
I’ve been kicking an idea around my melon for a while now. Are we more inclined to think people are smart because we agree with them? Ask yourself this question: When was the last time you agreed with a statement made by someone you can’t stand? It is so automatic that we barely even notice. We dismiss them as morons and henceforth everything issued from their pie hole is crap.
The conservative blogs have a designated term for this when it’s applied to the president: Bush Derangement Syndrome. Its victims are otherwise intelligent people that are never more than two conversational leaps from a sputtering, profanity laced Tourettes syndrome outburst when it comes to anything dealing with our current president. (That reminds me, at some point I’m going to take a blog walk with the outsized emotional investment this country has made in the office of the president.)
But to me the president is just a humorous footnote in a larger question. If possible, put down the political and social pretensions and ask yourself a question. What constitutes ‘smart’ in our society?There are obvious benchmarks that have always been accepted. An advanced degree will get you street cred in some circles. Going to law or med school will get you a seat at the table. But the older you get the more lawyers and doctors you meet. After you’ve met a few and spoke with them socially you realize that the dumb ass distribution hits that population with some measure. I think in some cases people we’ve been giving the smart tag are really folks that were just obsessive-compulsive about academics.
Another pit we commoners fall into when it comes to viewing smart people is being mystified by their skill set. Because a person knows a lot about something doesn’t automatically make them smart. It just means they’ve lived in a neighborhood you haven’t, intellectually speaking. How many of us have met people that can give you the intimate details of a computer server while barely being able to dress themselves?I know, there’s that whole ‘emotional intelligence’ thing at work. But I’m driving at something a bit different. A computer with a big hard drive isn’t necessarily a great computer; it just holds a lot of stuff. Saw a bit on the Science Channel a while back about an English guy that can solve pi out to 20,000 places in his head and can learn a new language in a week. While he is an impressive intellectual specimen he is also of limited use to humanity. My idea of a really smart person is Benjamin Franklin. He failed a fair amount, but he was always pushing the unknown. Granted, in his day the unknown was a hell of a lot bigger.
And while I’m on the subject of the unknown there is another ugly phenomenon that’s poking up its head up here and there. With the rise of the Internet, Wikipedia (which I love), and the Discovery Channel there are a lot more people getting exposed to a lot more stuff that would have normally been outside of their knowledge envelope. While learning is a good thing because it makes us push up against our unknowns it does not automatically impart wisdom. Just because you saw a thing on the Discovery Channel does not mean you’re an astrophysicist or expert on modern warfare.
This is especially insidious in the realm of politics, where partisans pick and choose knowledge that suits their position. You can test this hypothesis by going into any large chain bookstore. Look at the variety of books that are prominently displayed near the entrance. Most are tomes taking a particular view on a divisive issue. Somewhere along the way it was decided by mass media that controversy and conflict should constitute the largest part of our diet. Critical thinking is getting that much tougher, for those that even care to engage in it, because our springs of knowledge are being flavored and tainted.
So I return to the question I’ve been asking myself for quite some time now: What constitutes ‘smart’ in our society? I think the definition is like art and pornography. You know it when you see it. I think we would benefit from a lot more people pushing the limits of their experience and intellect. Merely being an information consumer isn’t enough.Ares
3 comments:
"Just because you saw a thing on the Discovery Channel does not mean you’re an astrophysicist or expert on modern warfare."
I see the above statement as contradictary to your earlier premise. You suggested that the degree doesn't make one smart. But then you suggest that simply learning something, no matter how, doesn't make you smart either. So which is it?
If Mr. 5-degrees can't find milk in a grocery store, and Mr. "Law and Order Educated" can't balance a check book, then you're right. There must be a different model. I don't think it's recognized by the modern western world.
Our current school system and the way it tracks for college would be a fine example of that. Smart does not equate academia and that is what our whole school system is geared to achieve. What about the musical savant? What about the visual artist? These people are increasingly schrifted by school budgets (don't even talk about how they need more $, cuz they'll still feature b-ball and test scores over the arts no matter how big the pie gets).
I think 'smart' is multi-pronged:
-learning ability
-courage to question
-ability to think outside the box, to see a bigger picture
-a healthy dose of common sense
There's probably more to add to this list. I think the above fits the Benjamin Franklin example nicely.
I think the point I was obtusely trying to make is that there are a lot of information consumers out there posing as smart people and we're inclined to take them at face value. I think your defintion of smart is one of the best I've seen and if I had more game I would have hit on something like that.
Couldn't agree more about about the state of education. Problem is, the negative results manifest so far downrange that the results get minimized or mislabeled.
I think the point I was obtusely trying to make is that there are a lot of information consumers out there posing as smart people and we're inclined to take them at face value. I think your defintion of smart is one of the best I've seen and if I had more game I would have hit on something like that.
Couldn't agree more about about the state of education. Problem is, the negative results manifest so far downrange that they get minimized or mislabeled.
Post a Comment