It’s also the hubris of people who think that their age has imparted in them a wisdom unknown to lesser mortal to make such claims. When I intellectually grasp a concept, it’s because of penetralia. It won’t do to claim that one can grasp the subject, but not understand it.
The first time I stubbed my toe, I thought it hurt. I didn’t need to go about experimenting all over the place to understand that future stubbings would hurt. Nor do I need to experience every type of pain in the universe to understand it. If you need that to understand it, so be it.
Groovy, when I was 30, I didn’t think like you still do. Largely because I understood that we learn the fastest in our very young years. We don’t progressively keep learning faster as time marches on; we learn slower. Maybe in another few years, experience will teach you what education has thus failed to teach you.
You know honey, using big words to make people think you’re smart only works on people who are unsure enough about the meaning of those words to not be sure they understand you. In other words, people you would already feel confident you’re smarter than, if you were confident in your smarts.
Thanks for the insight, sweetcheeks. Please, and I’m quite curious to know, exactly which word in my post would you define as big? On review, I haven’t found a particularly big word, or even an unusual one. The largest word there is “intellectually” which is not unusual. But it does have lots of letters.
Was it penetralia? That’s hardly a large word considering it has fewer letters than intellectually, which is a common word. It’s also not really unusual. Indeed, I see nothing in the post to which you reply which at all uncommon, or evidence of an attempt to sound particularly (the second largest word I used) bright. The post, if I had to critique it, isn’t even complex writing. I’d say an tenth grader could easily have written it. Maybe even that gives it too much credit.
Attempting to deride someone for a supposed usage of large words for the sake of insulting another’s intellect, or as a sign of some belief in his intellectual superiority usually fares better when the writing is both erudite and contrived. My post was neither.
So old people are more patient and have nebulous ‘experience’ which, despite being apparently impossible to define, makes them better than younger people who, biologically speaking, function much quicker and accurately. That would be the experience and wisdom that led the current crop of old people to drive the American economy into the ground, then?
Why I love being a member of Generation X, #1,782: Realizing **NinjaChick **sounds just like the Baby Boomers did at 20, and laughing quietly to myself.
Interesting. As someone in his early fifties, I find the attitude exhibited by ashman165 to be a perfect example of what the OP is asking for.
One of the really important things that experience gives to most people is the knowledge that they may not know as much as they think (or would like to think) they know. The wisdom of experience tells most people that, perhaps, other people actually DO know more than you do; that other people actually DO know some things that you are ignorant of; that what you believe to be true about yourself may actually, through the wisdom of experience you have yet to experience, not be so true.
ashman165 takes such offense at the suggestion that there might be things he does not fully understand. Taking such offense is a sure sign of a lack of the wisdom of experience. It’s kind of a catch-22; when you protest so vehemently that you do too understand (about the wisdom of experience), you make it plain that you don’t.
How do I know that? How can I so confidently proclaim that? Because when I was younger, I had that same attitude, that same chip on my shoulder of “just because you’re older doesn’t mean you can tell me anything I don’t already know, doesn’t mean I don’t understand.” But as I got older, I realized the folly of that. Hopefully, as ashman165 gets older, he will eventually realize that, too. Until then, nothing anyone says could possibly convince him that he might be wrong. And I’m sure he’ll be along soon to confirm that.
Taking some things to seriously. An annoying boss is an annoying boss. A bad date is a bad date. Your friend said something mean - she probably mispoke. Ten years from now no one will care what sort of purse you had today - it probably isn’t worth going into hock for.
Taking other things not seriously enough - a really abusive job (relationship) should just be walked out on. It actually IS important to live within your means and maybe make sure you can afford retirement. Drinking and smoking will probably catch up with you and although you think you’ll be dead before you are 50 and won’t care - chances are instead you’ll just be in bad physical shape at 50.
And not everyone makes the same mistakes - some people avoid unsecured debt, marry their high school sweetheart and live happily ever after without ever abusing their bodies. They never have the stupid fight with their boss where they walk out on a perfectly good job. But I think everyone who is honest with themselves admits they made some mistake when they were younger that the experience of making the mistake keeps them from making again.
Or maybe most of us learn differently–I’ve certainly learned more in the 20-30 decade (end of college, grad work, on-the-job) than the 10-20 (sleeping through high school, getting in fights in middle school, band practice.)
I’m sorry, please cite for me anywhere that I’ve suggested there are people who don’t know more than I do? Or aren’t smarter than am I? Or who aren’t more intelligent than I? You’ll find no such cite because it’s not a claim I’ve made a single time in my life. Indeed, I enjoy being in the presence of profoundly smart people because it greatly increases the chances that I’ll learn something. I suppose that having a few PhDs doesn’t count because, hey, you’re older and that’s enough, huh?
I love knowledge and learning. I always have. But there is no good reason to think that in the next 20 years I’ll be inherently wiser than I am now. Surely I won’t learn as fast and my IQ will drop. My mental faculties will decline as is our biological curse. But sure, okay. Getting older means you’ll have, um, what? Done more academically than I have? There might some people who will do more academically than will I, but not many.
I realize that because you’re 50 and convinced that you’re suddenly some scholar because of that, you’ll automatically reject the assertion that those who are somewhat young than you can know as much, if not more, than you. I haven’t claimed that I’m smarter than anyone; I’ve only maintained that you aren’t smarter than I am. Your counterpoint is that, essentially, simply because you’re somewhat older, you have to be.
Hogwash.
Only when it’s a subject I do actually understand. Perhaps, in all of your infinite wisdom predicated upon merely your age, you’d be so kind to cite that I somehow am fully understanding all of what is. I am fully aware of my limitations, which I think is quite wise to do because it gives one a good starting place for gaining future knowledge. You, however, sound like you have all the answers. Moreover, the information in the world I haven’t yet learned, or will never learn, doesn’t somehow impugn the intellect and knowledge that I actually do posses.
I love your permeating syllogism here that refusing to accept someone’s uninformed opinion somehow implies that they are, of course, correct. That’s claptrap.
So far, those of the supposed wise and experienced years have accused me of:
*Using big words as a show of my intellect, when the largest word I’ve used to date is “intellectually”, which is commonly taught even to public school children by the ripe old age of 12. Yeah, that’s some show of intellectual prowess.
*Presuming to have alleged to know everything when I’ve made no such assertion.
*Being far too stupid to understand, from what I can gather, much of anything. One wonders how I’ve managed, in all my inexperience and foolishness, to avoid getting hit by cars while crossing the street. I suppose since I have never been hit by a car while doing so, it follows that I don’t have the experience necessary to continue doing so without incident. Thank god all those wise, experienced drivers out there have managed, through their many years of experience, to not run me down. I’m much obliged.
I see where you’re coming from now: because of how you were when you were young, you want to read that same set of limitations into others. Sorry, but not all of us have your limitations in life; we’re saddled with another set to bear through.
I can’t be convinced I’m wrong? That’s an outright lie. But to convince me of your position, you’ll have do much better than some vague reference to years and experience necessitate superior knowledge of the world. To date, all that’s come about is the vague notion that time passes, we exist in time, and the more of it you live through, you’ll naturally be better off or wiser or something.
I think one can find many examples of old stupid people. One can find examples of old socially awkward people. One can find examples of old people who are no further along in their lives than they were in their youth. But, hey, why let reality get into an otherwise excellent example of holier than thou, you’re too young to know what I know? I mean, ya know, because experience has taught you that you have experience and experience is itself the truest educator.
Many people come to wisdom; oftentimes from disparate sources. I didn’t think it was necessary for me to delay my education and wait for life to just dole it out as things came up. I aggressively pursue such, and I think my results have shown that my method was quite good. Either that or I’m just the luckiest SOB to ever walk the Earth.
Do you think that your academic achievements will be the sum total of your knowledge in those particular fields for the rest of you life?
Do you think, in 20 years from now, that you will be APPLYING that knowledge in exactly the same way as you do now?
May I suggest a long term experiment:
Save this thread to you computer.
Open it again in 20 years time.
Read it.
If you DON’T think to yourself, “Geez, I was an arrogant fellow back then, wasn’t I?”
Then I would suggest that you are right … that experience teaches YOU nothing.
I don’t know; such as I understand the concept death can’t be predicted very reliably. I can say reasonably confidently that it won’t be tomorrow or the day after. But too far into the future and these psychic powers are weakened. Why are you being naive by asking of someone who proclaims that he has a passion for learning when he plans to lose it? That’s surely the mark of an enlightened mind there, boy howdy.
Yeah, I stopped thinking and learning the moment I left school.
That would imply that things aren’t a function of time, which is a bit silly. Things change. New shit gets invented. However, the fundamentals that serve me well today will continue to serve me well tomorrow. Otherwise, it must be manifestly the case that the processes by which I’ve operated for the bulk of my life are faulty. One wonders how I could enjoy such academic success if my underlying fundamentals terribly diverge from what is accepted as good scholarship, and from reality.
Did you somewhere along way discover that a logical analysis a situation and its alternative solutions didn’t work? Did 2 and 2 stop equaling 4? Does PEMDAS no longer apply?
These things are basic; they are radical and are immutable. The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus isn’t going away anytime soon and I have no reason to think that in 20 years new systems of mathematics will replace our current ones. Sure, we’ll have more information than we have now, but if our fundamentals are so askew, one wonders why buildings aren’t collapsing like crazy.
I have no reason to think I will sometime in the next 20 years decide that being a responsible adult isn’t worth it anymore and take to being a reckless drunkard whose life revolves around what party is happening where and how best can I get to it. I have no reason to think that I will tomorrow suddenly decide a life of crime is attractive. I have no reason to think that I’m going to substantially mentally impaired by that time such that reacting to base emotion will the sum total of my analysis of situations.
You may, indeed.
Why would I do such a foolish thing? Save this to my computer which won’t be functional in 20 years? One would think in your infinite wisdom given to you by age you’d have spotted the obvious improbability of this reality. One would also expect that by your age you’d have learned to say what you mean and mean what you say.
Oh, I see. Even though your experiment is physically impossible, you still want to talk about its outcome. Ok, in 20 years, I’ll plug this computer in, turn on the switch and wait for this saved data to show up. Then I’ll evaluate what comes up on the screen. Maybe you should give your experiment more thought.
While we’re at, save the emotional appeals and pleas to my intellect. It’s entirely possible that I’m right about what serves me well, and you aren’t. Indeed, I’d submit that I know me better than you know me. And, if nothing other than mere pedantry, I at least when posing an experiment to support my claims propose one which is actually possible to do.
I know, you’re going to say “you know what I meant”. And perhaps I do. But it doesn’t do for your argument to imply that my ability to interpret your true meaning, despite your attempts to confuse them, works in your favor. After all, what’s at issue is my ability to understand you despite your inability to articulate what you actually meant. That has to do with my skills, not your absence.
I’m sure you meant save the data somewhere for later review, but it won’t be on this computer merely because this computer won’t be functional in that amount of time from now. Of course, one wonders why you’d ask me to do such anyway except for as some kind of rhetorical device since the words on this website are cataloged. It doesn’t seem that things on the internet actually disappear, so I could easily look it up in 20 years from now here. Alas, you didn’t choose a reasonable course; you chose an experiment which, by its own terms, cannot offer anything in the way of proof for either of us. Excellent work there. Your wisdom and experience are inspiring to such an extent that if you were in my class and turned in something with degree of scholarship, you’d have received a failing grade.
And learn what arrogant means. I know it’s a petty thing, but I find it difficult to accept that you’re actually wise when after (how old are you?) so many years you’ve been using a word and still haven’t bothered to learn its definition that you’re correct in asserting age = experience = wisdom. Why do you consider it wise to use words to which you clearly don’t know the definition?
You’ve demonstrated that in the limited example of you, it’s true. However, I’m not and I don’t suffer the same set of limitations and the degree of hubris you do. I have my own different set of limitations to work through.