# Assholes, the jealous, and mediocretins. Cemetary Savior, spoke-, Fessie, Treis, etc **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 12, 2005, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591 "2005-05-12T19:24:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/321 "2005-05-14T19:48:02Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > No. You’ve been pointing out an **incorrect** view. You were **wrong**. See? Wrong ideas and correct varied interpretations are not to be given equal weight. Again, don’t hide behind “but it’s my opinion!” Your ‘point of view’ was wrong. Simply wrong. Deal. What am I wrong about? My premise all along has been that intelligence doesn’t always make one a target for peer abuse; the most important factors tend to relate to how they interact with other people. Go back and _read_. You can pull out cites all night long, but that doesn’t prove that I’m wrong. It only proves that other people–including yourself–have differing opinions. Big freakin’ deal. And yes, **Finn** , despite your delusions of granduer, your main position in this thread is also an _opinion_, not a fact. You can not prove that you were bullied in school because you were smart, which is what you want us to believe. Based on what we have seen from you so far, it seems more likely that there were other reasons responsible for your alienation. Intelligence isn’t at the top of the differential list. > [@](#): > > Instructional strategies include pointing out alternate vantage points. Again, if you don’t understand that, don’t talk about pedagogy. How is it pedagogical to discuss personal experiences? Personal philosophies about how people relate to one another? Ideas about what does and does not consistitute pretentiousness? Who is the teacher in a conversation where opinions make up 99% of the content? If pedagogy includes dialogue between any two indivduals presenting different views on any given subject–whether that be movies, sports, weather, or romance–you are watering down the meaning of that word and basically making it meaningless. But of course you won’t see this because you are so hellbent on being right. > [@](#): > > Oh, and, by the way, pointing out alternate view points is only valid as long as those view points have some merit to them. In a debate about children being harrased for intelligence, the point “That doesn’t happen” is ignorant and wrong, it shouldn’t be given equal weight with the truth. Nobody said that. What _has_ been said is that a lot of people mistake intelligence as the source of their peer problems rather than social ineptitude. > [@](#): > > Check monstro’s first post to this thread. Evidently he’s been nursing a hardon for me since I posted about linguistics and cog’ sci’ and, lo and behold, knew what I was talking about. According to whom? You? Bwhahahahaha!! That’s funny. > [@](#): > > And, ‘the little insult’ at the end? > For the love of truth, I was pointing out why his premise was bankrupt. It is **arrogant** and **egotistical** to think that just because you can flap your gums, without doing any research, an expert needs to hear you. Where did she even mention experts? I thought we were talking about kids in high school. Non-expertise having adolescents. Can’t you see how argumentative you are that you have to inject your own strawmen into the conversation just so you “win”? Talk about a lack of courage. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/322 "2005-05-14T19:50:38Z")
Jesus fucking christ you’re a moron treis. Yes the article says what I’m saying it does, I fucking quoted it. You’re trying to take Milroyj’s title, eh? > [@treis](#): > > “Aptitude test scores were unrelated to clique membership” Nothing to do with anything. I still showed how those with high scores could be subject to bullying. > [@treis](#): > > “Nearly 100,000 students at Alliance schools were given a list of 12 traits and asked to describe the qualities of the members of the “most popular crowd (your gender)…during the first year of middle or junior high school….” Trait were ranked as: cool clothes (64%), attractive (61%), funny (60%), good in sports (55%), outgoing (53%), self-confident (48%), tough (31%), not attentive in class (24%), worked hard for grades (22%), attentive in class (21%), smart (19%), and made fun of those who study (18%)” What the fuck do you think this proves? Honestly, you’re reaching you poor fuck. > [@treis](#): > > School achievement is relatively insignificant compared to personality. Even thosethat put it down as a factor 24% said not attentive in class while 21% said attentive in class, 22% said worked hard for grades while 18% said made fun of those who study. In other words according to these junior high achieving in school had little effect on membership in the popular crowd. Remove your head from your rectum spunky. If one fifth of your classmates will mock you for knowing stuff, that poses a problem. Your denial isn’t beneath you, becuase you’re just a step up from being a troll. > [@treis](#): > > "1) 1) It’s not cool to frequently volunteer answers or comments in class. (Agree = 19%, Disagree = 81%); It’s not cool to study real hard for tests and quizzes. (Agree =5%, Disagree = 85%); It’s not cool to be enthusiastic about what you are learning in school.” (Agree = 27%, Disagree = 73%); It’s not cool to be competitive about grades. (Agree = 51%, Disagree = 49%); It’s annoying when other students talk or joke around in class. (Agree =40%, Disagree = 60%); It’s annoying when students try to get teachers off track. (Agree = 42%, Disagree = 58%). We also asked about friends’ behavior: 24% said “My friends make fun of people who try to do real well in school,” and 56% said “My friends joke around and annoy the teacher.” Yes, nearly one in four students say their friends will harass you if you do well in school. Can you read? > [@treis](#): > > As you can see according to your cite the vast majority do not believe it is not cool to volunteer in class, study for tests and quizes or be entusiastic about school. Do note however that 51% said it was not cool to be competitive about grades. Who the fuck cares about the majority? Your position is intellectually bankrupt, and it is clear that are you intellectually dishonest. If one out of every four or five children will harass you for being smart, that’s a hell of a lot. > [@treis](#): > > Well holy shit you’re kidding. The kids that spend more time socializing _gasp_ are more popular than the ones that spend their time studying. I have to say this shocking revelation has changed my entire view on high school social dynamics. Do you take lessons in being this dense? Yes, that’s one of the fundamental dynamics whereby smart kids who study aren’t as popular as kids who don’t. Less popular people caught shit, those who studied more were less popular, thus… Come on, you can’t be this dumb, can you? > [@treis](#): > > In other words students who varied from the mean GPA whether it be above or below were harassed. It is true that those who had a higher GPA were harassed slightly more than the ones below but 4 times a year isn’t that significant. Moron! Stop being stupid! For god’s sake this is ridiculous. Yes, people **on both extremes, because they are different, caught shit.** You’re not arguing honestly, and you’re disgusting. > [@treis](#): > > If I had to sum up that study in one sentence it would be those who deviated from social norms where harassed and excluded from the popular cliques. And if I had to give you a clue, I’d point out that smart kids who care about school deviated from the norm! For fuck’s sake, it’s right in front of your face, open your gooddamn eyes. > [@treis](#): > > Don’t bother trying to find anymore cites becuase I am tired of reading them to find they don’t say what you claim they do. I won’t find anymore for you, because you’re so dedicated to cherry picking what you find that even when you’re told that higher GPA’s mean more harassment, you point out that lower GPA’s do too. Guess what you fool, one doesn’t invalidate the other! You can catch shit for being ‘too smart’ or ‘too dumb’. But you’re an intillectually dishonest debater. Milroyj would be proud. Oh, and fool, back to Sesame Street. “One of these things is not like the other…” a PhD in sociology is not the same thing as the greatest living genius in physics. Moreoever, sociology is a soft science, and it’s far more likely that you could have anecdotal evidence to benefit a discussion there than in hard science. But whatever, you’ve made yourself clear. You don’t care about honesty, or integrity. You just have a point, which is wrong, that you keep madly trying to prove. Even when faced with proof that roughly one out of every five kids would harass smart kids, you close you eyes and jam your fingers in your ear. You are an exemplar of everything the Dope is supposed to stand against. You are creeping ignorance with a big fucking mouth. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/323 "2005-05-14T19:53:15Z")
I’m always amazed at what people with no experience in a field can sometimes teach those of us with a lot of experience in a field. There are times when the sort of incestuous thinking of a closed field can be more of a hindrance than a help. So, even in those fields where I am quite knowledgeable, I value the input of people whose expertise might lie in another field or in none. Social interaction can be a valuable, irreplaceable, resource. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/324 "2005-05-14T20:01:22Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > It only proves that other people–including yourself–have differing opinions. Big freakin’ deal. Nope. It shows that intelligence is, in and of itself, a mark of difference and a magnet for problems. Other factors can lessen this effect, but it’s still a factor. > [@you with the face](#): > > your main position in this thread is also an _opinion_, not a fact. Nope. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact backed up at this point by hard statistical data, and you too are intellectually dishonest. > [@you with the face](#): > > You can not prove that you were bullied in school because you were smart, which is what you want us to believe. Whatever. If I smack you with hard date I also can’t seem to prove to you that intelligence is often a negative factor. Boo hoo. > [@you with the face](#): > > How is it pedagogical to discuss personal experiences? Personal philosophies about how people relate to one another? Ideas about what does and does not consistitute pretentiousness? Who is the teacher in a conversation where opinions make up 99% of the content? If pedagogy includes dialogue between any two indivduals presenting different views on any given subject–whether that be movies, sports, weather, or romance–you are watering down the meaning of that word and basically making it meaningless. Um… no. You’re being an idiot. And you are evidently confused about the difference between an opinion and a fact. > [@you with the face](#): > > But of course you won’t see this because you are so hellbent on being right. Mmm hmmm. Either that or I am right, and you’re ignorant and grasping at straws. Why don’t you go colaberate with treis and argue that one out of five people harassing you for being good at school simply doesn’t matter. > [@you with the face](#): > > Nobody said that. What _has_ been said is that a lot of people mistake intelligence as the source of their peer problems rather than social ineptitude. And, that’s wrong. I’ve already fucking cited it. All things being equal, social skills, etc… the more intelligent kid will get more flack. > [@you with the face](#): > > According to whom? You? Bwhahahahaha!! > That’s funny. Read the damn cites you ignorant loud mouthed asshole. According to the wealth or research, not me. Fool. > [@you with the face](#): > > Where did she even mention experts? I thought we were talking about kids in high school. Non-expertise having adolescents. Well lo and behold, you’d be wrong. And ignorant. And flapping your gums even though the text of what we said is right there and you could read it if you weren’t too damn lazy. We were talking about Stephen Hawking. How much more fucking ‘expert’ do you want to get? > [@FinnAgain](#): > > Nor am I going to discuss how someone who is an **expert** on a topic shouldn’t be bothered with some kid whose ego is dependant on being able to teach the **expert** something. In sure Stephen Hawking wants to hear alllllll about monstro’s thoughts on physics. Naw… we certainly didn’t mention anything about experts. Idiot. > [@you with the face](#): > > Can’t you see how argumentative you are that you have to inject your own strawmen into the conversation just so you “win”? Talk about a lack of courage. Can’t you see how you need to deliberately misrepresent my argument in order to make a point about me? No, you probably can’t. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/325 "2005-05-14T20:02:49Z")
😃 I am done with you **FinnAgain** have fun swearing, cursing, insulting and demeaning everyone else that disagrees with you. I will have no more of it. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/326 "2005-05-14T20:05:18Z")
> [@treis](#): > > 😃 I am done with you **FinnAgain** have fun swearing, cursing, insulting and demeaning everyone else that disagrees with you. I will have no more of it. And have fun being a lying asshole 🙂 I can disagree with people and still be civil, in fact I think I corrected **Lute** at one point in this very thread. But I know, someone with your selective attention skills must’ve missed that. See, it’s not that you disagree with me, it’s that your disagreement is based only on ignorance. It’s that you’re such an asshole that when presented with the fact that 20 out of 100 kids would be likely to abuse you somehow for being smart, you just want to sing “La la la, I can’t heaaaaaaar you!” You really are a perfect examplar of everything this place stands against. Militant ignorance is disgusting. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/327 "2005-05-14T20:14:01Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Instructional strategies include pointing out alternate vantage points. Again, if you don’t understand that, don’t talk about pedagogy. Yes, pedagogy involves presenting alternative viewpoints and perspectives. But simply sharing an opinion is _not_ pedagogy. If that were the case, then everybody and their mama woud be pedagogists. My point–which you seem to be arguing with for no good reason–is that an arrogant person believes they are too worthy to even listen to other people’s ideas and opinions. They believe they have a complete understanding of EVERYTHING. They have no problem sharing their opinions and ideas, of course, because they are RIGHT. ALL THE TIME. And they expect us all to accept this right-off-the-bat. They say things like this: > [@](#): > > You’ve been pointing out an incorrect view. You were wrong. See? Wrong ideas and correct varied interpretations are not to be given equal weight. Again, don’t hide behind “but it’s my opinion!” Your ‘point of view’ was wrong. Simply wrong. Deal. And then they wonder why people look at them sideways. > [@](#): > > Oh, and, by the way, pointing out alternate view points is only valid as long as those view points have some merit to them. In a debate about children being harrased for intelligence, the point “That doesn’t happen” is ignorant and wrong, it shouldn’t be given equal weight with the truth. And yet you conveniently deny the anecdotal experiences and facts presented by others who counter your arguments. I don’t deny that brainiacs have a hard time–never did. However, I also don’t think intelligence is the sole domain of brainiacs. I think it would be more accurate to say brainiacs, rather than smart people, have a hard time in high school. I define a brainaic to be someone who is strong academically, but weak socially. Not all intelligent people are brainaics. Nor are brainiacs always innocent victims who do nothing to deserve ridicule. Is my viewpoint wrong? Is it completely invalid? Does it not deserve to be treated with respect? Why or why not? > [@](#): > > Check monstro’s first post to this thread. Evidently he’s been nursing a hardon for me since I posted about linguistics and cog’ sci’ and, lo and behold, knew what I was talking about. First off, I’m not a “he”. Second off, I am not nursing a hardon, but I do have a memory. I know that you’ve presented a “haughty” persona on the boards previous to the baby-bragging thread. I think your posting history has some relevance to this discussion, especially since posters were wondering why “braggart” was being hurled your way. While I do not think you deserved it in the most recent case (although I can understand why you got it), I do think you have an over inflated sense of self. If you being called a braggart was just a one-time occurance, I think you’d be justified in acting surprised and offended. But there is a clear pattern with you, **FinnAgain**. Surely not all of us have a “hardon” for you. Don’t flatter yourself so much. > [@](#): > > And, ‘the little insult’ at the end? > For the love of truth, I was pointing out why his premise was bankrupt. It is **arrogant** and **egotistical** to think that just because you can flap your gums, without doing any research, an expert needs to hear you. You are the only one talking about “experts” and “research”. Is that what you think social interaction is, just swapping knowledge and displaying expertise? Don’t you ever just sit around and talk about things that you’re curious about, but don’t really understand? What about when you meet people for the first time? Do you introduce yourself by saying, “Hello. I’m **FinnAgain**. And I’m an expert in \_\_. I don’t care what you’re an expert in. We can only talk about what _I_ know, because I’m smarter and better than you, and I don’t feel like hearing you flap your gums about things you know nothing about.” You’re talking about knowledge. I’m talking about sharing opinions and ideas. Knowledge can be embedded in opinions and ideas, but so can a bunch of other interesting, equally satisfying things. An arrogant person doesn’t see this at all. Do you? I’m not talking about kids either. I’m talking about _people_. You seem to want to restrict this to one sphere (high school). The rest of us want you go grow up a little and be open to the way the “real world”–the one we’re all living in–works. > [@](#): > > And as for what he said that would warrant a disucssion of ‘such bullshit’, what exactly was bullshit? Pointing out that he was totally wrong about instructional strategies? Yeah… becuase fighting ignorance is just out of style these days. :rolleyes: Are you a damn robot? You are a prisoner to words and their definitions, and it’s kind of sad. It’s like you resort to semantic arguments when you run out of other ways to defend yourself. It is cowardly. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/328 "2005-05-14T21:00:09Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Nope. > It shows that intelligence is, in and of itself, a mark of difference and a magnet for problems. Other factors can lessen this effect, but it’s still a factor. Yeah, it’s _a_ factor. But just with like the pretty girl who can’t find a boyfriend and the nice guy who keeps getting rejected, the smart guy is not always bullied just because he’s smart. Blaming factor X on outcome Y may make one feel better, but _often_ other more important variables at play. _That’s all I’m saying_. You can try your best to prove me wrong, but you can’t. To do so, you would have to show me some evidence that humans don’t invent coping mechanisms and are always infallible. > [@](#): > > Nope. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact backed up at this point by hard statistical data, and you too are intellectually dishonest. You don’t have proof that you were bullied because of your intelligence. It’s theory (or opinion) that may or may not truth-based. The only ones who can validate it are the people who were picking on you. > [@](#): > > Mmm hmmm. Either that or I am right, and you’re ignorant and grasping at straws. Why don’t you go colaberate with treis and argue that one out of five people harassing you for being good at school simply doesn’t matter. Firstly, it’s fucking hilarious how just about every one of your paragraphs is prefaced with an insult. It’s like you can’t construct an adequate retort without first putting down your opponent. Secondly, I will continue to poke you with a stick and make your shriek because it’s infinitely more amusing than “colaberating” with **treis**. You really should have heeded my suggestion to go outside and get some fresh air. I just came back from planting some trees and the exercise was great! > [@](#): > > And, that’s wrong. I’ve already fucking cited it. All things being equal, social skills, etc… the more intelligent kid will get more flack. It is not wrong that a lot of people mistake intelligence as the source of their social woes. Trust me, many do. I’ve encountered a-plenty. I hate to break this to you, but the content of your cite doesn’t really prove your case. You say intelligent kids have a hard time of it in school. Sounds reasonable. But your cite focuses on behaviors that may or may not be tied to the factor under discussion. Studying a lot, for example is not always a province of the really intelligent. I was one of those kids who could forget there was a math test and still end up acing it. Classmates who were less bright, on the other hand, had to start studying weeks in advance. In my experience, the most studious people are the ones who are _not_ exceptionally bright; they have to study more in order to assimilate what takes minutes for the brainiacs. Another thing your cite said was this: “It’s annoying when students try to get teachers off track. (Agree = 42%, Disagree = 58%).” I can vouch for agreeing with that. Yes, it’s fuckin’ annoying when students interrupt the lesson and send the discussion down a path that is A) off-topic, B) boring, and C) self-serving to the student who likes to hear his own voice. But again, this has nothing to do with intelligence and all about being sensitive to other people in the class. Some of the most talkative people in class discussions can be the weakest upstairs. Anyone who has listened to one of these kinds of people prattle on and on knows what I’m talking about. Perhaps your classmates thought you were one of those people who like the sound of their own voices and picked on you because of it. Not because what you had to say was all so overwhelmingly intelligent sounding. As your cite points out, being an overachiever may cause a kid to catch some flak. Intelligence is associated with maintaining good grades. Therefore, _indirectly_, intelligence may cause kids to get beaten up. But kids in the 60th percentile can do well in school, too, and will probably catch some of the same flak that is dealt out to the overachieving 99th percentile folks. Lots of intelligent kids are so bored by school that they don’t apply themselves and settle for C’s. These students will more than likely not get picked on, yet they are still very much intelligent people. So your conclusion that intelligence makes kids a target for abuse may be confounded by the other factor of overachievement. I’m saying this so you will stop patting yourself on the back so hard. You haven’t proven anything except that you are a blowhard. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/329 "2005-05-14T21:59:07Z")
> [@treis](#): > > If I had to sum up that study in one sentence it would be those who deviated from social norms where harassed and excluded from the popular cliques. That’s my read of it, too. It’s not so much that “smarts” equals “unpopular”. Rather, it’s “unsocial” equals “unpopular”. That smart people are more likely to be unsocial isn’t surprising in the least. It’s hard to yak on the phone or bounce around on the dance floor when you’re studying for the spelling bee or memorizing the structure of 20 amino acids. If a smart person can juggle both studying and social activities, I’m willing to bet that the level of harrassment they receive will go down tremenduously. The football players who have high GPAs, the cheerleaders who win merit scholarships and tutor slower students, and the chess team captains that go to all the school dances and crack jokes in class will have a better go at things than the quiet bookworm who never leaves the library and looks his nose down on things like school dances, pep rallies, and other “social” things. I don’t think the quiet bookworm deserves bullying and harrassment (I am more like the bookworm than the cheerleader, lord knows), but I don’t think the laws of social interaction need to flipped upside down just so the quiet bookworm is just as popular as the cheerleader. I don’t think it’s possible, first of all. But I also think it’s unfair to people who _excel_ in social interactions. A good student shouldn’t be defined as someone who spends all their waking hours with their nose in a book. Well-rounded individuals will always have more success and garner more respect than folks who put every drop of their energy into a narrow area and can’t come down from the tower to rub shoulders with the masses every once in a while. > [@you with the face](#): > > Firstly, it’s fucking hilarious how just about every one of your paragraphs is prefaced with an insult. It’s like you can’t construct an adequate retort without first putting down your opponent. He’s an insecure fellow, isn’t he? It’s either you agree with him, or you’re an idiot. What I find interesting is that only a few people on this thread have denied that he’s an intelligent person (insults about his spelling notwithstanding). Has he acknowledged the intellectual worth of any of his opponents? In this thread or others? No, he hasn’t. We’re all idiots, in his myopic eyes. > [@jsgoddess](#): > > I’m always amazed at what people with no experience in a field can sometimes teach those of us with a lot of experience in a field. There are times when the sort of incestuous thinking of a closed field can be more of a hindrance than a help. So, even in those fields where I am quite knowledgeable, I value the input of people whose expertise might lie in another field or in none. Social interaction can be a valuable, irreplaceable, resource. Hear hear! Not only that, but questions from people outside of the field inspire those _within_ it to study their subject harder. I remember thinking I understood my field (aquatic biology) really well. That is, until I was thrust in front of a classroom for the first time and the students starting hurling questions at me. Suddenly, I realized that the depth of my understanding really wasn’t as impressive as I thought it was. I saw that the stuff I knew was about as important as a grain of sand in the Sahara Desert. Being around so-called “dumb” people can be a humbling experience sometimes. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/330 "2005-05-14T22:21:39Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > It’s annoying when students try to get teachers off track. (Agree = 42%, Disagree = 58%)." > > I can vouch for agreeing with that. Yes, it’s fuckin’ annoying when students interrupt the lesson and send the discussion down a path that is A) off-topic, B) boring, and C) self-serving to the student who likes to hear his own voice. But again, this has nothing to do with intelligence and all about being sensitive to other people in the class. Some of the most talkative people in class discussions can be the weakest upstairs. Anyone who has listened to one of these kinds of people prattle on and on knows what I’m talking about. Perhaps your classmates thought you were one of those people who like the sound of their own voices and picked on you because of it. Not because what you had to say was all so overwhelmingly intelligent sounding. Exactly. It’s not only dumb people who “flap their gums”. A lot of intelligent people do too. The only difference is that an intelligent person is more likely to provide technically accurate information. But they are still “flapping their gums” if they are interrupting the lesson and taking the lecture off track. It is also rude to be the constant source of tangents in the classroom. A teacher prepares their lessons days in advance, and usually plans to cover X amount of material in Y number of days so that the students will be on track in time for lesson Z. A student who likes to steer the discussion inadvertedly destroys these plans. I’m betting that teachers who were asked to comment on “It’s annoying when students try to get the teacher off track” would agree overwhelmingly with it. That doesn’t mean that teachers are anti-intellectual or believe that smart students should be harrassed. Students who raise their hand a lot in class have the same affect as the students who steer the lecture. They impede the teacher’s ability to reach all of the students and serve as a distraction. Acknowledging this fact does not mean I advocate beating and harrassing smart kids. It just means that when I sit down in a classroom, I have certain expectations for how things are supposed to be. One of those expectations is that it is the teacher who does most of the talking (unless it’s a seminar course). I believe those researchers should have left out that particular question in their survey. ---
**Author:** ![Sarah\_Woodruff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sarah\_Woodruff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarah_Woodruff)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/331 "2005-05-15T00:58:37Z")
> [@Arwin](#): > > While I do think that sometimes letting all that pent up anger out can be healthy, and that the Pit is definitely the place to do it, I agree with you Sarah - this discussion played a few notches too loud has run its course. If I were FinnAgain, I’d walk away. > > (As someone with your username and location, Sarah, I presume you do understand he has a point, so that you just take issue with the poor manner in which he is making it.) > > (God I loved that book.) You’ve hit the nail on the head regarding my position. You have great literary taste, by the way. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/332 "2005-05-15T05:54:20Z")
**FinnAgain** , I have not read the links in your OP because I am not concerned by the comments of others about you. This is all that I want to address: > [@](#): > > People are picked on for their intellect. As you know, I’m no great intellect myself. But I have had the privilege of spending my entire life with outstandingly brilliant people. With the exception of one, all of them were exceptionally well-liked. The one who had trouble adjusting socially was not picked on for his intellect. He _seemed_ to be a little on the silly and immature side socially. I truly don’t think that it is the intellect that gets people picked on. (I’ve seen too many exceptions for that to be true.) It is how that intellect is handled emotionally and socially. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/333 "2005-05-15T06:35:11Z")
When I posted that last post, I had read only the first page of this thread and I didn’t realize how redundant my remarks were or how long the thread was. My apologies to all for stating the obvious. > [@](#): > > **FinnAgain** : As a side note people who are ignorant and yet open their mouths real wide are one of my pet peeves. I don’t talk, I don’t post, I don’t have anything to say, most of the time, on subjects which I do not know reasonably well, and it bothers me to no end when other people do. If someone doesn’t know what they’re talking about, it’s extremely jerkish to join an argument, without the facts, only to be difficult. It’s just bad form. You are lying to yourself then, if not to us. I remember a thread in which you went on and on about what was appropriate procedure in a classroom setting. It was unrealistic in the extreme. Since I had spent twenty years on the “front lines,” I asked you how much actual experience you had in the classroom. You declined to answer. (I believe I remember that you had said previously that you were spending your seventh year in an academic “ivory tower” – something like that.) Some day you will learn a little about **monstro** and begin to understand why the rest of us know that it isn’t your intellect that puts people off. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/334 "2005-05-15T07:09:45Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > You are lying to yourself then, if not to us. Nope. > [@Zoe](#): > > I remember a thread in which you went on and on about what was appropriate procedure in a classroom setting. It was unrealistic in the extreme. I pointed out a psychological link between the color red and perception. Hardly beyond the pale. One doesn’t have to be a teacher to look at studies talking about people’s responses to the color red. You misread what I said as advocating parents running classroom decisions, which I never said. ~shrugs~ > [@Zoe](#): > > Some day you will learn a little about **monstro** and begin to understand why the rest of us know that it isn’t your intellect that puts people off. I’d put a bit more weight into that, except I don’t ‘put people off’. That was way back in highschool. Starting with college I had a very large circle of friends. But whatever, I’m pretty much done with this thread. It can be locked, or people can flame some more, but I doubt I’ll be back. Ciao ciao. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/335 "2005-05-15T07:44:34Z")
No, I didn’t misread what you said. You completely over-simplified what is feasible in a classroom situation. It went far beyond the red ink controversy (which I took no position on). You are failing to take responsibility for what you said in that thread. Reading thousands of studies does **not** give anyone one minute of experience in the classroom. _I’ve read the studies, I’ve done the course work at a first rate university, and I’ve had the classroom experience._ I’m glad to hear that you no longer have trouble putting people off and that you don’t lie to yourself. I don’t blame your wanting out of the thread. You are not a bad person, FinnAgain. Just overwhelmed like a lot of people in your situation. You can’t intellecualize your way out of this. It’s not about that. You’re going to have to trust someone. Not here at the Dope, but there. Pax ---
**Author:** ![Linus\_Van\_Pelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@Linus\_Van\_Pelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Linus_Van_Pelt)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/336 "2005-05-15T11:53:20Z")
I’m not sure why I’m jumping into the fray here. But there’s somthing that’s gotten me curious. And I’m hoping that by asking in what I believe to be a non-confrontational manner that I can get an answer. **FinnAgain** , assuming that you’ve not completely abandoned this thread (you did say that you ‘doubt’ you’d be back, not that you were definately not coming back), I have a question for you. Despite the fact that you vehemently insist that no one but you can know your intent when you posted about your high school experiences, why are you not willing to even consider the possibility that even one of the posters that claimed that they weren’t trying to be insulting was telling the truth? It’s possible that I missed a place where you did; it’s been quite the long train-wreck of a thread and I have no intention of wading back through the whole thing again. If I did miss such an instance, I withdraw the question. But my recollection is that anytime a poster stated that their intent was not to attack you or that their post was, at most, good natured ribbing your response was to call them a coward (or a liar, etc.). It could be that I’m mistaken about any number of things. Perhaps I’m misremembering the number of people that stated that they weren’t trying to insult you (which, in my precise manner, I will define as “several”). It could be that you accepted one of their statements of intent at face value and I simply missed it. If you did, as I stated above, I withdraw the question. ---
**Author:** ![Hippy\_Hollow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hippy_hollow/32/4841_2.png) [@Hippy\_Hollow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hippy_Hollow)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/337 "2005-05-15T20:34:01Z")
This thread is… well, I can’t believe I’ve been following it so diligently. But it is fascinating… What I find most interesting from this raging debate is the assumption that there is one valid metric upon which one can claim “I’m smarter than average.” The work of Howard Gardner, and more recently, Daniel Goleman, points to the fact that there are indeed multiple intelligences. Certain contexts (school, for instance) may value some intelligence domains over others. But the law of averages would suggest that most folks probably excel in one or more domains, and are likely deficient in others - think of it as a huge bell curve, where the tails consist of those who are “below average” across all domains, and those who are “above average” across all domains. There’s also the disturbing history of testing in this country, and the unmitigated record of bias that aptitude and intelligence tests demonstrate - Nicholas Lehman’s The Big Test and the work of Asa Hilliard III present compelling evidence that people of color, women, the poor, non-White, Anglo-Saxon Protestants, the learning disabled, the developmentally delayed, and non-native, Standard English speakers have not been well served by standardized testing - not by omission or negligence, but by design. I just think that anyone who proffers test scores as an indication of intelligence should really be careful and examine how privilege advantages the test taker. If you happen to claim all the above identities, then you are really something else… It sounds as if FinnAgain excels in at least one domain of intelligence, judging from what he’s shared, but perhaps is not as proficient in another (that’s not a dig at you FinnAgain). Quite simply, it seems that there are some fundamental differences in the experiences FinnAgain cites and those of other posters. Is it possible that your individual anecdotal experiences are indeed valid, to some degree? That is, perhaps FinnAgain is correct in noting that he experienced ostracism because of his intelligence (and perhaps it was exacerbated beyond intelligence for different reasons), and perhaps others did not? I’m a lowly graduate student, and in my career in education I have taught at the elementary, middle, and graduate levels. As a pedagogue, I tend to place the responsibility of imparting, or introducing students to knowledge on the educator’s shoulders primarily. Certain teaching styles that are favored in the U.S. K-12, and even higher education systems - like lecturing - favor students who excel in those learning styles. It’s the educator’s job to differentiate instruction so that all students can have the experience of learning in a style that fits their aptitudes, as well as experience the challenge of learning in a style in which they are not as proficient. Unfortunately that doesn’t happen - FinnAgain’s references to those who are less proficient in his domains of intelligence as “mediocretins” and the like suggests that perhaps this is an experience he hasn’t had. I suspect if one can’t empathize with dissimilar experiences, that might create an issue in peer-to-peer relationships. Anecdotally, my experiences as a student and teacher in a variety of environments - from inner-city classrooms to comprehensive state universities to elite private colleges - is that intelligence is a trait admired by students. I do think, however, it is admired when students detect it, rather than when it is self-promoted or endorsed by teachers. I don’t think your teachers did you any favors, FinnAgain, by repeatedly singling you out to answer questions, to heap praise on your work, etc. Your peers may not have had the opportunity to observe your intelligence for themselves and perhaps doubted those assessments by teachers. The last thing I want to throw out is the idea that schools are artificial environments that do not resemble real life - that’s simply a nonsensical dichotomy. Peer relationships are very real, whether they are on a sports team, quiz bowl team, during recess, or in staff meetings. It would drive me nuts when students would say to me that they were ready to go out into the “real world.” To which I’d respond, “Really? Where have you been for the past several years?” One final thing… I work with two professors in their 80s. Both are incredibly accomplished, have published many books and articles, and have national if not international reputations. What I find incredible about these two is that they could always refute/deconstruct/challenge anyone’s take on their work, but they both revel in the opportunity to hear how others - from students to people in other fields - frame issues and problems. There’s a humility that seems to come from knowing a great deal about a topic, and perhaps as importantly, if one is interested in sharing knowledge beyond the academic community, a need to engage with those who are not immersed in the topic on a daily basis to connect your ideas to their reality. FinnAgain, if your effort was to convince others of the validity of your perspective, I think the insults you used worked against your cause. I think there is a willingness to accept differing viewpoints on this board, but if you choose to initiate most of your responses with insults, I think you become less effective. But then again this is the pit, so maybe that’s cool as well! ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2005, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/338 "2005-05-15T23:31:34Z")
**Hippy Hollow** , what an insightful post. I hope that **FinnAgain** and others who have participated will read it and consider. Welcome to SDMB! ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2005, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/339 "2005-05-16T00:00:46Z")
Yeh, **Hippy Hollow** , you’re a credit to your state! She says from the exurbian wilds of Ipswich. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Hippy\_Hollow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hippy_hollow/32/4841_2.png) [@Hippy\_Hollow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hippy_Hollow)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2005, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591/340 "2005-05-16T00:30:05Z")
[waves at **Zoe** and **EddyTeddyFreddy**] [slight hijack] **EddyTeddyFreddy** , I’m only a temporary resident of the state until I finish school. Then I will likely return to my native Texas… but the Bay State isn’t a bad place to live, at all… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assholes-the-jealous-and-mediocretins-cemetary-savior-spoke-fessie-treis-etc/303591.md?page=18)