Re: Why is there such an aversion to thinking?

Date: 2010-09-29 04:53 pm (UTC)
First, thanks Elf for hosting this fascinating and very thought-provoking thread.

Now, _Candide_, to respond to your points.

Quakers are a very interesting group. One of the structural parts of their worship is silent contemplation with the occasional speaking. It seems to me that building lots of *time* to think right into their religious/communal worship has led to lots of actual thinking and discussion.

The Jesuit dedication for education does not represent the Catholic laity at-large, but it constitutes an acceptable and respected stream of Catholicism. In other words, there is an acceptable path for people with intellectual leanings and aspirations - within a broad framework of Catholic religion.

When you say that certain famous figures are famous for being famous, rather than for their achievements, you nullify a priori any name I mention - because if I know their name they're famous, which makes the admiration of them suspect.
But it is not their celebrity which makes the people I mentioned interesting.
Here are a few more: Ralph Waldo Emerson, admired for his essays and thinking; Walt Whitman, admired for his poetry (writing poetry counts as an intellectual achievement, I think.)
Robert Frost, also a giant of poetry. Louisa May Alcott, whose books for girls provided role models (including intellectual ones) for generations of young women.
I keep writing and deleting Thomas Jefferson, but I guess I won't delete him this time: he is renowned and celebrated for his intellectual writing as well as for the political roles he had.
Might I mention Harriet Beecher Stowe? She is widely admired for the effect that her writing-of-stories had on the world and on the country.

Now, I am at a bit of a disadvantage here, because not only am I not an average American in nearly any way, I did not grow up here. Not only do I not know what other Americans of my generation admire, I was never exposed to the names of many great people, celebrated for their intellectual prowess. Any knowledge I have is eclectic, grabbed magpie-style due to their noticeable twinkling. This was not part of a well-ordered education.
My children, however, are being raised here, and they have been informed admiringly by their schools of some wonderful figures, ones who inspire both of them to excel. This is now, in both public and private schools, in a tiny town at the very edge of the continental 48.
Now, I like to think that this city is unusual. I'd hate to live in a dull, flat space, indistinguishable from any other McCity. But it is not *that* unusual! I know this because I speak with parents from across the U.S., and their kids are having the same kind of experiences - both in terms of being fed factoids rather than learning to think, and in terms of seeing intellectual giants as worthwhile figures.

As to that average American and her response to the names I mentioned: good question. I just don't know. I've been blessed with having met only two "average" people in my life, and I suspect that even they were using that as a facade.

In summary: I don't see hostility to intellectual pursuits. I see a very disturbing way of delivering education (factoid rather than frameworks of thought), and indeed, a culture of celebrity rather than substance and of replacing contemplation with memorization. I read that as a misunderstanding of what education is, rather than a hostility to it.

Thanks for the stimulating conversation so far!
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

elfs: (Default)
Elf Sternberg

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 15th, 2025 12:38 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios