Well, it's been some time since I've posted anything here, and now with some free time I found it prudent to write up a short (in my terms) article. I'm deciding to base it on a quick snippet I read today, which was from the US Army. According to their statistics, 75% of youth aged between 17-24 are unfit fot military service - whether through physical inability (they're fat), unable to pass the entrance exams (they're stupid - have you seen one of these tests? I could've passed it in 8th grade), are high school drop-outs, or have criminal records. Think about the numbers for a second. Seventy five percent. That's 3/4. Basically, it means that some of the people you know are either fat, stupid, criminals, or failures (hmm - they may be on to something here). Now, I've forever ranted about the state of today's youth - whether jokingly calling some kids running around @ a Best Buy 'whippersnappers' or 'scamps'; or delivering a serious tirade about the general disdain for fitness and education that seems prevalent in today's generation. Yet, to be perfectly honest, I have no compassion for them. These are all things that are up to each individual to fix and deal with. You don't have to be dumb - I honestly think the diagnosis of 'Attention Deficit Disorder' is a sham, by the way - and you don't have to be overweight. There really is no excuse. My primary point, besides this all - is what defines intelligence?
Is it being well-read, having diverse knowledge of any fields of study? Is it having well-defined critical thinking and ability to provide analysis? Is it what we know as 'common sense'? Is it receiving all As in school? Is it being able to win at 'Trivial Pursuit'? Or perhaps its a combination of any of these, or something I am forgetting?
The thing is, that for the most part, I do consider myself as an intelligent individual, so I tend to make quantitative comparisons of others in relation to myself, or what I know. I consider myself well-read, most specifically in the areas of history, geography, geology, biology, zoology, archaeology - but then again, what do I truly know? I can rant off facts like its nothing, but does this make me intelligent? If I can elaborate on the Saffir-Simpson scale and the Fujita scale; or the decisive defeat suffered by the Russians at Port Arthur in the early 20th century, or readily identify all of Jupiter's main moons - does that then mean I can look down on people who don't?
I won't lie. I do. I do have this tendency to belittle - especially when it comes to the most basic of things, at least, in my opinion. People should know certain things. Whether or not they are necessary to get by in life is another animal (should I make a quagga joke?) entirely. Someone might respond to me by saying, "Sure, you know the top speed and armament of a P-51D Mustang; but I make twice as much as you in a year." ((437mph and six 0.50 Browning MGs, btw)) How would I respond to that? I'd have no answer. He'd have me beat. Yet let me get to this point in a bit. Back to what I was saying before, obviously, I don't know everything. I don't know more about history than a historian, more about Hymenoptera than an entomologist. This thus raises the question as to whether or not it is worthwhile to know anything outside of your field of study, if any. I mean, I know mechanics or body shop owners who have an intricate, intense knowledge of the workings of an internal combustion engine despite having little formal schooling or even a GED - and on the flip side, I know several upper-middle class professionals who couldn't change a tire if their life depended on it. So what really matters? In the end, I am going to say that it is up to each individual to gauge what they think is important to know, and learn it. Far be it for my ((undercover)) nerd self to impose my own sanctions on others for whatever biased reason I can come up with. But I will continue to make fun of you, though.
...ESPECIALLY if you lack common sense. It's undefinable, since everyone has differing perspectives on what exactly common sense entails - but everyone has a vague understanding of it. There are certain things everyone should be able to do by now. Read. Write properly, spell properly. Do basic math. You know, kid shit. Problem solve. So on.
The flip side of the coin (/no Two Face), in my opinion; is the emphasis that our culture places on income over education. That ol' 'get rich or die trying' mentality. If I remember something that a Romanian friend of mine once said in high school: "What's the point of classes? To go to college? So in the end I can stress and work my own boring nine-to-five to be able to put my own kids through college?" I suppose that is one way to think about it. I remember back when I first announced I was going to Grad School to get my Master's and that I was going to take my GRE, I ran into quite an interesting series of questions among some of my circles. "What's the GRE?" "Why are you doing more school, you just graduated college!" "What's a Master's program?" Besides the obvious economic reasons, what struck me hardest was that - they just couldn't understand why. Why, if you can start making some money now, would you go back to school? Because I'm not that easily satisfied. I want to learn more. Not because I have to, in the case of medical school - I want to. What's wrong with learning? Do we, as a society, really have to portray learning in such a negative light? Because that's what it is, whether jokingly or not. You see somebody reading a textbook on a weekend or on a sunny day and you tend to automatically make presumptions. I have a book on my coffee table at my house and visitors will ask why I own a book (and they've never seen the library I have stashed in my closet) - on the assumption that I don't look like someone who is well-read (as if there was a jewelry to knowledge inverse correlation I was unaware about). I remember having a conversation with an architecture professor about aviation in the 30s, to which he asked me, "What class did you take to learn this?" - when I responded, "I read on my own time" - he sounded positively shocked. That's what it has come down to. And don't tell me people don't learn because they lack the time. Nobody lacks the time. They just lack the will to learn (or in the case of America's youth, as I stated in my opening paragraph, to work out, study, and stay out of jail. lol). That's it. But hey, do you. I'll do me. If you think knowledge is a waste of time, and you just want to keep working at your dead end job to pay your bills, more power to you. Just remember we all started at the same point in life, and through our own decisions, we end up where we are now.
...I could also very easily rant about the lack of intelligence in some women I know, but that's a topic for a different time. Maybe later. Besides, I think that's more of a Miami phenomenon anyway. Bless them, at least they can cook.
((Disclaimer notes - anything I mentioned in the above reading I actually know about and wrote off the top of my head. Didn't have to look anything up. Just saying. ::Kanye shrug:: Now go read something. May I recommend the particularly fascinating fields of astronomy, paleontology, and european history?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I very much enjoyed reading this, though I have to say I believe you've blurred the lines between intelligence and knowledge. (I believe) intelligence is innate, while knowledge is learned. The question of why people don't care enough to become more knowledgable is confounding.
ReplyDeleteThe one thing that really troubles me about this entire thing is that we live in an age where through the wonders of the internet the sum of human knowledge is available to everyone in a first world country with minimal effort, yet as opposed to tapping into it, people are content with sitting on facebook and myspace all day.