Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
I propose we use anti-thinking instead of anti-intellectualism when describing the attitude of politicians who seem to be against thoughtful discourse. The words “intellectual†and “intellectualism†seem to have a class implication to them.
I consider an intellectual to be a person who is interested in ideas for their own sake, a person who loves art and literature; a person who enjoys intelligent discourse about ideas.
A thinking person, in my opinion, may or may not be an intellectual. A football coach is a thinking person but not necessarily an intellectual.
Engineers, farmers, small-time business people may be thinkers of the highest order in that they analyze, synthesize and evaluate the world around them but may not necessarily be intellectuals.
I would prefer my politicians to be intellectuals since they are dealing with the stuff of civilization, but I'm satisfied if they are thinkers. It would be almost tolerable with me for politicians to be anti-intellectuals, if they were in favor of thinking. But the absolute worst are politicians who disdain both intellectuals and thinking and expect people to accept and endorse their messages without thinking.
So I think it would be better if we made the distinction between intellectuals and people who think. I think it allow more accurate speech and it would be a more powerful and accurate condemnation.
You raise an interesting point. The idea of anyone being "anti-intellectual" has always seemed strange to me. I'm not sure that I'd ever considered that "anti-intellectualism" might have a class component to it. Maybe that at least partially explains why some people say that they don't want anyone who is "too smart" to be the President.
Yes, †I won't vote for him/her because they are too smart†may mean I don't want someone who belongs to a higher class than I lording it over me.
The press has adopted the term “low information voter†but I don't think that is not quite accurate. They have information, they just don't use it. I think non-thinking would be more accurate to describe some of those “low information†voters and anti-thinking would describe others.
Maybe columnnists, most of whom who belong to the intellectual class, prefer anti-intellectual as it reminds the reader of their higher status. Even though they're reluctant to call themselves intellectuals. This is different in Europe and South America where people where the title with pride.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)