People's attitudes towards intellectual ability

[Daedalus12]

As I went through school, I noticed a drift in standards of education away from learning, and towards passing tests.

My biggest issue with the current education system is how low the bar has been set in order to accommodate the average mass. I am not even going to talk about K-12 here (the entire experience was a joke for me as far as providing intellectual challenge). I am talking about undergrad engineering curriculum at top engineering schools that have to a certain extent fallen to the same trap. For example having the ability to do rigorous mathematics and having the ability to talk about high-level abstract ideas clearly in front of your peers is not part of it. A test isn't a tough exercise that require you to stretch your brain but a rather routine simple exercise of regurgitating what you remembered. Fortunately the grad-level engineering curriculum in this country have maintained the same level of toughness and rigorousness required of a person who wants to produce actual intellectual output.

To summarize I think more resources should be devoted cultivating the intellectually gifted kids rather than spent on programs to "close the gaps."

 

[KimMH]

I do remember having a teacher in third grade who berated me for bringing my textbook home. We didn't have an assignment, I just found the material interesting and wanted to read more on my own. I didn't anticipate that she would react that way and ended up a bit upset because I didn't know what I was doing wrong.

On the other hand, I remember my middle school teacher that discovered my love of reading and the speed at which I devoured books. When the class would read silently she would give me other books to read and then take time to discuss them with me. Eventually I read all the ones she had and then she had the librarians introduce me to all different titles and genres in our school library. Many of my peers didn't study some of these books until years later, and I've always been grateful to her for the world she opened up to me.

I had a similar teacher in HS who encouraged my love of reading. She really opened a whole world to me I'd never thought about before then.

For every horrible teacher who has no business standing in the same classroom as students there are dozens more who endure petty beauracracy, hassle and evenings and weekends full of taking home their work and spending a great deal of their own money to supply their students who will create a bedrock for people to build many of thier life skills on.

I will always be grateful to Mrs. Rita Moe of Baldwin HS - and I am sure I am not the only student to remember her with affection and deep respect.

 

[LaxScrutiny]

No, I paid attention in English class. There is no valid reason why people should use made up words such as irregardless, towards, everywheres, somewheres, anywheres, etc. Next, you'll be defending people who use "then" when the proper word is "than". After all, it's up to the recipient to decipher what the sender/speaker is conveying, right?

It's sad and humorous that years ago, with the advent of technology, it was stated that people would become super-intelligent as compared to years past. How sad that a mechanic friend of mine, with only a high school education from the late-1960's can compose written prose superior to that of today's college graduates.

The sad thing is that the word comes from Old English tōweardes which happens to have an 's' on the end. Towards, upwards, downwards, inwards, outwards, are all common in various dialects, especially here in Canada, and I would suspect in England.

It's more likely that our neighbours to the south were guilty of sloppy spelling. In any case, both forms are common, both forms are in the dictionary, both forms have been around for centuries, and you obvious didn't pay quite enough attention in English class.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I like high standards in general, and that includes my attitude towards intellectual ability. Unfortunately, we do live in a society that both distrusts and trivializes intellectualism. The existence of this Thread is evidence enough of that-- if the subject of guitar or football came up, everyone wouldn't suddenly get all defensive and emphasize that these abilities are only part of what's important. But intelligence is widely characterized as cold or antisocial or just plain threatening. My Mother always told me that it's okay to be smart as long as I kept it to myself. If the common people prized intelligence as much as they do sports or religion, we would be living in a much better world.

It's ok to think of language as fluid and changing, but on the other hand, at what point does saying "towards" or "mute point" or anything similar, become 'correct' just because a certain number of people screw it up regularly?

"Mute point" is wrong, because "mute" and "moot" don't mean the same thing. Towards is an accepted variation of towards.

 

[spoonie]

Is there any general feeling the OP would expect people to have regarding intellectually gifted people?

Nope.

The topic is deliberately broad, to avoid people interpreting this as a leading question.

All replies so far have been extremely valuable and useful for my project, even the off-topic digressions. Thank you.

 

[Jadzia]

As I went through school, I noticed a drift in standards of education away from learning, and towards passing tests.

My biggest issue with the current education system is how low the bar has been set in order to accommodate the average mass.

I think there are two driving forces:

(1) Education being infiltrated by psychologists who seem to want to hide intelligence, and promote their "socialization" agenda, with an apparent goal of the less able kids shouldn't feel less able. We see this in things like class sets. When I started school, there were four sets for practically everything. Set one has the most able kids. Set four had the least able. It was a system that worked really well, and lessons happened smoothly with everyone at the same level. Everyone was learning at a comfortable pace.

By the time I finished school that system had been phased out. There were effectively only two sets. 1A/B, 2A/B. The bar was brought down to accommodate the less able kids. Classes were more frequently interrupted with the less able people asking questions and half the lesson would be repeated.

I remember hearing a story last year about a primary school with a class 1 and class 2. But this was deemed improper as it "made class 2 feel less able", and the classes had to be renamed A and B.



(2) School league tables. This is a competitive system, that encourages schools to care about exam results more than they should, as it is used as a quantitative measure of how good the school is. As I said before, I noticed this attitude with some teachers, who were only interested in us answering exam questions, not on intellectual fulfillment.

And of course, this feeds back to the exam boards. Schools will naturally flock to whichever board has the easier exams that yield the higher marks. So they too are competing for schools, perhaps feeling encouraged to dumb down the syllabus, have almost the exact same exam questions every year, and using less critical marking.

 

[ThankQ]

I think many people mistake intellectual confidence for intellectual arrogance.

First, it is true that nearly nobody likes a "know-it-all", but that's not what I'm talking about.

We expect our athletes to be confident. Few have a problem when a fast fucker notes, "I can run really fast". Dancers need confidence in their body control and other abilities. A devout man has the utmost confidence in his faith. None of these things seem to offend people in any where close to the manner of one who has confidence in his or her intellectual abilities.

 

[KimMH]

With the possible exception of Faith - which actually has to be practiced as well, athletes and dancers while possessing natural ability must work very hard to attain their goals. People reacting negtively to brilliant people may not consider the amount of study and cultivation that goes into feeding a mind.

 

[Holdfast]

Education being infiltrated by psychologists who seem to want to hide intelligence, and promote their "socialization" agenda, with an apparent goal of the less able kids shouldn't feel less able.

It isn't so much psychology driving this as it is the heavy left-wing bias of the teaching establishment, at least in the UK. There's an active bias against elitism in favour of a comprehensive system amongst most teachers, certainly amongst the teachers who are members of the major teaching unions. It's perfectly possible - from both an educational, and a psychological, perspective - to educate in sets/streams and in a competitive manner, but to do so would conflict with some of the core beliefs/principles held by many teachers, esp. those working in the state sector. This is one of the main reasons my children - if I ever were to want any - would get a private education.

 

[thumbtack]

Would you prefer the company of an utter moron who agrees with you on most things (say Sarah Palin for example), or would you rather hang with a smart person you learn from, but who has a tendency to condescend toward you when you proffer your opinions (say certain persons on these boards for example)?

 

[ThankQ]

Would you prefer the company of an utter moron who agrees with you on most things (say Sarah Palin for example), or would you rather hang with a smart person you learn from, but who has a tendency to condescend toward you when you proffer your opinions (say certain persons on these boards for example)?

Oh, I'll take the smart asshole anyday, between the two.

Worse than a moron who agrees with you all the time, though, is a moron who argues because he thinks he's right about everything.

In my time, I've run into more stupid people who think they know everything than I have smart people who think they know everything.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

Would you prefer the company of an utter moron who agrees with you on most things (say Sarah Palin for example), or would you rather hang with a smart person you learn from, but who has a tendency to condescend toward you when you proffer your opinions (say certain persons on these boards for example)?

Oh, I'll take the smart asshole anyday, between the two.

Worse than a moron who agrees with you all the time, though, is a moron who argues because he thinks he's right about everything.

In my time, I've run into more stupid people who think they know everything than I have smart people who think they know everything.

"... I'd rather be happy than right any day." -- Slartibartfast

 

[ThankQ]

"... I'd rather be happy than right any day." -- Slartibartfast

....and thus we have religion.

Meh, I wanted a snazzy Guide quote, but I couldn't find the one from Marvin about "the doors closing with the satisfaction of a job well done"... or something.

It's one of my favorites.

That, and how the Vogon ships hang in the air in exactly the way bricks don't.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

"... I'd rather be happy than right any day." -- Slartibartfast

....and thus we have religion.

What does religion have to do with it?

 

[ThankQ]

"... I'd rather be happy than right any day." -- Slartibartfast

....and thus we have religion.

What does religion have to do with it?

Back off, man. I'm a scientist.

 

[Pingfah]

"... I'd rather be happy than right any day." -- Slartibartfast

....and thus we have religion.

What does religion have to do with it?

Come on ZR, it can't be too hard to parse the meaning from that statement...

 

[thestrangequark]

Worse than a moron who agrees with you all the time, though, is a moron who argues because he thinks he's right about everything.

In my time, I've run into more stupid people who think they know everything than I have smart people who think they know everything.

That's because one of the signs of intelligence is the understanding that one does not and cannot know everything. The most intelligent people I've met have no difficulty admitting when they don' know something and aren't afraid to ask questions.

As for the equity in education debate, boy, do I have a lot to say on that subject! However, my students are waiting, and I don't want to be late. I'll have to come back later!

 

[Shaw]

Well, grammar and diction are quite a bit like the use of clothes. One can dress in a very proper manner, and take pride in doing so, but such attire (these days) isn't appropriate for all settings. I, for example, do not wear a suit to go to the movies. I could, but I don't.

Posting in a forum is more akin to a casual/conversational environment, and so it really isn't appropriate to attempt to hold anyone to such high standards. This is, after all, a recreational activity.

For my part, having suffered with learning disorders all my life (and a family history of dyslexia), I'm happy to even complete a post. And I'm pleasantly surprised if anyone comprehends what it was that I was attempting to say.

On the topic at hand, I've had the fortunate opportunity to know some of the most intelligent people our world has had to offer. They are (generally) very nice and have normally gone out of their way to provide me with help when I was in need.

I don't know why people would hold anything against the gifted, unless those with gifts are holding those abilities over everyone else. I've been lucky enough not to have run across many people like that... at least not anyone who was truly gifted who acted in such a manner.

 

[Scout101]

Understand that a post isn't exactly a master thesis going out for peer review, and typos certainly happen as we type fast and don't always pay full attention, but it still gets me when people screw up stuff they should have learned about in the 3rd grade.

Obvious spelling mistakes (not typos, more like trying to sound out a word on paper), or people that write loose when they mean lose, Could care less vs Couldn't, that sort of stuff gets me. Regardless of the manner of this sort of place, I can't help but look down on people that do it. Just such elementary stuff, that in my own mind, it hurts the argument of the person that wrote it, because I mentally discount their IQ, and thus their argument, a little bit. Maybe in person, when the communication is verbal, you have more leeway (until you say mute point, like one idiot in my office), but when it's online, and ALL you have to go on is what you write down, written communication skills take on more importance...

I guess we can argue whether I'm elitist for holding people to 3rd grade spelling and grammar or not

 

[137th Gebirg]

To the OP, my opinions toward people generally have nothing to do with their intelligence level, more how they interact with others as decent `(or not) human beings.

I have noticed on occasion that people with extraordinary intelligence (MENSA members especially) are more likely to have issues in dealing with others they perceive to have lesser intelligence than their own (i.e. personality of a fruit-fly) and don't really hold back in their disdain for having to lower themselves in a discussion with someone of the "unwashed masses". It is those "lucky few" I choose to ignore, particularly if they think I'm some knuckle-dragging troglodyte who doesn't know 15 different languages fluently, including Esperanto.

As long as you treat people as you wish to be treated yourself and not act like an ass-hat, I couldn't care less what intellect anyone possesses.

Just don't drool on me.


It isn't polite.