Recently in Anti-Intellectualism Category

I recently risked my mental health by reading a review of "What's So Great About Christianity?" by Dinesh D'Souza. Having read it, I fear I'd go stark raving mad if I attempted to read the book.

One paragraph really got my attention;

The author barely conceals his contempt for the incredible arrogance of scientists Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkin's descriptions of themselves as "brights" because "they think they and their atheist friends are simply smarter that the community of religious believers."

We are. Too bad if that offends you, Christians, but we are. And we don't have to apologize for that nor should we deny it so as not to offend your insecure sensibilities.

Perhaps it's time to repost an earlier entry in this blog, a quote from Way of the Mind entitles Intellectuals should be godless:

In my opinion, anti-intellectualism is one of the world's most serious problems these days.

What is it? It's the belief that what is good are the 'simple people', the 'common people', who are supposedly more honest and 'real' than so-called 'ivory tower' intellectuals.

It's also the belief that thinking and learning are trouble, that they lead people to unhappiness, sinfulness, asking too many questions, and such...

There are several sources of anti-intellectualism. Religion is an obvious one, of course, since being intelligent and learning makes one less likely to accept arguments from authority, and to question unproven assertions. An intelligent, learned man has no need for religion - therefore, we don't want any intelligent, learned men (to paraphrase The Fountainhead's Elllsworth Toohey)...

An intellectual isn't necessarily someone more intelligent or with more knowledge than the norm. It just means that the person highly values the mind, thinking, and the pursuit of knowledge. And it's frightening, to me, how few intellectuals (by that definition) I personally know. Anti-intellectuals (people who deride the mind, who pride themselves on not thinking, on not using their reason), on the other hand, are everywhere.

I'd encourage you to also read, "Atheism: arrogance?" on the same page.

We atheists are smarter than theists because we came to our conclusions about reality through study and contemplation. Very few of us were born into our conclusions, unlike the majority of the religious. In fact, most of us were born into religious families and were indoctrinated in the usual manner into "the faith". We had to question on our own, find our own answers to the questions we had about theism. We had to use our curiosity and intellect, because our religious leaders didn't encourage skepticism and doubt. We concluded that atheism is the only sane and reasonable position to take on the question of the existence of gods.

Accepting the existence of gods because you've been told that story from birth or because the Bible/Koran says you must, without question, is intellectually lazy. I've never talked to an atheist who said, "I'm just an atheist. I don't know why."

"Bright" is a controversial term even within the atheist community. I don't know that it's the best term to use nor do I staunchly advocate its use (personally, I prefer realist). But I won't deny that it implies accurately that atheists are brighter than theists. I challenge any theist to provide an intellectual reason for their belief that doesn't, in the end, come down to, "you must have faith".

Once again the fundamentalist response to 21st century thinking is to ban any book which challenges their 2000 year old mythology:

The Palm Beach County School Board refused to pull 80 books referencing homosexuality, atheism and abortion from the library shelves of two high schools.

But the mother fighting since September to ban them refuses to give up.

Laura Lopez said she will start a church-to-church petition and reach out to a Christian law center to represent her.

“To me, it doesn’t end here. This is just the beginning,” said the West Palm Beach mom.

Two school committees and Superintendent Art Johnson had already shot down her request. On Wednesday, the board voted unanimously to back Johnson.

It was unclear whether Lopez had any challenges left.

Lopez had 15 minutes to make her case during a school board workshop. She listed a litany of sins that she says are promoted by books she found doing a simple key word search on the library computers at Dreyfoos School of the Arts and Royal Palm Beach High School. She acknowledged she hadn’t read a single one of the books cover-to-cover.

Among the objectionable books were: Medical Ethics: Moral and Legal Conflicts in Health Care, Coping When a Parent is Gay and The Cider House Rules, a John Irving novel about a rural doctor who runs an orphanage and performs illegal abortions.

She also expanded her objections to include the curriculum taught in schools.

“They’re teaching kids the Big Bang. They’re teaching kids lies,” she told the board. “The world was created 6,000 years ago. In my son’s elementary school book, it says the world was created several million years ago.”

Board members applauded Lopez’s advocacy but found no grounds to support her.

Board member Monroe Benaim talked about students who struggle with their sexuality or contemplate suicide and might be afraid to talk to someone but could find some solace in a library book.

“As a school board member, I’m a school board member to all children whether they are heterosexual or homosexual, pregnant or not pregnant and no matter what they believe religiously,” he said.

One of Lopez’s two teenaged sons, Jesse, a sophomore at Royal Palm Beach, came to support his mother. Her oldest son, whom she did not name, does not agree with his mother’s objections to the library books.

Jesse Lopez said he worries about his fellow classmates who turn to friends for information, who may consult books full of lies. “If their friends rely on them and if those books are teaching evil, that’s just corrupt,” he said.

Despite the controversial topic, Lopez’s hearing drew only a few people to the daytime board workshop. She brought a friend and a youth pastor. Two members of the Atheists of Broward County also came, but did not testify.

“If you don’t like a book, walk to the next aisle and find a different one,” Ken Loukinen, president of the atheist organization, said after the meeting.

Her comments after the article reveal a mindset that obviously believes freedom of thought is a dangerous concept:

I think it's obvious that we created gods to explain those things about our world that didn't make sense, for which there were as yet no other explanations. Gods made lightening, brought forth crops, made the day and night, gave meaning to pain and suffering. We needed gods because the human mind cannot tolerate unsolved riddles.

So you'd expect that as science continues to discover the processes behind natural phenomena, the need to believe in gods would diminish. In the same way we came to understand that the presents under the tree were put there by our parents, we should have come to understand that nature has provided us with a wonderful universe in which to live.

But instead we are seeing a rise in fundamental religous belief in many parts of the world including the U.S. and Middle East. What could possibly account for first century belief systems becoming even more popular at the dawn of the 21st century?

Thanks to UberKuh for calling my attention to this article from Way of the Mind:

In my opinion, anti-intellectualism is one of the world's most serious problems these days.

What is it? It's the belief that what is good are the 'simple people', the 'common people', who are supposedly more honest and 'real' than so-called 'ivory tower' intellectuals.

It's also the belief that thinking and learning are trouble, that they lead people to unhappiness, sinfulness, asking too many questions, and such.

It's geeks, or more intelligent students, being called 'brainy' or 'nerds' and harassed by classmates. It's science being seen as a waste of time and money. It's a political candidate winning an election because he successfully depicted his opponent as an 'egghead'. Incidentally, it's likely that one of the reasons America currently has one of its worst presidents ever is that, by being less educated and articulate than Gore or Kerry, he appeared 'more in touch' with the common man (of course, one should then wonder if you really want the village idiot in charge of the most powerful nation in the world' but I digress.)

There are several sources of anti-intellectualism. Religion is an obvious one, of course, since being intelligent and learning makes one less likely to accept arguments from authority, and to question unproven assertions. An intelligent, learned man has no need for religion - therefore, we don't want any intelligent, learned men (to paraphrase The Fountainhead's Elllsworth Toohey).

Another reason is populism, the belief that the honest, hard working 'masses' are oppressed by the corrupt, privileged 'elites'. While they certainly are, sometimes (in dictatorships, for instance), populism is wrong because of its belief of 'the lower, the better', and its worship of ordinariness. Populism, like most forms of collectivism, punishes people for ability and for success - therefore, it promotes mediocrity and sameness. And a populist certainly hates and feels threatened by anyone with more 'brains' or education.

Finally, a lot of people simply believe the lie that intelligence causes unhappiness, and stupid people are happier. Even today, at breakfast, I had this conversation with a co-worker, who strongly believes that lie: that most people are dumb (true) and happy (false), that most geniuses suffered their entire lives (if they did, which was not always the case, it was usually because they were persecuted), that intelligence and learning are mostly 'theoretical' and are of no use in the real world, and can't be used in order to improve your life, and so on. And I know a lot of people who think like her.

An intellectual isn't necessarily someone more intelligent or with more knowledge than the norm. It just means that the person highly values the mind, thinking, and the pursuit of knowledge. And it's frightening, to me, how few intellectuals (by that definition) I personally know. Anti-intellectuals (people who deride the mind, who pride themselves on not thinking, on not using their reason), on the other hand, are everywhere.