Anti-intellectualism inhibits learning

A large percentage (studies suggest over 90%) of the meaning we derive from communication, we derive from the non-verbal cues that the other person gives.

How does one communicate with an unseen audience that can be anybody in the world? In face-to-face communication there is so much information about the audience at hand that does not exist on the Internet.

Does one use language for the 12 year old, or the 18 year old, or the 25 year old, the educated, the non-educated? How to speak coherently to the 12 year old while not infuriating the 18 year old and how to mold an essay for the 30 year old without losing the 18 year old.

People who write books have editors to act as a third party who understands the material and understands the anticipated audience.

How do I, who have been studying the matter at hand for months and even years, know what words to provide a parenthetical definition that some may need but others may consider to be condescending?

Anti-intellectualism (opposing or hostile to intellectuals or to an intellectual view or approach) is so prevailing in the United States that almost every reader has a strong anti-intellectual bias that they are completely unconscious of. This anti-intellectual bias constantly inhibits their effort to read anything that smacks of being ‘intellectual’.

People might pay me money to lecture them on the proper way to swing a golf club but to lecture anyone on matters intellectual is pompous (excessively elevated or ornate—having or exhibiting self-importance).

Anti-intellectualism (opposing or hostile to intellectuals or to an intellectual view or approach) is so prevailing in the United States that almost every reader has a strong anti-intellectual bias that they are completely unconscious of.

On what evidence do you make that assertion? Or are you just accustomed to making such idle accusations about the people of an entire nation?

Baron Max

On what evidence do you make that assertion? Or are you just accustomed to making such idle accusations about the people of an entire nation?

Baron Max

I agree, why would anyone be bias against intellectual material if they were making the effort to read in the first place?

I have for a long time thought that our culture had an anti-intellectual streak but my experience of three plus years in Internet discussion forums informs me that anti-intellectualism is a dangerous intellectual attitude that is designed to make us good producers and consumers without the ability for critical thinking. Observatioon of our culture by anyone with critical thinking skills would agree.

The following is a reply from a reader.

Below is a link to a very good book that you may enjoy, written by Richard Hofstadter. This book is multifaceted and the title is somewhat misleading (chosen to induce book sales no doubt) as the theme of the book is very broad and includes an excellent analyses of education in America, with the main thesis an analyses of the American Character from the founding of the Nation to the “present day”. The book won the 1964 Pulitzer Prize for non-fiction and deservedly so. I highly recommend it.

http://www.amazon.com/Anti-Intellectualism-American-Life-Richard-Hofstadter/dp/0394703170/?tag=hypographycom

On what evidence do you make that assertion? Or are you just accustomed to making such idle accusations about the people of an entire nation?

Baron Max

I went to radio shack to buy some solar cells and the person at the counter didn't even know what a solar cell was. She eventually told me at the section were the cells were located that most people just buy fuses or switches.
She was actually surprised I was buying something that is experimental and thought it was cool.

I went to radio shack to buy some solar cells and the person at the counter didn't even know what a solar cell was. She eventually told me at the section were the cells were located that most people just buy fuses or switches.
She was actually surprised I was buying something that is experimental and thought it was cool.

So based on your experience with only one person, you're ready to claim that the entire human race is stupid? Otherwise, what's your point?

Baron Max

So based on your experience with only one person, you're ready to claim that the entire human race is stupid? Otherwise, what's your point?

Baron Max

I think it was implied americans were uneducated, since radioshack is an american chain.

Or maybe you didn't know radioshack was American. :p

I think it was implied americans were uneducated, since radioshack is an american chain.

Was the clerk an American or an illegal alien?

Baron Max

After all, the people who spend all day posting on internet forums represent a fair survey group of an entire nation...

Perhaps anti-intellectualism isn't the proper name for people who annoy you - they must be against your remarkable stupidity. Of the individuals I know currently working in advanced physics, mathematics and biology (the only sciences to which I know a large sample group), not one that I've spoken to about the internet posts or frequents an internet debate site. Most people in academia don't bother to read this worthless crap. Can you blame them? On sciforums alone I could read 30+ threads by some kook who hasn't opened a physics textbook since grade 10 explaining why he thinks super-string theory is wrong. Who in the fuck wants to read that? I've majored in philosophy and I can't bare to read more than 3 sentences of 98% of the posts in the philosophy forum. I thought they were great fun when I was 15, but I can't read it anymore. (N.B. I also think much of what kids are taught in university is crap, so...).

No, internet forums are probably one of the worst sample groups you could possibly take and if you knew the first thing about science you probably would have realized that.

anti-intellectualism is a dangerous intellectual attitude that is designed to make us good producers and consumers without the ability for critical thinking

Anti-intellectualism was not created by massive corporations, you dolt. It's a very natural rejection of either (a) something someone doesn't understand (b) something someone doesn't agree with (c) something that is over-complicated by those in the ivory tower. If you think we need WallMart to feel any of the above then I might suggest you've never spoken to a human being outside of the internet.

Observatioon of our culture by anyone with critical thinking skills would agree.

After reading your mumblings it gave me a smile to notice you invoke a fallacy at the end of your 'argument'.

Good on ya, champ.

I agree, why would anyone be bias against intellectual material if they were making the effort to read in the first place?
just for the sake of hanging around to flame and ridicule - surely sciforums offers clear evidence (http://www.google.com.au/search?as_q=%22full+of+shit%22&hl=en&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=sciforums.com&as_rights=&safe=images) of this

Was the clerk an American or an illegal alien?

Baron Max

The clerk was American and the conclusion was concluded by one person who is in sales and probably sales to a couple thousand people every month. So the conclusion is based off of every person she as sold to. So apparently Radio Shack doesn't make too many of it sells from electrical components.