4 ms·

"Never let your schooling interfere with your education" - there is a big difference between educating yourself for the real world and educating yourself for

by lsc 15y ago

"Never let your schooling interfere with your education" - there is a big difference between educating yourself for the real world and educating yourself for a test; this difference, I think, can possibly give the Americans an advantage. I do think that this American anti-intellectualism is a relatively new (and hopefully temporary) thing. I mean, if you can earn a good living working at a factory, you do what you are told, right? you don't go changing the system 'cause you think it's better. But really, I think this is largely a post-great-war thing, and hopefully it will fade. Really, as far as I can tell, schooling, if anything, makes this problem worse. You ever hire someone out of college? Most of them seem to think they should do what you tell them to do, no more and no less. And they expect fairly explicit instructions. The self-taught seem to be much more open to "hey, I need task X done. Go figure it out"

jleader 15y ago
I think you may be conflating anti-intellectualism and need for structure. The need for structure is probably newer, as people grow up in an increasingly structured society. On the other hand, I think there is an American strain of anti-intellectualism that goes much deeper, to our national myth of "taming the frontier". We don't need no diplomas out here on the frontier!
- lsc 15y ago
  Maybe. I dono. I don't automatically equate diplomas to learning. I mean, sure, lots of people learn things at school... but lots of people get degrees without learning anything useful, too, and I'm not sure why, say, an art history degree should be respected any more than four years spent backpacking around the world. Most of the people I see shouting about anti-intellectualism have degrees, sure, but most of them are degrees in art history or other fields that are not applicable to creating or fixing anything, so maybe I /am/ the American anti-intellectualism that they speak of, because I value knowledge based on what it can be used to achieve, rather than knowledge that indicates belonging in a certain class, and because I don't have a lot of respect for degrees. I mean, I have a lot of respect for people who learned useful things and got a degree along the way... but I don't see the degree as primary; I see the learning as primary. I see a degree in art history a little bit like buying a lexus; It shows that you are a person of leisure.
  - pyre 15y ago
    Some examples of anti-intellectualism in-grained into American culture: - 'jocks' are celebrated while 'nerds' are persecuted at the high school level, and to a lesser extent at the college/university level. - Someone that's smart is looked down on because they 'ruined the curve' for everyone else by acing a test. - College/University are culturally seen as one large drunken orgy.
    - lsc 15y ago
      >- 'jocks' are celebrated while 'nerds' are persecuted at the high school level, and to a lesser extent at the college/university level. It's a huge problem. My understanding is that the definition of "Ivy league college" actually refers to what colleges play sports against what other colleges. An absolutely insane way to rank schools. Hell, we subsidize sports stadiums as adults; stadiums that cause significant traffic problems, and if you ask me, attract an undesirable element. This is actually one of the things I really like about silicon valley; I don't know anyone who doesn't work a service job who is really into sports. >- College/University are culturally seen as one large drunken orgy. Wait, you mean it's not a large drunken orgy? I mean, I'm half joking, but outside of the math and engineering majors, I'm under the impression that a lot of partying happens. But this goes back to my own prejudice against liberal arts majors. Does that prejudice make me an anti-intellectual?
      - pyre 15y ago
        > My understanding is that the definition of "Ivy league > college" actually refers to what colleges play sports > against what other colleges. According to Wikipedia: The use of the phrase is no longer limited to athletics, and now represents an educational philosophy inherent to the nation's oldest schools. > I don't know anyone who doesn't work a service job > who is really into sports. There are downsides to the polar opposite though. Personally, I think the balance is to love playing sports (or possibly going to friends' sporting events to cheer them on), rather than to just love watching them. > But this goes back to my own prejudice against > liberal arts majors. I think you're missing the distinction between someone that pursues are major because they want to coast through university vs someone that pursues a major because they have a passion of the subject.

by lsc 15y ago

jleader 15y ago

I think you may be conflating anti-intellectualism and need for structure. The need for structure is probably newer, as people grow up in an increasingly structured society. On the other hand, I think there is an American strain of anti-intellectualism that goes much deeper, to our national myth of "taming the frontier". We don't need no diplomas out here on the frontier!

lsc 15y ago
Maybe. I dono. I don't automatically equate diplomas to learning. I mean, sure, lots of people learn things at school... but lots of people get degrees without learning anything useful, too, and I'm not sure why, say, an art history degree should be respected any more than four years spent backpacking around the world. Most of the people I see shouting about anti-intellectualism have degrees, sure, but most of them are degrees in art history or other fields that are not applicable to creating or fixing anything, so maybe I /am/ the American anti-intellectualism that they speak of, because I value knowledge based on what it can be used to achieve, rather than knowledge that indicates belonging in a certain class, and because I don't have a lot of respect for degrees. I mean, I have a lot of respect for people who learned useful things and got a degree along the way... but I don't see the degree as primary; I see the learning as primary. I see a degree in art history a little bit like buying a lexus; It shows that you are a person of leisure.
- pyre 15y ago
  Some examples of anti-intellectualism in-grained into American culture: - 'jocks' are celebrated while 'nerds' are persecuted at the high school level, and to a lesser extent at the college/university level. - Someone that's smart is looked down on because they 'ruined the curve' for everyone else by acing a test. - College/University are culturally seen as one large drunken orgy.
  - lsc 15y ago
    >- 'jocks' are celebrated while 'nerds' are persecuted at the high school level, and to a lesser extent at the college/university level. It's a huge problem. My understanding is that the definition of "Ivy league college" actually refers to what colleges play sports against what other colleges. An absolutely insane way to rank schools. Hell, we subsidize sports stadiums as adults; stadiums that cause significant traffic problems, and if you ask me, attract an undesirable element. This is actually one of the things I really like about silicon valley; I don't know anyone who doesn't work a service job who is really into sports. >- College/University are culturally seen as one large drunken orgy. Wait, you mean it's not a large drunken orgy? I mean, I'm half joking, but outside of the math and engineering majors, I'm under the impression that a lot of partying happens. But this goes back to my own prejudice against liberal arts majors. Does that prejudice make me an anti-intellectual?
    - pyre 15y ago
      > My understanding is that the definition of "Ivy league > college" actually refers to what colleges play sports > against what other colleges. According to Wikipedia: The use of the phrase is no longer limited to athletics, and now represents an educational philosophy inherent to the nation's oldest schools. > I don't know anyone who doesn't work a service job > who is really into sports. There are downsides to the polar opposite though. Personally, I think the balance is to love playing sports (or possibly going to friends' sporting events to cheer them on), rather than to just love watching them. > But this goes back to my own prejudice against > liberal arts majors. I think you're missing the distinction between someone that pursues are major because they want to coast through university vs someone that pursues a major because they have a passion of the subject.