Hi, I’m doing a research paper on Anti-Intellectualism in America. I have somewhat of an idea about what I am going to write about, but first I want to see what everyone here at ILP thinks.
Why would Intellectualism be a benefit to society? (if you think it would be)
Why would Anti-Intellectualism be a hinderance to society? (If you think it would be)
And… do you think Anti-Intellectualism is more prevalent in America than elsewhere?
What does anti-intellectualism mean to you? I have heard many use this term but at the same time I have seen noone adequately explain the full details as to what it represents.
What is the problem when addressing anti-intellectualism?
But, just off hand this is the first thing that came to mind when I saw your post: uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/WhyAntiInt.htm , but the title, Why is there Anti-Intellectualism? is a little misleading, the actual topic of the article is that “man is creative” and “man is curious” are myths.
More to the point, would intellectuals look less bad if it were called the “Merchant of Death” Peace Prize®? And would society think any better of boffins if causing the extinction of 4740 species of frogs were as casual a mistake as dropping a three Quid erlenmeyer flask? ( timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u … 391853.ece )
Intellectualism would be a great benefit to the society of socialist slaves.
Intellectualism only benifits leaders who need to be in control. It pacifies the masses.
A part that I agree with anti-intellectualism in, is that intellectual specialists have become dominant elitists in many modern industrial countries who then oppress the rest of the populance into slavery and servitude through service occupations.
The modern age of course is indeed marked by specialization as a sort of salvation or opium to the miseries of civilization.