this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
469 points (91.9% liked)

Asklemmy

49833 readers
435 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

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_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 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.

(page 6) 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Is the world anti-intellectual or anti-“know-it-all”-poindexter?

I haven’t noticed anti-intellectualism but the reject of disrespectful and bad-faith discourse.

This is probably inevitable because science has been politicized in America.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] OptimusPhillip@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think the claim that the world is anti-intellectual is somewhat biased. I don't know if that's a sampling bias, a cognitive bias, or some other kind of bias. But one way or another, I feel like you're overblowing things.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jakdracula@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

No.

It’s human nature to want to be the best, the most loved, the top dog. It helps to propagate the species.

If someone is smarter than you, it digs at the very core of that, and becomes a threat.

[–] ThePenitentOne@discuss.online 0 points 2 years ago

I think 'human nature' is far too broad to define in such a way, and making objective statements about it is wrong. In my opinion, the only definite thing you can say is that humans act out of self-interest (as do all living beings), but the motivation derived from it doesn't have to be destructive.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] calypsopub@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I say we should provide UBI to everyone, legalize drugs, and let the stupid ones rot on their couch doing weed, playing video games, and streaming anime or porn. Hopefully they'll be too lazy to vote or commit crimes, and the rest of us can work on creating a better society with them safely out of the way.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Thisfox@sopuli.xyz -4 points 2 years ago (6 children)

In my experience, anti-intellectualism is a yank trait, not a worldwide trait. Ask a German, or someone from Japan, for confirmation.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] AlpineSteakHouse@hexbear.net -4 points 2 years ago (14 children)

Ayn Rand once said "It is not I who will die, it is the world." I will never stop being anti-intellectual personally so when I die it can't change.

Sorry, the answer is no but if you trust the quote the world will only exist for another 30-40 years so I wouldn't worry.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›