I think antifragile theory is needed to really understand anti-intellectualism. Engineers love to convince themselves that older and simpler is always better.

I think antifragile theory is needed to really understand anti-intellectualism. Engineers love to convince themselves that older and simpler is always better. So, you might have someone who can solve a differential equation, but seriously looks down on anyone with an Alexa, and thinks we will never be able to transition to all electric cars cleanly with future tech. They are sometimes biased toward their senses much more than numbers. An engineer could totally still say "Metal is always better than cheap plastic crap" and make a power drill with a solid steel case or something. The technical analysis only matters if you actually do it. They can do tech on a personal level but they don't trust the large scale process of technical improvement. The other commenter mentioned disregard for the humanities and I think they are related. "My intelligence is more valuable than your education" is a common belief. People seem to see life and work not as a series of projects, but like a sport, where the goal is to test yourself in a pure way, without "cheating". The humanities often don't have objective success criteria, they are seen as nonessential, and often have lower barrier to entry(Some people can learn to draw from zero in a few weeks, math takes months to years before you can do anything you can't do with an app). These people judge value by amount of challenge. It just doesn't fit the "Living off the land, surviving on your own skill, being practical instead of academic, trusting your eyes not math" kind of paradigm as well.