One of the most aggravating things to me in this world has to be the absolutely rampant anti-intellectualism that dominates so many conversations and debates, and its influence just seems to be expanding. Do you think there will ever actually be a time when this ends? I'd hope so once people become more educated and cultural changes eventually happen, but as of now it honestly infuriates me like few things ever have.

  • IonAddis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Funnily enough, if as an intellectual you let go of the idea that others are dummies and start examining what they do and why and start brainstorming about what might motivate them, you might get a better idea of all the dynamics that go on when it comes to an individual’s choice or motivation. Including, yes, why people are “anti-intellectual”. And perhaps how to “solve” it.

    I’m a bit snarky here, because I get irritated by other supposedly “smart” people looking at things through a tiny, biased and prejudged pinhole.

    You’re smart? Ok. Get out there, observe things, learn them, then come back and form a hypothesis that aligns with what you’ve observed.

    • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure that your statement has anything to do with stopping thinking of others as dummies. I think it’s telling you to think of them that way, and you’re just trying to push that under the rug to try to be nice.

      You’re saying to understand anti intellectualism you need to understand things from their perspective.

      The lack of knowledge (especially true knowledge) and lesser ability to understand complex ideas are major aspects of that perspective.

      No matter how we define or measure intelligence, we’re mathematically guaranteed that it’s distributed approximately on a bell curve with a small number of intelligent people at the top.

      • ThePenitentOne@discuss.onlineOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ll never not see anti-intellectual people as stupid, even if they have their reasons. I used to be an idiot who actively did things they thought were wrong. But eventually I stopped because I realised it’s completely hypocritical and morally and logically wrong. I came to that conclusion without need of others judging me through my own self-reflection, and I’ll admit it was hard. Even so, I wished somebody would have called me out, but I guess animal consumption is so engrained in society people don’t even question it. I had my reasons to do so, but they were by no means a justification. I still try to understand things in different ways, but eventually it becomes redundant taking each case and doing so. The reality is that anti-intellectualism is incredibly prevalent and people need to change their ways of thinking. Sometimes they are just blatantly wrong and need to stop letting their emotions do their thinking. Sometimes there is nothing to understand. I don’t know why people are so bent on seeing every individual separately, it’s impossible to do so. Even if we do, they are still liable for their actions. Such as choosing not to self-reflect.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          The reality is that … people need to change their thinking

          Sounds like your grasp of what “reality” refers to is flawed. What kind of instrument would one use to measure whether people need to change their thinking? What units does that instrument use?

          Maybe instead of bemoaning how little effort others are putting into understanding things, you should forge ahead with your own work.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        The lack of knowledge (especially true knowledge) and lesser ability to understand complex ideas are major aspects of that perspective.

        Can you prove this?

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          The mark of an intellectual! Making bold statements without evidence then suppressing any discussion of that lack of evidence.

          Gee I wonder why anti-intellectualism exists?

          • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It couldn’t possibly be because of dumbshits like you who enable them, thinking that by allowing them to dominate the conversation every single time it is brought up that you’ll convince them to see the light or anything.

            It couldn’t possibly be people like you pushing popular misconceptions about the debate and blindly accepting every dumb personal attack they make on the rest of us as true without critically thinking about any of it or applying any of your intelligence or anything.

            Nah. The problem is other people who call them out and hold them accountable. Totally everyone else.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah you basically claimed that anti-intellectualism is based on stupidity. Do you have any evidence of that?

              The answer is obviously no, or you’d be producing it

                • quinnly@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That kind of thinking has no place in any modern society and neither do you

                  Psssssst saying stuff like that doesn’t make you sound very smart

                • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Anti-intellectualism is stupidity

                  No. You have your definitions arranged sloppily. Stupidity is stupidity.

                  Grow the fuck up and stop defending stupid people.

                  I’m not defending anyone. Like at all. You being unable to see that is another indicator of how sloppy and undisciplined your mind is.

                  Colloquially, anti-intellectualism is the stance that intellectualism is bad. Intellectualism is not the same as intelligence. Intellectualism is a specific relationship with the mind and knowledge. Specifically it’s the belief that articulated argument and logic is the best way to approach knowledge. Anti-intellectualism is the stance that there are other ways far more valuable to develop knowledge.

                  For a bunch of self-proclaimed “intellectuals” you guys have no idea what you’re talking about.

                  Like being an intellectual and in favor of intellectualism is one thing. It’s another thing entirely to declare yourself an intellectual without actually being one.

                  In my experience, skilled intellectuals don’t call themselves that, and people who call themselves intellectuals are primarily interested in being seen as special.

                  Just to educate you a little on what the landscape is here, alternatives to intellectual consideration of reality include:

                  • intuition
                  • phenomenology
                  • practice
                  • empiricism
                  • idiocy

                  You’ve latched onto one of those, because apparently you don’t read enough to have any awareness whatsoever of the context of this conversation. Which is ahem rather anti-intellectual of you.

    • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Having tried this, no, it does not. People are anti-intellectual because they willfully choose to be ignorant. They’re like that for several different reasons, but their choices are the same.

      What actually matters is not allowing people like you to shame the rest of us who do value knowledge into submitting to the will of people like that out of a misguided notion that judging them for their stupidity is wrong or bad. It’s not. It’s called holding people accountable for their actions and choices, and it’s a thing we have been doing far too little of in society.

      Hold people accountable for not knowing basic shit and refusing to learn it. Grown adults have no excuse, barring some learning disability, for not having decent reading comprehension, or not being able to do basic math, or not having critical thinking skills. We’re trying to run a democracy here and that requires having an educated public. And that means the public has to be willing to educate themselves.

      For fuck’s sake. I don’t know everything either but if there’s something I don’t know, I learn it. I at least try.

      You’re part of the problem defending them by shaming us. You’re part of the reason why anti-intellectualism is such a problem: you enable irresponsibility, indolence, and selfishness by protecting people who refuse to learn from consequences.

    • ThePenitentOne@discuss.onlineOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think everyone is an idiot. It’s a big assumption to say so. People have their reasons and motivations. Many people weren’t given a fair chance in life, many lacked an education, many were raised to think a certain way or in a certain culture.

      I’d wager I have tried arguing with the people I would categorise as ‘anti-intellectual’ more than 99% of people to ever have lived trying to understand them, and I did develop a level of empathy and understanding. But still it remains that just because people have reasons, they aren’t necessarily valid and eventually people are responsible for their own self-reflection and decisions. ‘Solving’ this issue with people who already have engrained beliefs is incredibly difficult because they need to be responsible themselves. It isn’t something I can actualise solely. It’s far easier to start from a fresh generation, because changing is hard when you are used to something for so long. You see this in religious people especially and in people who eat meat. I know why they are/do what they do, but still it doesn’t give justification. Many of them may even doubt their beliefs, but still cling to them. I know they do because I used to as well. I even still proceeded to do things I know were wrong. I don’t claim to be flawless. Furthermore, I also know there is no reason to come in blaming these people ruthlessly because it will not progress anywhere and serve no purpose, what is done is done. But I cannot deny how annoying it is to see people still refuse to even attempt to learn.

      The ‘solution’ is very complex if you want people to change because it will be an incredibly difficult task and something that would require an entire cultural shift to how people think. No doubt long term and I don’t have the answer to how, and even if somebody did, it still relies on others to make a decision themselves. You can only make your own judgement of individuals for so long, soon enough you can recognise patterns and arguing every case is not possible with what time you have. I do my best.

      • Pandemanium@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think you’re mixing up intellectualism and morality. There are many reasons people choose not to eat meat, and some of those reasons are emotional or moral rather than intellectual. Some people only eat a vegan diet because their doctor told them they had to. Are those people somehow more intellectual than someone who researched the science and came to the conclusion that humans are omnivores?

        You have already judged the outcomes of people’s decisions as being objectively correct or incorrect. To you, eating meat is incorrect regardless of the reasons for doing so. That is not an intellectual stance, it is a moral one. You are ultimately judging people for having different values than you. Maybe they don’t care about the environment, maybe they don’t care about the safety of animals or other people. Like it or not, to care about those things is emotion. You can argue they’re wrong as much as you like, but you can’t prove that any human behavior is objectively “the right thing to do,” meaning you are not as objectively correct as you think you are. There isn’t a one-fits-all solution for how to live. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can stop judging others for not being like you.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Intellectualism is a moral issue, and a serious one in our society.

          The only way democracy works is if the population is intellectual, and when it stops being such, it falls apart. We can’t afford for people to reject learning and education the way they have. It’s the reason why we get dipshit wannabe dictators like Donald Trump in office and why corporations and companies have been allowed to run roughshod over everything this country claims to stand for. It’s why climate collapse has been allowed to go on unabated. It’s literally the root of all of our problems.

          Don’t stand here and try to tell us it’s not a moral issue. It is. And people who refuse to learn anything are doing something wrong.

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            people who refuse to learn anything are doing something wrong

            Well at least we agree on one thing. It is a moral imperative to learn about the world, to make oneself capable of solving problems.

          • Pandemanium@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Don’t stand here and try to tell us it’s not a moral issue. It is. And people who refuse to learn anything are doing something wrong.

            I literally said it is a moral issue. And I get the importance of people changing. But you have to accept that you can’t control this. You can lead by example or you can try to educate people. If you really want to control people, become a dictator. Judging people doesn’t make the world a better place. OP said they don’t like religion, but this is exactly what religion does: it declares there’s one right way to live and judges anyone who dares to not live that way.

    • Arotrios@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed. I’d also like to add that intelligence != wisdom != experience, and you need all three to achieve real understanding.

    • Grayox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Especially when you look at folks anti-intellectual sentiments through the lense of their Material Conditions.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, as an intellectual, I’d advise that understanding anti-intellectualism requires understanding what alternatives exist to intellectualism and why people might see them as more valuable (or less problematic) than intellectualism.