this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
4 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43397 readers
1157 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

One of the most aggravating things to me in this world has to be the absolutely rampant anti-intellectualism that dominates so many conversations and debates, and its influence just seems to be expanding. Do you think there will ever actually be a time when this ends? I'd hope so once people become more educated and cultural changes eventually happen, but as of now it honestly infuriates me like few things ever have.

all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

β€œIn 1976, a professor of economic history at the University of California, Berkeley published an essay outlining the fundamental laws of a force he perceived as humanity’s greatest existential threat: Stupidity.

Stupid people, Carlo M. Cipolla explained, share several identifying traits: they are abundant, they are irrational, and they cause problems for others without apparent benefit to themselves, thereby lowering society’s total well-being. There are no defenses against stupidity, argued the Italian-born professor, who died in 2000. The only way a society can avoid being crushed by the burden of its idiots is if the non-stupid work even harder to offset the losses of their stupid brethren.”

https://qz.com/967554/the-five-universal-laws-of-human-stupidity

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

I try my best to keep in check my stupidity thus offloading some of the work of the smart people. Unfortunately, I fail most of the time

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Can we start with anti-I-Need-My-Dopamine-Hit-Every-10-Minutes?

Between people's ever depleting attention span and our desire for acceptance on social media, I just don't see how you can even begin to tackle "anti-intellectualism".

Most people use these platforms to comment on a headline and never read the article. Perhaps we could all decide to use these platforms properly and use the downvote button to bury comments that, while funny or otherwise emotionally engaging, are clearly not accurate or providing value to the topic of discussion.

By upvoting funny comments and rewarding hive-mind mentality, we're partly to blame for the lack of intellectualism.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Lemmy is far better than Reddit regarding the use of downvotes, but many people still use it as an emotional disagreement button rather than something used to hide useless/irrelevant content. I only downvote when somebody says something completely fucked or starts trolling.

I don't think upvoting funny comments is necessarily wrong, but there is a lack of meaningful engagement a lot of the time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Lemmy is far better than Reddit regarding the use of downvotes, but many people still use it as an emotional disagreement button rather than something used to hide useless/irrelevant content

I don't know if I'd agree at all with the idea that Lemmy is any better, in my experience, people still use the downvote button as an "I Disagree" button 99% of the time. There's less people here, so it's less pronounced (you'll get -9 instead of -300 for expressing an against-the-grain opinion), but the pattern is still just as present

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

"the world" is not anti-intellectual, you just hang out with the wrong people

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Some folks can't much help who they hang out with. Any American is literally surrounded by thousands of miles of other Americans, and anti-intellectualism is rampant in the country. It's not like Sweden is going to let Americans immigrate with the justification that "I'm a sad intellectual surrounded by boorish peasants."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Perhaps not the whole world, but I'm many/most countries, the larger structures, like government and business, absolutely are anti-intellectual. Nice to have an academic friend group, but that doesn't change the fact that capitalism makes education less accessible in order to rely on an undereducated workforce, and then politicians push it even further for the sake of easy control.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Anti-intellectualism is a strategy employed by some rich people that control some mass media outlets to keep people away from being class conscious.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I dislike this take. It assumes a conspiracy among a shadowy elite, which is the same tactic often employed by the anti-intellectual crowd. If we simply write off the problem with a hand-wavy solution based on a hunch, we’re no better than those we are discussing.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 11 months ago

Some professors have actually done the methodical research to find out this is, in fact, true. There's no shadowy elite there's just an elite that has a policy towards this: https://www.amazon.com/Gatekeeper-Years-Economics-According-Times/dp/1594516820

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You're absolutely fooling yourself if you think anti-intellectualism is a "rich people" thing. If rich people disappeared, anti-intellectualism would still exist

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's not what my statement posits.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What does your sTaTeMeNt PoSiT exactly?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 11 months ago

Is your first language English? I can help explain but need to know if you didn't understand because of a language barrier or you read it too quickly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This smells like someone who considers himself an β€œintellectual” and is sick of people disagreeing with him.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What's wrong with that? Just an example, imagine living in a world where most people consume animal products without second thought, despite the absolute moral atrocity that is committed as a result of it. You'd be pathetic to not be outraged at it. People should care about the consequences of their actions, but most people hypocritically selective in what ways they are.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't think I've ever witnessed literal "anti-intellectualism", perhaps that's a thing around you ? People not caring/understanding the value of knowledge, sure, but deliberately opposing it... that sounds terribly dumb. Not sure what anybody would get out of it

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

In the run up to brevity people were literally saying "were tired of listening to experts" who were saying it would be a bad idea.

Were you not around for the last 4 years when half the country decided all doctors were working together and lying?

How about our populations response to climate scientists.

Or the universally agreed on hatred for any college degree that isn't sufficiently marketable as "worthless"

The only way I can imagine saying you've never seen anti intellectualism is you don't know what you're looking for.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't think I've seen this in France at least.

Were you not around for the last 4 years when half the country decided all doctors were working together and lying?

There is absolutely some (growing?) distrust in institutional knowledge, pharmaceutical labs, etc. but it's far from being as strong as in the US (which is the country I assume you're referring to?)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

Anti intellectualism is a cornerstone of right wing politics which is gaining steam in lots of countries in Europe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Wait til AI takes prominence. What effect on intellectualism that might have remains to be seen. As long as LLMs aren't tailored to bias certain views, it may just lift humanity.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

As soon as the AIs start saying it would make the most sense to equally distribute resources and having 10 people hoarding all the wealth is bad for the economy they're going to get some adjustments real fucking fast.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

I think there's this idea of historical tick-tock, that goes from faith or belief to enlightenment. It swings back and forth depending upon geopolitical development.

But that aside, I believe that after the digital revolution, getting people to believe bunk en masse became easier. This has amplified the grift economy, which in turn spreads disinformation, fronts logical fallacies as a debate method and puts bad faith arguments on a pedestal.

Take for instance that guy who illegally experimented on kids because he thought he had a better vaccine than the multi-purpose vaccine that was standardised. After he lost his medical practice he has been forced to rely on financing from conspiracy theorists and socialize with flat earthers because he is now an anti-vaccine icon.

He has to do that because his name is synonymous with malpractice and needs to play the part to feed his face.

This is just one example of the grift economy. For more, seep up "savage alpha male podcasts" to see an even harder grift.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I believe there is an evolutionary purpose to human stupidity though, and it's the reason we've come so far as a species. Without writing a novel here, look up the concept of simulated annealing, which is conceptually related to natural selection. The short version is, when searching for a better solution to problem in a sea of functionally infinite possible solutions, if you only ever try solutions you can see that are categorically better than the solution you currently have, you will (with statistical certainty) end up in a local maxima. That is to say, without stupid people, no one would have ever looked at a cow udder and thought, "yeah, I wanna get in on that", and as a result many humans throughout history would have gone without nutrients necessary for their survival.

I have no idea who first drank cow's milk, that's not the point, don't @ me. The point is, stupid people try stupid stuff, many times it is just as stupid as it looked, but sometimes that stupid thing turns out to have previously undiscovered potential benefits which smart people notice, research, and help integrate into our society, resulting in others' lives being better.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So to further simplify, stupid people are unwitting test subjects that the rest of humanity sometimes benefit from because they do dumb shit no one else would have thought to try.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I'm reminded of an episode from Stargate when one of the Asgardians, Thor I believe, was able to stop replicators from attacking his home world with the help of one of the main Earth characters, Sam. Thor needed someone of a less evolved/"stupider" species to help with the problem after none of the Asgard scientists could find a way. He said with compliment, "It was your stupid idea," and Sam smiled back.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~By-NC-SA~ ~4.0~