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.

  • jrbaconcheese
    link
    fedilink
    English
    101 year ago

    This smells like someone who considers himself an “intellectual” and is sick of people disagreeing with him.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      That may be the case but it doesn’t change the strong current of anti-intellectualism in modern societies.

      It’s useful to those in power, for example.

      • jrbaconcheese
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        No disagreement there, but simply declaring that “those who don’t see things my way are anti-intellectual” is a drastic over-simplification of how things got this way. Declaring it into Lemmy, which an echo chamber of progressives and communists (including myself) means we all know who he’s talking about, which means it’s just a progressive dog-whistle for the “them” that we want to be mad at.

        There are a lot of intelligent people who hold what I’m sure OP would consider anti-intellectual stances. I live around them, work with them, play games with them, etc. it’s much more valuable to understand who they are and how they got to their beliefs than it is to simply vilify them.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I haven’t seen the argument “disagreement is anti-intellectual” being used here, though I’m sure people act that way. It’s hard to be disagreed with: people tend to entrench rather than change.

          It’s still worth noting that anti-intellectualism is pushed as a tool of division and control though. Sure it occurs naturally but weaponized at a systemic level it is much more of a threat to society.

    • amio
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      This smells like jumping to conclusions.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      Or someone who’s seen brexit happen, or the rise of right wing populist parties everywhere that want to ban books and discount expert advice on climate, the economy, etc.

      • Haus
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Observing democratically-elected governments being unable to address existential threats to the human race is certainly food for thought.

    • @ryno364
      link
      11 year ago

      I somewhat agree. The world isn’t black and white. And as a society we are very much still untwined with our primitive groupthink.

      The world is very complex.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      -51 year ago

      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.

      • jrbaconcheese
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Is it anti-morality or anti-intellectualism you were concerned with? Now I’m confused.

        • @[email protected]OP
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Both. Most people who eat meat would say animal abuse is wrong, all while ignoring their own contribution. A lack of intellectual honesty and logical consistency that leads to moral problems is also anti-intellectual. They would say slavery is wrong because it is prejudice, and unjust for ‘xyz’ reasons, while also saying ‘xyz’ reasons aren’t good enough to change their mind away from eating meat.