3 ms·
rtpg above has hit the nail on the head. Mocking someone for climbing the wrong ladder isn't necessarily anti intellectualism.
by copperx 6y ago
rtpg above has hit the nail on the head. Mocking someone for climbing the wrong ladder isn't necessarily anti intellectualism.
- jjoonathan 6y agoRight, but sometimes it is. Strategic apathy is the dumb debate tactic of the moment and in that capacity I'd call it anti-intellectual. It's hard to watch gel-haired youtubers going back and forth trying to out-apathy (and thereby out-cool) each other and come away with the idea that they are actually having an intellectual meta-debate about the allocation of time and attention. It seems far more likely that they saw someone win a debate by staying cool and projecting apathy, copied the behavior, and have spread it so far and wide that the tactic is now regularly played against itself with farcical results.
- notabee 6y agoScience itself involves climbing many wrong ladders to verify that they are indeed wrong. Some things you can't know beforehand. Not everything needs that level of dedication, but also, how confident are you that said ladder is wrong unless you've climbed it yourself or have extensive, reliable reports from others who have done so? It's also easy to be like the fox in Aesop's Fables that declares grapes to be sour, untasted.
- Bakary 6y agoSome knowledge of life will necessarily have to be intuitive since you won't be able to come up with a double blind experiment for everything
- manigandham 6y agoIn your analogy, the climbing is what's important, not which ladder. Learning how to climb well is applicable regardless of which ladder you encounter in the future.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- klyrs 6y agoNo, it's strictly anti-curiosity. The answers found at the top of a wrong ladder can be more illuminating than the solution being sought after.