personal opinion).

People say that Whaleboy is arrogant and that is the cause of these incidents (his accusers are mostly those who appear to be anti-intellectuals themselves).

Whaleboy denies this

People continue to insist, even though they are flying in the face of what Whaleboy has been saying about HIS OWN LIFE.

Whaleboy continues to deny, and purport his position.

People go on about him being arrogant, starting to include quotes of his that appear to demonstrate that.

Stupid people do this. It's called Brute Force Prejudice.

I've also been called multiple times on my tendency to act as if I'm infinitely correct or infinitely competant.
"But what if you're wrong?" People say.
"But what if I'm right?" I say.
If I'm wrong, I'll correct myself in my own time (perhaps based on things I read here).
While I'm in the public eye, though, I'll fight for what I think is correct even if I'm not entirely sure.
As a Questioner, I'm farmiliar with doubt. Waiting to be 100% certain would move me to inaction :/
Speaking with a truckload of "I might be wrongs" and analytical tangents would make my indecisive position clear but also lose interest.
While indeed I might be wrong (or I might be wrong about being wrong hence be entirely right!), I think my 1-year-old self said it best:

"I'll act like I'm correct in case the others are wrong, because if the others are wrong, and if I don't speak, then they'll still be wrong."
Individualism at its core. Also self-assurance.
I seem like an arrogant fool at times but it is the price of being continually combattive.
"We might be fighting for something not worth fighting for but let's fight anyway!"

I am being honest when I say that I am reasonably well read and people do tell me that have a philosophical mind. I know my own capabilities.

Well you know some of your own capacities, but I do not believe that any human being can come to know themselves fully in a finite length of time.
So let's say you have a rough estimate of your strengths and weaknesses.

you only harm your own credibility in making such an outlandish and frankly ad hoc ad hominem.

You fool!
You GAIN coolness by picking on the uncool dude.
"Why is he uncool?"
Because he does that uncool 'thinking' thing.
"Why is thinking uncool?"
HEY! You're one of THEM! Now we'll pick on YOU!
"Sorry. That Whaleboy sucks."
Good conformist.

[Sandman]

Its a commonly known fact that useless intellectuals get more sex.

Oh come on. You start a thread to complain about anti-intellectualism, and then you use an argument like that?

The notion of "use" is a difficult one. Let me put it this way. Imagine civilisation to be a car. Most people work in the engine, where they are perceived useful. You get some people who are the drivers (the policians, big business, pressure groups, pragmatic intellectuals (I think you are saying etc). Then you get the headlights.

It's perfectly possible for a group like 'intellectuals' to have no use whatsoever. In your analogy, they'd be the fluffy dice.

The fact that you're articulating such strong functionalist sentiments leads me to ask: what is the use of long-winded intellectuals? What do the 'headlights' of civilisation actually do? I mean, the anti-intellectualism you claim suggests that either they're useless, or that being disliked is a critical aspect of intellectualism; the wire that connects the headlights to the battery.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Yes, intellectuals see their work, and sometimes theirselves as important,

/me raises his hand in agreement
Self-importance does not make you arrogant! It makes you Egotistical!
And judging by the way that I use first person almost exclusively, you would think that I am Egotistical.

/me admits Egotism
Being egotistical or arrogant does not make someone wrong, nor is it a valid excuse to ignore them.
The same with ignorance and stupidity.

NEVER!!!

PROBLEM: World is broken.
SOLUTION A: Accept failure of human civilisation; live out sham of a life rendered poor by broken world.
SOLUTION B: Fix world.
I opt for solution B.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by yavoon
so being a massively important intellectual all that lesbian porn u write is obviously helping us as a civilisation.

No no no! You're supposed to say something moronic, as if you were thinking with your genitals, so we could all laugh at you.

[Whaleboy]

Whaleboy, I thought you were pretentious and duplitious for calling yourself a novelist in response to my question about what you had published. What you had been paid for. If I hadn't pursued you, I wouldn't have gotten the "I didn't inhale answer". You are a poseur.

Funny how no-one else agrees, including Drogue who knows me better than just about anyone else on this planet

Oh come on. You start a thread to complain about anti-intellectualism, and then you use an argument like that?

Sounds like someone's jealous... *sings* jk

It's perfectly possible for a group like 'intellectuals' to have no use whatsoever. In your analogy, they'd be the fluffy dice.

Fluffy dice have a use! They're cute!!!

The fact that you're articulating such strong functionalist sentiments leads me to ask: what is the use of long-winded intellectuals? What do the 'headlights' of civilisation actually do?

They bring light to darkness. What that means exactly is down to each individual intellectual.

Enigma is the man of the match on this thread!!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova

No no no! You're supposed to say something moronic, as if you were thinking with your genitals, so we could all laugh at you.

i only think w/ them half the time.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy

Enigma is the man of the match on this thread!!

I can just see it now. the circle jerk of intelligence.

[Kramerman]

Yeah, but if all is equally valid, why do you (Whaleboy) think then that your believe is somehow relevant when it comes to a decision making about making war? Simply let those warmongers follow their (equally valid) beliefs!

who said moral relativists cant have their own personal views? I could try and explain it, but whaleboy did a good job of it already. hypothetically, i can be a moral relativist but still dislike war because of the inconvenience it causes me personally, or something like that. In otherwords, just because you think all moral view points are equally valid, you dont have to like all of them! that would be rediculous.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by yavoon


I can just see it now. the circle jerk of intelligence.

you're a funny mother ****er

[Whaleboy]

I can just see it now. the circle jerk of intelligence.

If you have nothing constructive to say, begone cretin and play with some duplo. Maybe I'll pop round and buy you an orange juice before we put you to bed as the sun goes down .

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Whaleboy

Quote:

If he is, then he would be wrong. Plain wrong

I assure you, I'm not. I am most certainly not!

I was refering to this statement "For all I know he could be saying "Ben Kenobi is right, Mariah Carey has a hot ass!" After all, it's all relative". If Ben Kenobi said that, then he'd be wrong. Plain wrong! (it was a light hearted comment btw )

[Whaleboy]

Drogue: Quite. However, the question of Mariah Carey's hotness is pushing the boundaries of relativism somewhat... jk

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
Self-importance does not make you arrogant! It makes you Egotistical!

That's worse. Besides, you can be both at the same time. In fact, most egotistical people are also arrogant, and vice versa.