Anti-intellectualism

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
In fact I've gained more respect for Enigma from reading this thread. Not that he would care, I don't expect him to.

Yes, I'm predictable.

Hmmm it comes across arrogant because you guys no want you want to say and aren't scared to say it.

All my communication is impromptu, sir. Save for perhaps a general intent of 'act calm' or 'act violent'.
I rarely have a general idea of what I say. What I -do- know, is what I think, and I try to express that.
The difficulty is that Emotions and Opinions are tangled in my mind, so my inherent frustration at being misunderstood translates into a hostile and self-assured way of communication, as if I end every sentence by implying that I'll kick all of your asses.
Of course, managing to imply that I'm going to assault you tends to make you hostile in retaliation, ergo you are hostile towards me.

People don't dislike me because I think I'm brilliant, people dislike me because I resent those who stand in the way of my brilliance agenda.
Not that I'm particularily self-assured for fighting for what I believe in (everyone loves Joan of Arc, right?), but that I attack a part of who people are - their desire to put the questions on the backburner and enjoy themselves.
Joan of Arc and I are in many ways similar (save for a gender difference) - but our marked difference is that people could see what Joan was fighting, and they had cause to support her.
When it comes to the deadly covert war on ignorance, people don't see it. What's worse, it's installed as a part of many people.
I'm fighting an invisible war in which I believe I must win for the future of the species.
Not surprisingly, the people that don't see what I see think I'm a doofus.

[TCO]

Whaleboy, I thought you were pretentious and duplitious for calling yourself a novelist in response to my question about what you had published. What you had been paid for. If I hadn't pursued you, I wouldn't have gotten the "I didn't inhale answer". You are a poseur.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
I must say that these cries of arrogance takes the form of this.

Whaleboy highlights an issue, referring to incidents in his own life.

People say "well you may be correct, but its six of one, half a dozen of the other, and the intellectual may be arrogant"

Whaleboy says "fair enough", but people seem to have a predisposition to attack the intellectual (later says people attack what they don't understand, though he would postulate that intellectuals should be respected for going against the grain, that being his personal opinion).

People say that Whaleboy is arrogant and that is the cause of these incidents (his accusers are mostly those who appear to be anti-intellectuals themselves).

Whaleboy denies this

People continue to insist, even though they are flying in the face of what Whaleboy has been saying about HIS OWN LIFE.

Whaleboy continues to deny, and purport his position.

People go on about him being arrogant, starting to include quotes of his that appear to demonstrate that.

Stupid people do this. It's called Brute Force Prejudice.

I've also been called multiple times on my tendency to act as if I'm infinitely correct or infinitely competant.
"But what if you're wrong?" People say.
"But what if I'm right?" I say.
If I'm wrong, I'll correct myself in my own time (perhaps based on things I read here).
While I'm in the public eye, though, I'll fight for what I think is correct even if I'm not entirely sure.
As a Questioner, I'm farmiliar with doubt. Waiting to be 100% certain would move me to inaction :/
Speaking with a truckload of "I might be wrongs" and analytical tangents would make my indecisive position clear but also lose interest.
While indeed I might be wrong (or I might be wrong about being wrong hence be entirely right!), I think my 1-year-old self said it best:

"I'll act like I'm correct in case the others are wrong, because if the others are wrong, and if I don't speak, then they'll still be wrong."
Individualism at its core. Also self-assurance.
I seem like an arrogant fool at times but it is the price of being continually combattive.
"We might be fighting for something not worth fighting for but let's fight anyway!"

I am being honest when I say that I am reasonably well read and people do tell me that have a philosophical mind. I know my own capabilities.

Well you know some of your own capacities, but I do not believe that any human being can come to know themselves fully in a finite length of time.
So let's say you have a rough estimate of your strengths and weaknesses.

you only harm your own credibility in making such an outlandish and frankly ad hoc ad hominem.

You fool!
You GAIN coolness by picking on the uncool dude.
"Why is he uncool?"
Because he does that uncool 'thinking' thing.
"Why is thinking uncool?"
HEY! You're one of THEM! Now we'll pick on YOU!
"Sorry. That Whaleboy sucks."
Good conformist.

[Sandman]

Its a commonly known fact that useless intellectuals get more sex.

Oh come on. You start a thread to complain about anti-intellectualism, and then you use an argument like that?

The notion of "use" is a difficult one. Let me put it this way. Imagine civilisation to be a car. Most people work in the engine, where they are perceived useful. You get some people who are the drivers (the policians, big business, pressure groups, pragmatic intellectuals (I think you are saying etc). Then you get the headlights.

It's perfectly possible for a group like 'intellectuals' to have no use whatsoever. In your analogy, they'd be the fluffy dice.

The fact that you're articulating such strong functionalist sentiments leads me to ask: what is the use of long-winded intellectuals? What do the 'headlights' of civilisation actually do? I mean, the anti-intellectualism you claim suggests that either they're useless, or that being disliked is a critical aspect of intellectualism; the wire that connects the headlights to the battery.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Yes, intellectuals see their work, and sometimes theirselves as important,

/me raises his hand in agreement
Self-importance does not make you arrogant! It makes you Egotistical!
And judging by the way that I use first person almost exclusively, you would think that I am Egotistical.

/me admits Egotism
Being egotistical or arrogant does not make someone wrong, nor is it a valid excuse to ignore them.
The same with ignorance and stupidity.

NEVER!!!

PROBLEM: World is broken.
SOLUTION A: Accept failure of human civilisation; live out sham of a life rendered poor by broken world.
SOLUTION B: Fix world.
I opt for solution B.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by yavoon
so being a massively important intellectual all that lesbian porn u write is obviously helping us as a civilisation.

No no no! You're supposed to say something moronic, as if you were thinking with your genitals, so we could all laugh at you.

[Whaleboy]

Whaleboy, I thought you were pretentious and duplitious for calling yourself a novelist in response to my question about what you had published. What you had been paid for. If I hadn't pursued you, I wouldn't have gotten the "I didn't inhale answer". You are a poseur.

Funny how no-one else agrees, including Drogue who knows me better than just about anyone else on this planet

Oh come on. You start a thread to complain about anti-intellectualism, and then you use an argument like that?

Sounds like someone's jealous... *sings* jk

It's perfectly possible for a group like 'intellectuals' to have no use whatsoever. In your analogy, they'd be the fluffy dice.

Fluffy dice have a use! They're cute!!!

The fact that you're articulating such strong functionalist sentiments leads me to ask: what is the use of long-winded intellectuals? What do the 'headlights' of civilisation actually do?

They bring light to darkness. What that means exactly is down to each individual intellectual.

Enigma is the man of the match on this thread!!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova

No no no! You're supposed to say something moronic, as if you were thinking with your genitals, so we could all laugh at you.

i only think w/ them half the time.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy

Enigma is the man of the match on this thread!!

I can just see it now. the circle jerk of intelligence.

[Kramerman]

Yeah, but if all is equally valid, why do you (Whaleboy) think then that your believe is somehow relevant when it comes to a decision making about making war? Simply let those warmongers follow their (equally valid) beliefs!

who said moral relativists cant have their own personal views? I could try and explain it, but whaleboy did a good job of it already. hypothetically, i can be a moral relativist but still dislike war because of the inconvenience it causes me personally, or something like that. In otherwords, just because you think all moral view points are equally valid, you dont have to like all of them! that would be rediculous.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by yavoon


I can just see it now. the circle jerk of intelligence.

you're a funny mother ****er

[Whaleboy]

I can just see it now. the circle jerk of intelligence.

If you have nothing constructive to say, begone cretin and play with some duplo. Maybe I'll pop round and buy you an orange juice before we put you to bed as the sun goes down .

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Whaleboy

If he is, then he would be wrong. Plain wrong

I assure you, I'm not. I am most certainly not!

I was refering to this statement "For all I know he could be saying "Ben Kenobi is right, Mariah Carey has a hot ass!" After all, it's all relative". If Ben Kenobi said that, then he'd be wrong. Plain wrong! (it was a light hearted comment btw )

[Whaleboy]

Drogue: Quite. However, the question of Mariah Carey's hotness is pushing the boundaries of relativism somewhat... jk

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
Self-importance does not make you arrogant! It makes you Egotistical!

That's worse. Besides, you can be both at the same time. In fact, most egotistical people are also arrogant, and vice versa.