Originally posted by Whaleboy
I think a lot of it, on the part of the intellectuals irritation with anti-intellectualism is the disparity between the abuse and prejudice, and the perceived importance of their work. Yes, intellectuals see their work, and sometimes theirselves as important, but theres nothing wrong with that since they play such a crucial and individual role in human civilisation imo. That is something I have always thoguht. Furthermore, would you deny that as humans, we simplistically attack whom and what we do not understand? It is quite interesting that those who persist in denying the existence of anti-intellectualism, preferring to highlight arrogance or some grossly overgeneralised point on the part of intellectuals, are appearing as anti-intellectuals themselves.
I think a lot of it, on the part of the intellectuals irritation with anti-intellectualism is the disparity between the abuse and prejudice, and the perceived importance of their work. Yes, intellectuals see their work, and sometimes theirselves as important, but theres nothing wrong with that since they play such a crucial and individual role in human civilisation imo. That is something I have always thoguht. Furthermore, would you deny that as humans, we simplistically attack whom and what we do not understand? It is quite interesting that those who persist in denying the existence of anti-intellectualism, preferring to highlight arrogance or some grossly overgeneralised point on the part of intellectuals, are appearing as anti-intellectuals themselves.
interesting.
Comment