Anti-intellectualism inhibits learning

[coberst]

Anti-intellectualism inhibits learning

A large percentage (studies suggest over 90%) of the meaning we derive from communication, we derive from the non-verbal cues that the other person gives.

How does one communicate with an unseen audience that can be anybody in the world? In face-to-face communication there is so much information about the audience at hand that does not exist on the Internet.

Does one use language for the 12 year old, or the 18 year old, or the 25 year old, the educated, the non-educated? How to speak coherently to the 12 year old while not infuriating the 18 year old and how to mold an essay for the 30 year old without losing the 18 year old.

People who write books have editors to act as a third party who understands the material and understands the anticipated audience.

How do I, who have been studying the matter at hand for months and even years, know what words to provide a parenthetical definition that some may need but others may consider to be condescending?

Anti-intellectualism (opposing or hostile to intellectuals or to an intellectual view or approach) is so prevailing in the United States that almost every reader has a strong anti-intellectual bias that they are completely unconscious of. This anti-intellectual bias constantly inhibits their effort to read anything that smacks of being ‘intellectual’.

People might pay me money to lecture them on the proper way to swing a golf club but to lecture anyone on matters intellectual is pompous (excessively elevated or ornate—having or exhibiting self-importance).

[madnak]

Communication is hard. And sadly, many smart people are poor communicators. That's part of why there's an anti-intellectual climate.

I'm not sure that there's a simple solution to this problem. In general, on an open forum, it's probably best to set the bar low. But I don't think parenthetical clarification is the best approach. Try using simpler terms and avoiding too much detail - even if it seems like you're "dumbing down" your message. Be concrete. Emphasize points with stories and examples, rather than analysis. Entertain your audience. Imagine that you're in their shoes before writing. Consider what their values and beliefs are likely to be. Don't be judgmental.

Sometimes it's best to cater to the "least common denominator." Often it helps to target a specific part of your audience, perhaps those who are most resistant (or those with the most to gain). Choose a couple of points and stick to them, rather than saying everything you want to say.

And so on. Easier said than done.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Communication is hard. And sadly, many smart people are poor communicators. That's part of why there's an anti-intellectual climate.

I'm not sure that there's a simple solution to this problem. In general, on an open forum, it's probably best to set the bar low. But I don't think parenthetical clarification is the best approach. Try using simpler terms and avoiding too much detail - even if it seems like you're "dumbing down" your message. Be concrete. Emphasize points with stories and examples, rather than analysis. Entertain your audience. Imagine that you're in their shoes before writing. Consider what their values and beliefs are likely to be. Don't be judgmental.

Sometimes it's best to cater to the "least common denominator." Often it helps to target a specific part of your audience, perhaps those who are most resistant (or those with the most to gain). Choose a couple of points and stick to them, rather than saying everything you want to say.

And so on. Easier said than done.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? When did you start posting here again? You just decided to wait until I slowed down and stopped posting very often? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[hitch1978]

Online conversations generally take place about subjects, and with people, that are often far more known, and with narrower crossection than in real life. Certain people are brought together in their search for different things. People looking for something to talk about on MSP are on average likely to be more open to an intellectoal debate than those browsing L&L. The man sat opposite you in the restaurant at lunch is just as likely to go home and spend 4 hours perusing one as the other - you don't know. Not so online.

Tune your arguments to your enviorenment.

What we lose here in body language, we gain in common goals partly.

The biggest make up, however, IMHO is the ability to use the written word. How often have you had an argument with your significant other, only to later wish you had had more time to formulate a response? Or more to better take in theirs?

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
A large percentage (studies suggest over 90%) of the meaning we derive from communication, we derive from the non-verbal cues that the other person gives.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not a relevant statistic on the topic you're raising. The deeper the subject matter the less important or useful is eye-rolling or shoulder-shrugging, etc.

A discussion of Kant, astronomy or particle physics may be assisted by diagrams, but the "non-verbal" clues of normal conversation are pretty low value. They may add to some entertainment value, but the idea exchange doesn't suffer much with their exclusion.

luckyme

[Splendour]

I agree with you OP...computer usage seems to have dulled communication and writing skills and possibly has culled out diversity ...I keep seeing online the same kinds of people grouping together...they are not getting other ideas or opinions...it seems they keep expressing the same thought/ideas repetitively...

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with you OP...computer usage seems to have dulled communication and writing skills and possibly has culled out diversity ...I keep seeing online the same kinds of people grouping together...they are not getting other ideas or opinions...it seems they keep expressing the same thought/ideas repetitively...

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
..they are not getting other ideas or opinions...it seems they keep expressing the same thought/ideas repetitively...

[/ QUOTE ]

Good timing. Here's a Brad1970 post from today-

[ QUOTE ]
did not & will not read the Koran or a Hindu text or any of these thinker/physchology books that you like so much. I have all I need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think the number of people who think they have the TRUTH is the basic problem, or those that question everything they run into?

luckyme

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
..they are not getting other ideas or opinions...it seems they keep expressing the same thought/ideas repetitively...

[/ QUOTE ]

Good timing. Here's a Brad1970 post from today-

[ QUOTE ]
did not & will not read the Koran or a Hindu text or any of these thinker/physchology books that you like so much. I have all I need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think the number of people who think they have the TRUTH is the basic problem, or those that question everything they run into?

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

I do question some things, quite a few actually. My faith is not one of them.

[coberst]

[ QUOTE ]
Online conversations generally take place about subjects, and with people, that are often far more known, and with narrower crossection than in real life. Certain people are brought together in their search for different things. People looking for something to talk about on MSP are on average likely to be more open to an intellectoal debate than those browsing L&L. The man sat opposite you in the restaurant at lunch is just as likely to go home and spend 4 hours perusing one as the other - you don't know. Not so online.

Tune your arguments to your enviorenment.

What we lose here in body language, we gain in common goals partly.

The biggest make up, however, IMHO is the ability to use the written word. How often have you had an argument with your significant other, only to later wish you had had more time to formulate a response? Or more to better take in theirs?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you make a good point about time. It appears to me that most responders seem to think that they have 5 minutes to read and respond or it doesn't count. I wish responders would take days, even weeks to get a book or do a Google and think about the matter before responding.