No, no, that was Giraffe the Poster back there. I wasn’t wearing my special hat.
[sub]Mmmmm, fuzzy…[/sub]
What, you’re not a Mod anymore? 
Sauron: We may have to agree to disagree, I can’t see a possible way in which someone who stands head and shoulders above their peers wouldn’t be perceived as somehow different.
So, in other words, there would be something wrong with a smart student using their vocabulary in class because it would make other people feel less comfortable? In a discussion with the teacher, one should watch their language to avoid upsetting the stupid people in the class?
What penalties do you advise for someone who speaks as is natural for him when talking to a teacher, and thus makes people who’re ignorant feel like they’re, well, ignorant?
Should we take this to its logical conclusion?
If a socially adept person doesn’t do things that make others uncomfortable, and since virtually any display of talent can make others who aren’t talented feel uncomfortable, then socially adept people shouldn’t ever do anything exceptional.
-Don’t be great at sports, because then you’ll make people feel like they’re not great at sports.
-Don’t be great at academics (or at least hide the fact if you are), because otherwise you’ll make people feel stupid.
-Don’t have a large vocabulary that you use, because then ignorant people will feel ignorant.
This is why I say we have a culture of mediocrity, of anti-intellectualism. Instead of saying “Wow, he understand things that I don’t, I could learn a lot!” we say “Wow, he’s using words I don’t know, what an asshole.”
Because smart people shouldn’t have to pretend to be someone else in order to avoid being harrassed. And people should be your friend because of who you are. If stupid people think that having a large vocabulary is a sign of being pretentious, should we educate them to reduce their bigotry, or should we hobble the smart kids because of the spiteful jealousy of those who aren’t as smart as them?
To put it more clearly: should we teach our smart children that they should be ashamed for being smart in public, and that people won’t like them if they’re just being who they are? Should we tell our smart children to make sure not to be too smart, or use words that people might not know, because then they’ll catch shit?
Seems to me that problem lies on the side of trogs, not those who’re smart. Why not educate the bullies instead of restricting the people who the bullies taunt?
As far as I’m concerned, all that means it that we need to better educate our children. We have a million ‘diversity workshops’, and ‘tollerance traning camps’, and what have you. Why don’t we have more for teaching students that being intelligent is normal and fine? Shouldn’t we train our children to know that just because someone knows more than we do, and that makes us feel bad about our own knowledge, doesn’t mean the other person is in any way bad?
Being that I don’t know the people you’re talking about, I have no idea exactly what sort of behavior you’re discussing. If it’s the kind of writing that goes into scholarly journals and is ridiculously dense, then yes, I’d say that’s, in general, bad. But then again, sometimes you’re only writing to those in your field who get you.
Describe more about these people and why they’re irritating, please. As far as I can tell all you’re talking about is people within a specialization who aren’t able to communicate their findings to others. To me this seems the norm, as it takes a somewhat outstanding individual to code switch between hard jargon and plain english, espeically while retaining all the scientific nuances. Can you elaborate?
True enough… but it seems that a more mature response to someone using words you don’t understand is to try to learn about the subject. Yes, maybe you stop listenting to them then and there, but some things can only be dumbed down so much. It takes an exceptional writer, for instance, to make eigenstates and the collapse of the state vector into anything other than jargon.
Maybe I’m missing your example, but I simply don’t see a reason to attatch a negative label to someone whose knowledge exceeds yours, simply because they’re not able to communicate it in a way you can understand.
There’s a huge difference between saying “I don’t get where you’re coming from man, and I don’t know half the terms you’re using.” and “I don’t undersatnd you, and you’re an asshole.”
Breathlessly awaiting the release of “How Not To Make Friends And Influence People” by the egghead tandem of FinnAgain and Bobby Fisher. It’s got Best Seller written all over it.
Meantime, I must comfort myself with FinnAgain’s copious yet nuanced er…droppings by way of preview.
Cheers.
~PinkFury.
Lets say I am playing a pick up game of 3 on 3 at a local park. Kevin Garnett shows up and plays with us. Its not going to be much fun for us when he is blocking everyone’s shot and dunking on every possession. If he wants to continue playing with us he is going to have to reign it in a bit so its fun for the rest of us. Otherwise we are just going to go play somewhere else or exclude him from our game.
Communication is the same way. It isn’t enjoyable to listen to or converse with someone who consistantly uses words you don’t understand. If you don’t wish to be excluded from the game i.e. social situations you will reign it in so it is enjoyable for everyone. You can sit here and say that they should learn all the words but that makes as much sense as saying we should practice and be as good as Garnett. The fact of the matter is that most people don’t have the ability or just flat out don’t care enough to learn obscure words when there are more common words that express the same ideas.
You can sit here and call us mediocretins or say we are anti-intellectual but the fact remains that we are right. If you come into an activity like Garnett does and consistantly ruins the enjoyment of the others you are being an asshole. The same goes for conversation if you consistantly ruin the enjoyment of the other people in the discussion by using words they don’t understand you are being an asshole. Consequently no one will want to talk to you and it is not due to you being smarter than them rather its due to you making the act of conversation unenjoyable.
You just didn’t get it, didja?
The point is that even ‘eggheads’ should be allowed to be who they are without being harassed for it. I know, a radical idea.
Which, along with the stupid fuck, dumb bitch, trog, etc. pejoratives in itself says a lot, doesn’t it? I’m sure one would view with suspicion the claims of innocence and oppression of someone saying, “I don’t get why all those kikes don’t like me, I’m a decent guy, it’s only when the heebs make my life miserable that I fight back.” Yet that’s the equivalent of what we’re getting here.
I knew what was up with this guy a long time ago when I noticed that most of his argument consisted of, “Why are you too fucking stupid to understand <my viewpoint on X issue> is right, you dumb bitch?”
I’ve found that the outright (and funny; oh, you said he’s a fucking moron, that wins the day) use of diminutive terms such as bitch, moron, and oh so witty and clever names like “Spunky” is a pretty typical sign of a childlike temper tantrum from someone who is simply used to mom and dad cooing over his intellectual superiority, and being upset when others don’t. It shows the exact emotional disconnect, and condescension toward others, that is being discussed here.
Who said anything about harrassing? Giraffe said that a socially adept person should modify their behavior to communicate more effectively. You took that to its supposed logical end by saying that no one should display excellence. I then explained to you the rational behind our argument that they should modify their language. Neither I, Giraffe nor you mentioned anything about harassment in that sequence.
My last response was to redfury, just to make things clear:
Bad analogy.
High school is not a basketball game, and students are supposed to be getting good grades, not having fun playing a game. A smart student shouldn’t have to ‘reign it in’ simply because other students aren’t able to compete. That’s not his problem, it’s theirs.
We weren’t talking about having a conversation, but children being picked on for academic performance.
That’s also why shop talk is bad for social gatherings. But again, there are different standards for when a bunch of buddies go grab some beers, and when a bunch of academicians sit down for a panel discussion, and when a student is answering a question put to them by their teacher.
Not at all.
The average person has no chance of achieving the status of a star athelete. But every person has the ability to learn new words and concepts. Again, I assume we’re talking about an academic setting, but even if we’re talking about friends hanging out it’s really not a huge deal.
I know nothing, not a damn thing, about cars. Does this mean that I should cop an atittude whenever one of my buddies launches into a speech about whatever part on whatever car? Or should I only pitch a hissy fit if someone says something that I think might mean they’re smarter than I am?
Specialized knowledge is just a fact of life, and it’s only going to accelerate as time goes on. We can either accept difference and diversity as actually being good things, or give them lip service while harassing those who know things that we don’t.
I deny that any normal human being lacks the ability to learn the language. It’s hardwired into us, after all. For those who refuse to learn words that aren’t common, whose fault is that?
Honestly, are we going to fight ignorance or invite it in for milk and cookies? If people are militant in their ignorance and refuse to learn new things, should we support them and help them harass and attack people whose only crime is being talented/knowledgeable?
And simply for the record, sometimes ‘big words’ express nuance better. Hell, I’m sure in some circles nuance itself is a ‘big word’ that’ll get you mocked. If someone can say something more efficiently and comfortably for them with one word instead of ten, why shouldn’t they? Especially if it’s in an academic setting, where the purpose is supposed to be learning?
Well, can’t argue with logic like that… :rolleyes:
By penalizing anybody who is exceptional, you are enforcing a culture of mediocrity and anti-intellectualism.
How, exactly, is calling for people who’re good at activities to dumb down their performance because the mediocre people won’t be able to keep up not love of mediocrity? You’re not in class to enjoy yourself, you’re in class to learn. If we penalize people who’ve learned more than others, what message are we sending about intellectualism?
How on earth is not this anti-intellectualism?
If you have a conversation with someone, and they use words you don’t know, they’re an asshole?
Your ignorance is their fault?
Just because someone’s demonstration of knowledge makes you feel ignorant, doesn’t mean they’ve done anything wrong. In fact, the mature response is to realize that nobody can ‘make’ you feel anything, and that your jealousy is a bad thing. If you’re not going to take responsibility for your own emotions, you can call a perfectly friendly person an asshole because they use words you don’t know.
So if ,say, you are talking to a group of people, and you bring up, oh I don’t know… the federal reserve, and nobody has heard of it, you’re an asshole, right?
If you bitch about the electoral college, and the people you talk to don’t know about it, you’re an asshole, right?
If you’re talking to people and feel that your ideas are expressed better in ‘ten dollar words’ because those are the words that fit, you’re an asshole, right?
If you just got back from Paris you shouldn’t say a thing, because if you talk about it people will assume you’re just a jet set snob and an asshole and they’ve never been to Paris, after all. Right?
If you write a book, and the only phrase you can think up which perfectly sums up your thought is “the ineluctable modality of the visible.” then you’re being an asshole, right?
I’m sorry, I don’t buy that. There’s a huge difference between saying “He’s not a good conversational partner for me.” and “He’s an asshole.” One is a mature reaction to the external world, the other blames people for our own shortcomings.
Of course not – you’re casting the situation into one of opposing extremes. One can modify one’s behavior without pretending to be a dullard. I know very bright people who come across as both intelligent and incredibly likeable to virtually everyone they meet. Can everyone naturally do this? Of course not, any more than everyone can be academically brilliant. However, most people with a willingness to educate themselves in the empirical rules of social interaction can greatly improve their abilities. People who are unwilling to do this can’t expect social acceptance any more than students who are unwilling to read books can expect good grades in a literature class.
We’re not just talking about high school here. This is a problem people have their whole lives, and there’s really only two choices: Stick to one’s principles and constantly fight negative perceptions, or learn to speak different languages in different situations in order to relate and connect better with different types of people.
It doesn’t matter a whit that it’s not fair that some people’s natural behavior is more likely to be viewed negatively and thus requires more attention to how they say things if they want to come across well to others. Some people have to work a lot harder to learn math. They can either put in the extra work and pass the test, or they can say it’s not fair, refuse to work harder, and fail.
Sly frog, don’t you have a thread to slime up talking about how teachers are lazy bastards?
Oh, and, you should grow some balls. Calling someone a moron after they’ve called you a braggart is hardly the end of the world. Nor is it indiciative of anything other than a flame war. You, on the other hand, are a coward to use that tired old bullshit yet again as if it proves anything.
Now, please, tell me about how my parents treated me because I’m calling you a coward. I’m sure that’ll give you great insight.
In class, if the teacher understands you, then there’s no need to modify your behavior as you’re communicating. And yet, children still get harassed for that sort of thing. What then?
You ignored the clear implications, so?
What do you think the consequences are of not conforming and ‘showing off’ by simply existing? What do you think the penalty is for those who don’t ‘make their classmates comfortable.’?
The only “point” in this whole thread is the one atop of your head – goes rather nicely with the chip on your shoulder and the chinks in your armour.
PS-Dude, as smart as you claim to be, you obviously have no fuckin’ clue as to what a “coward” is.
Hint. It ain’t disagreeing with you.
Pistols at dawn?
Whether or not they’re pretending to be a dullard, they’re pretending to be someone that they aren’t.
Bah, I don’t and won’t accept this. Society is nothing other than a useful linguistic fiction, it is ephemeral, it is ever changing, and ther are almost limitless sub-cultures. Moreoever, if we simply accepted the way society is and did nothing, we’d never have had sufferage, civil rights, etc…
No, I say it is flat out wrong to discriminate against someone simply because they speek a different way than you do.
If the status quo doesn’t work, change it.
That’s odd… I’ve always considered sticking to one’s principles to be a virtue.
But, now, if we’re talking about things outside of high school, obviously the situation is different. I was addressing bigotry and harassment in high school. Yes, when trying to transmit information one should learn to adopt an effective mode of discourse. But by the same token, if they don’t know how to communicate, we can either be accepting of this difference and try to bridge the gap, or bring the hammer of societal non-acceptance down on them.
Yes, it does matter, because that’s bigotry and that’s hatefulness and that’s just wrong. Either difference and diversity should be valued, individualism and intelligence respected, or these buzz words should be dropped from any and all lexicons.
Would you tell someone who was gay that they had to hide it from people because it’d be viewed negatively, or would you try to educate people?
Would you tell someone who speeks with an accent to keep his mouth shut, or would you try to educate people?
Would you tell someone who naturally thinks in and speaks with ‘big words’ to tone down their vocabulary, wor would you try to educate people?
Because justice, and fairness, and what’s right matters more than what’s expedient.
It’s perfectly fair that people have to work at a skill to master it.
Is it perfectly unfair that someone will be harassed simply for being who they are.
As educators and parents I don’t think we should let this situation continue. It’s our job to leave this world better than when we found it, after all.
Oh! Contentless snark! I am terribly surprised.
Mind pointing out which of my arguements is factually incorrect, or would you like to snipe some more?
Although I would note that claiming I have a ‘chip on my shoulder’ for stating the facts of my intellect is a very good way of proving my point. How dare anybody be smart and know it, why, they must have a chip on their shoulder! :rolleyes:
Thank you for serving as my object lesson.
Oh, and, no, disagreeing with me doesn’t make one a coward. Nor have I ever said that, and I’ve disagreed with people in this thread without calling them cowards. Maybe you don’t want to put your ignorance on display like that again along with petty digs?
Yes, I ‘claim to be’ intelligent. It’s a ‘claim’. And you’re just a sniping fuck who can’t be bothered to put together an argument and slings ad hominems instead. Congrats, you’re intellectually dishonest! Want a medal or a monument?
Your post has done nothing to address the main idea of my post. Let me be explicit, if you want to successfully interact socially you must use language others understand. Again the problem is not your supposed intellectual superiority or Garnett’s basketball ability its the fact that you refuse to modify your behavior in order for others to enjoy conversation or a basketball game. There is nothing anti-intellectual about this nor does it punish anyone for excellence.
Yes, it did. .
And let me be explicit, we were talking about high school and smart kids being harassed for knowing more/being smarter/having a bigger vocabulary, what have you. One has a responsibility to learn in school, one does not have a responsibility to get only average grades, or use only average words.
No no, Garnett’s supposed basketball ability. Right?
Are we talking about high school still? If we are, then fuck no it’s not my responsibility to make class enjoyable for you. Class isn’t supposed to be a vacation, it’s supposed to be about learning.
If you’re talking about society in general, thinking/talking about things that are over the heads of the people are you still doesn’t make you an asshole. It does make you someone that they can’t really get to know, but, so? If you want to talk about marine ecosystems, does it make more sense to find similar minded people, or to talk about the weather?
Of course it does. If someone spends their life learning, but isn’t able to dumb it down enough for non specialists, they’re penalized. In your formulation, they’re an asshole. An asshole for not knowing the right words to make increadibly complex concepts simple.
A pro-intellectual response to someone who you don’t get is to ask questions, read, try to figure it out, or just plain give up. An anti-intellectual response is to say that they’re an asshole because their conversation pointed out areas in which you’re ignorant.
I’ll take sniping for a $1,000, Alex!
“What is arrogant asshole?”
“Correct. Pick again.”
I claim my dick’s 14".
How dare anyone dispute my claim!
I’m here to please. With a 14" dick, what else would you have me do?
For an English major, you can’t write for shit – or you’re simply a disingenous fucktard. Fact is you’ve called a number of people "cowards"for doing just that,
You’re doing just fine displaying yours.
Better to be thought of as a fool than open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.
No thanks. Want to suck my monster schlong instead?
TTFN
** FinnAgain ** its not “we” that are talking about academic situations its “you”. I explicitly said social situations and ** Giraffe ** has said she (he?) is not just talking about high school. Again, I am talking about social situations and making friends. Please try again at comprehending my posts as you have missed the mark one more time.