This is an important essay because it gets to the crux of what are, essentially, deliberate impediments to intellectual curiosity which represents an impediment to the development of knowledge and so human development and progress.
Actually, however, this is NOT a new phenomenon. I have always worked in the Private sector but by virtue of…
This is an important essay because it gets to the crux of what are, essentially, deliberate impediments to intellectual curiosity which represents an impediment to the development of knowledge and so human development and progress.
Actually, however, this is NOT a new phenomenon. I have always worked in the Private sector but by virtue of my work I have often interacted with senior academics who, over the years, have highlighted this as an issue in academia. That certain avenues of "research" are essentially closed because they are not "politically correct". The more recent Covid "thing" has provided ample further illustration of this phenomenon.
I find it most difficult to understand how intelligent, highly educated people can at their fundamental belief level, go along with this thinking. Yes, I understand the self-preservation aspect but there seems to be more than that going on. Like with Covid, there seems to be a macro psyop in operation which forces people to "take sides" perhaps out of "fear" and persuade themselves that "truth is lies"?
I have no political axe to grind as I regard myself as an Agorist and have no affiliation with either side of the same Red/Blue political coin, but I think any impartial observer can see the effects of such "intellectual thinking" impacting US society today. There comes a point where society must decide which road to take in the wood?
Reminds me of an old Ray Bradbury story I read in high school. I think it was "The Flying Machine". Ironically set in China, it is the story of a young man who demonstrates flight wearing wings he invented. The emperor is sufficiently impressed he has the young man killed and the flying machine destroyed. He doesn't want an enemy to acquire the technology and use it to improve war-making skills.
I can remember reading an article about testing IQ and such in the military. The army was puzzled why black recruits had more prostate and urinary tract problems, so they began testing for testosterone levels. They found that the black soldiers' T-level was something like 18% higher than the whites on average. This should be interesting because it could go a long way to explaining certain racial traits...superior athletic ability might be one advantage, but others might not be as beneficial...aggressiveness, poor control of impulse and anger, etc. Nobody will touch this now, of course, even if society might be helped by understanding and developing ways to moderate behavior.
That is amazing. It would be helpful to know this because it might help point to therapies or whatever to help people. Or just shed light on things. No one would touch this with a 10 foot pole.
May want to look into what higher testosterone actually does, as most of those things listed are misconceptions. Sapolski does a great job in Behave of covering these.
True, but at that time, the incentive was a nice medium rare Wagyu ribeye steak which made it difficult for the "leaders" to restrain the popular sentiment?. And that was before the world developed and understood propaganda and totalitarianism. And their "sophisticated" application.. Now, the incentives are reversed? For other than the Puppet masters.
I was thinking the same to LA_Bob's comment......today our corporate leaders, whether directly, indirectly through lobbyists and politicians, sell our technologies to our adversaries for their short term gains.....the Global Express or Gulfstream 650 is the new Wagyu Ribeye Steak for the Puppet Masters while the Wagyu Ribeye is the fodder for the masses they have enslaved via golden handcuffs and propaganda....and most have willingly bought into this business model b/c why rock the boat when that boat contains your retirement portfolio?
That would seem to be why those who "steal fire from the gods" always end up horribly punished in creation myths. I am afraid humans have a very long history of doing this, possibly the longest history we have.
I think one issue is that we routinely (and incorrectly) conflate the terms 'highly educated' and 'intelligence'.
Especially given the current state of the 'academy', I have doubts that the former correlates well at all with one's ability to 'think'. Students are mostly indoctrinated and trained to regurgitate teacher/professor X's subjective views (how long before 2+2=5 be on Ms Kousta's IQ test?). And I'd argue that kids who are 'trained' to do well on IQ math problems (or the SATs) w/repetitive drilling, but then can't find their way out of a paper bag, are not 'intelligent' either.
It may be more likely that the 'discipline' instilled in them w/the drilling is more responsible for the observed IQ/future success correlation than their perceived (IQ test 'measured') 'intelligence'.
Similarly I know/have worked with plenty of people who matriculated through the most preeminent universities in the world whom - while 'trained' and 'excel' in their respective fields - I would still contend have limited 'intelligence'...to the point that their 'educational pedigree' was actually more of a pejorative (also not sure 'Nobel Prizes' are an objective measure of anything either...except of course the 2009 Peace Prize!). :P
Anyway, I'm still stuck on question 4, since it would take at least ~1/3 of the 1st rotation to get the first people into the building. :P
I like to illustrate the difference between "highly educated" and "intelligent" with this story.
While I was in college, I helped a friend move some of her stuff that had found its way to another colleges frat house back to her dorm room. This college was and is still well known for turning out well educated engineering students. Anyhow, while attempting to move her stuff out the frat house basement, we discovered that the light bulb burned out in the basement. Since this was a time before cell phones, and not everyone carried around a flashlight, this was more than a minor inconvenience. The best answer I got out of the inhabitants was "the light burned out." and that settled the issue. For them, that was where the discussion ended.
I asked if there were any replacement light bulbs (there were not) and suggested finally that we temporarily remove a light bulb from the upstairs to the basement in order to locate this friend's stuff. I felt like Obi Wan Kenobi at that moment having successfully done a Jedi mind trick on them. A light bulb was given, lights were on in the basement and her stuff was successfully transported back to her dorm room.
I do not know how to built a light bulb, although I could find out by reading a tutorial online, but I do know how to change one.
My former wife has 2 MS & 2 PhD's all in hard core biology of Plant Pathology & Soil Science...she even does peer-review for some of the top journals in her area of expertise......what is especially curious about someone as "intelligent" as she is this: She does not even question nor is curious of the current Human Pathogen, despite her being someone who actually has the education, tools and training to actually evaluate the pathogen itself or the 'solution' to it . . . she defers to the experts including her doctors/clinicians rather than evaluate it trusting her own abilities....for example if the data to justify the current policy were presented to her for anonymous peer-review the study design flaws, data and conclusions would have been rejected out of hand as not acceptable to even consider, let alone try to work with the authors to address the holes the peer reviewer might come across ......the Human Condition is an interesting thing and probably why reverting to 'el gato' has some basis in fact!
I've found that intelligence which is validated through advanced university degree and a title like 'Dr.' comes with a certain confidence in ones own acquired knowledge which often undermines their curiosity. Moreover, it takes a certain type of person to even accomplish advanced degrees. They need to be good at following rules, must have the focus to read and memorize prepared and approved materials, and in the end they must conform to the whims and opinions of subjective professors. Basically, to succeed you need to fall in line and defer to "the experts". Some of the most curious people don't do well in such a system as their curiosity to seek out and read all material (including unapproved material) is stifled and they are not elevated or praised for original thought that runs counter to what is being taught. All that to say, that I've observed the same lack of interest in the most highly educated of my Family and friends. The aren't willing to entertain ideas that aren't put forth by "the experts". They feel they already know it all, instead of recognizing that the more you know, the more you realize the less you know.
There is a certain process that occurs while going for a PhD. I watched someone close to me pursue her doctorate and masters in education, and observed changes in them. And because of those changes I was able to know without much thought as to where they would come down politically, where they would side in regards to Covid, and other issues. There is a vetting process in this level of learning that makes most academics "get with the program" ethically, and it is questionable why anyone of differing viewpoints would put themselves through such a process.
To be sure, academia could use a variety of different viewpoints, as such a stance towards dissenting views leads to mediocrity and more intolerant thinking.
I have seen similar in several friends & family during their academic indoctrination processes. One was vet school, and that almost seemed to be cult-like brainwashing and ritual abuse in the aspects of the continuous sleep deprivation for several years straight, cut-throat competition, seemingly arbitrary hazing by professors & other staff. calculated psychological warfare by the system to turn out people who, in most cases, simply cannot buck the system any more. Is it any wonder the medical and allied science professions have acted the way they have with the whole Covid genocide thing?
It's strange. For her, she has an ambivalence towards her PhD that I find curious. She doesn't really use it, but I can tell at the same time she also a product of it.
An example of the interesting level of thinking that arose from it. Early in the pandemic we were sitting outside for the Fourth of July and we exchanged words about Covid.
It felt odd but good to have a get together in July of 2020. I wondered what other members of the PhD program would have thought about a get-together 4 scant months after it raged throughout the globe. But she was already in the workforce by then.
I could tell she worried a lot about Covid. She mentioned to me that she was worried, as she heard through the media, that this was going to be like the Spanish flu.
I replied simply, "This isn't anything like the Spanish flu. With the Spanish flu 55,000,000 people died. Among them were young adults and children. The death rate was substantially higher. This virus primarily is bad for the elderly with comorbidities. It is more a catalyst disease than it is something dangerous in and of itself.
What I found striking is that this is someone with a PhD. She knew how to do research, probably went deeper than I ever did pre-pandemic, and yet she was completely immersed in the narrative.
It was one of the last times we spoke on the subject. I know she thinks I am a hard line conservative, but I am a libertarian. My conservative leanings go so far as "limited government" but if anything, this pandemic has taught me that we need to limit government as much as possible. I am no anarchist, but I recognize that the current bloatware of our current government is way too much.
Precisely, my former wife is brilliant (on the Asperger's Syndrome spectrum) and curious as the basic research scientist she is but she is definitely a rule follower, whereas I fall into the other category, the kid that won't stop asking questions.....the more I learn the less I know so for each answer leads to a dozen questions....and I've paid dearly for being on the outside and my lack of credentials is one small part of the failure of that relationship......so your observations are aligned with mine....but what do we know, especially on some obscure thread on a blog by a feline.....
This is interesting. I have 1 hard core bio MS. I'm female. But I'm also schooled in holistic nutrition (not the RD / gov't food pyramid variety). (And I would call my nutrition work another MS degree, although The Powers That Be would not.) I said HELL NO to these vaxs initially based solely on the new technology for humans, dead ferrets, & based on my personal knowledge/understanding of auto immunity.
However... I am not a very female female. I'm a bit of a tomboy, I don't give a shit what others think or if they want to be around me, that's fine I'll go do whatever it is by myself (and I'll probably enjoy it more without someone yapping in my ear). I don't strive to be a part of the group as so many others do. So I wonder if a prickly disposition contributes to whether people are swayed to take these shots?
i once read a good book called Functional Intelligence, which discussed the difficulties in quantifying intelligence. Areas like math, music, writing, “street”, emotional, etc. can all be exhibited more in some people than others. I think it supports El Gatos premise— that quantifying and discussing facts doesn’t necessarily reflect “poorly” on a group. Some other research may find the same group is at the top percentile in some other dimension of intelligence. Having respect for individuality should reinforce the desire to learn more. I suspect those purportedly protecting collective groups don’t really value or even consider individuals in their internal statistics.
There are many aspects to this. I was thinking of the Jordan Peterson interview where he was asked about the inequity of wages men and women earned. He stated that there were many variables as to why there was a 9% wage gap between men and women, and said that gender, and prejudice were factors, but were not nearly as high as the reasons for the gender gap. Agreeableness was a huge factor. As was what choices in professions men and women tend to choose: ie. in Scandinavian countries where free choice was a laudable goal for professions. Women chose 20 to 1 over men to go into healthcare, and men chose 20 to 1 to go into engineering. Women face a "crisis" in their lives between age 28 to 32 as to the direction their lives will take in regards to family, and there are many other factors. But this is one of those subjects that is verboten.
This is an important essay because it gets to the crux of what are, essentially, deliberate impediments to intellectual curiosity which represents an impediment to the development of knowledge and so human development and progress.
Actually, however, this is NOT a new phenomenon. I have always worked in the Private sector but by virtue of my work I have often interacted with senior academics who, over the years, have highlighted this as an issue in academia. That certain avenues of "research" are essentially closed because they are not "politically correct". The more recent Covid "thing" has provided ample further illustration of this phenomenon.
I find it most difficult to understand how intelligent, highly educated people can at their fundamental belief level, go along with this thinking. Yes, I understand the self-preservation aspect but there seems to be more than that going on. Like with Covid, there seems to be a macro psyop in operation which forces people to "take sides" perhaps out of "fear" and persuade themselves that "truth is lies"?
I have no political axe to grind as I regard myself as an Agorist and have no affiliation with either side of the same Red/Blue political coin, but I think any impartial observer can see the effects of such "intellectual thinking" impacting US society today. There comes a point where society must decide which road to take in the wood?
indeed, i suspect the first incidence of this issue was probably some cave man saying "thag no research fire! fire upset gods!"
"Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire. He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light."
~ Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead
Reminds me of an old Ray Bradbury story I read in high school. I think it was "The Flying Machine". Ironically set in China, it is the story of a young man who demonstrates flight wearing wings he invented. The emperor is sufficiently impressed he has the young man killed and the flying machine destroyed. He doesn't want an enemy to acquire the technology and use it to improve war-making skills.
Philipat is right. This is a foundational essay.
We feel as if we are living in a house of mirrors because we decided a long time ago not to be faithful to the truth.
I can remember reading an article about testing IQ and such in the military. The army was puzzled why black recruits had more prostate and urinary tract problems, so they began testing for testosterone levels. They found that the black soldiers' T-level was something like 18% higher than the whites on average. This should be interesting because it could go a long way to explaining certain racial traits...superior athletic ability might be one advantage, but others might not be as beneficial...aggressiveness, poor control of impulse and anger, etc. Nobody will touch this now, of course, even if society might be helped by understanding and developing ways to moderate behavior.
That is amazing. It would be helpful to know this because it might help point to therapies or whatever to help people. Or just shed light on things. No one would touch this with a 10 foot pole.
May want to look into what higher testosterone actually does, as most of those things listed are misconceptions. Sapolski does a great job in Behave of covering these.
"I used to live in a room full of mirrors
All I could see was me
Well I take my spirit and I crash my mirrors
Now the whole world is here for me to see"
-- Jimi Hendrix [the rest of the song is rather less coherent 😁]
Lmao. Reminds of the early 80's movie "Caveman".
Ta : [re-appearing from behind a rock and pointing at the 'mud'] Doo-doo!
Atouk : [Angrily] Ca-ca.
Nook : [looking with disgust at his fingers and then right into the camera] Shit.
It had Ringo Starr in it. Which was funny in its own right!
"Everything the government touches turns to crap."
~ Ringo Starr
"What happens if the government touches crap?"
-- Doorknob creating a testable hypothesis
endless recursive crap loop, requires hard reboot to escape
There is no need to get metaphysical.
Crap is crap.
NICE!
True, but at that time, the incentive was a nice medium rare Wagyu ribeye steak which made it difficult for the "leaders" to restrain the popular sentiment?. And that was before the world developed and understood propaganda and totalitarianism. And their "sophisticated" application.. Now, the incentives are reversed? For other than the Puppet masters.
I was thinking the same to LA_Bob's comment......today our corporate leaders, whether directly, indirectly through lobbyists and politicians, sell our technologies to our adversaries for their short term gains.....the Global Express or Gulfstream 650 is the new Wagyu Ribeye Steak for the Puppet Masters while the Wagyu Ribeye is the fodder for the masses they have enslaved via golden handcuffs and propaganda....and most have willingly bought into this business model b/c why rock the boat when that boat contains your retirement portfolio?
That would seem to be why those who "steal fire from the gods" always end up horribly punished in creation myths. I am afraid humans have a very long history of doing this, possibly the longest history we have.
I think one issue is that we routinely (and incorrectly) conflate the terms 'highly educated' and 'intelligence'.
Especially given the current state of the 'academy', I have doubts that the former correlates well at all with one's ability to 'think'. Students are mostly indoctrinated and trained to regurgitate teacher/professor X's subjective views (how long before 2+2=5 be on Ms Kousta's IQ test?). And I'd argue that kids who are 'trained' to do well on IQ math problems (or the SATs) w/repetitive drilling, but then can't find their way out of a paper bag, are not 'intelligent' either.
It may be more likely that the 'discipline' instilled in them w/the drilling is more responsible for the observed IQ/future success correlation than their perceived (IQ test 'measured') 'intelligence'.
Similarly I know/have worked with plenty of people who matriculated through the most preeminent universities in the world whom - while 'trained' and 'excel' in their respective fields - I would still contend have limited 'intelligence'...to the point that their 'educational pedigree' was actually more of a pejorative (also not sure 'Nobel Prizes' are an objective measure of anything either...except of course the 2009 Peace Prize!). :P
Anyway, I'm still stuck on question 4, since it would take at least ~1/3 of the 1st rotation to get the first people into the building. :P
I like to illustrate the difference between "highly educated" and "intelligent" with this story.
While I was in college, I helped a friend move some of her stuff that had found its way to another colleges frat house back to her dorm room. This college was and is still well known for turning out well educated engineering students. Anyhow, while attempting to move her stuff out the frat house basement, we discovered that the light bulb burned out in the basement. Since this was a time before cell phones, and not everyone carried around a flashlight, this was more than a minor inconvenience. The best answer I got out of the inhabitants was "the light burned out." and that settled the issue. For them, that was where the discussion ended.
I asked if there were any replacement light bulbs (there were not) and suggested finally that we temporarily remove a light bulb from the upstairs to the basement in order to locate this friend's stuff. I felt like Obi Wan Kenobi at that moment having successfully done a Jedi mind trick on them. A light bulb was given, lights were on in the basement and her stuff was successfully transported back to her dorm room.
I do not know how to built a light bulb, although I could find out by reading a tutorial online, but I do know how to change one.
My better half has 2x Degrees, 1x MSc. and 1x PhD.
She cannot tie her own shoe laces . . .
My former wife has 2 MS & 2 PhD's all in hard core biology of Plant Pathology & Soil Science...she even does peer-review for some of the top journals in her area of expertise......what is especially curious about someone as "intelligent" as she is this: She does not even question nor is curious of the current Human Pathogen, despite her being someone who actually has the education, tools and training to actually evaluate the pathogen itself or the 'solution' to it . . . she defers to the experts including her doctors/clinicians rather than evaluate it trusting her own abilities....for example if the data to justify the current policy were presented to her for anonymous peer-review the study design flaws, data and conclusions would have been rejected out of hand as not acceptable to even consider, let alone try to work with the authors to address the holes the peer reviewer might come across ......the Human Condition is an interesting thing and probably why reverting to 'el gato' has some basis in fact!
I've found that intelligence which is validated through advanced university degree and a title like 'Dr.' comes with a certain confidence in ones own acquired knowledge which often undermines their curiosity. Moreover, it takes a certain type of person to even accomplish advanced degrees. They need to be good at following rules, must have the focus to read and memorize prepared and approved materials, and in the end they must conform to the whims and opinions of subjective professors. Basically, to succeed you need to fall in line and defer to "the experts". Some of the most curious people don't do well in such a system as their curiosity to seek out and read all material (including unapproved material) is stifled and they are not elevated or praised for original thought that runs counter to what is being taught. All that to say, that I've observed the same lack of interest in the most highly educated of my Family and friends. The aren't willing to entertain ideas that aren't put forth by "the experts". They feel they already know it all, instead of recognizing that the more you know, the more you realize the less you know.
There is a certain process that occurs while going for a PhD. I watched someone close to me pursue her doctorate and masters in education, and observed changes in them. And because of those changes I was able to know without much thought as to where they would come down politically, where they would side in regards to Covid, and other issues. There is a vetting process in this level of learning that makes most academics "get with the program" ethically, and it is questionable why anyone of differing viewpoints would put themselves through such a process.
To be sure, academia could use a variety of different viewpoints, as such a stance towards dissenting views leads to mediocrity and more intolerant thinking.
I have seen similar in several friends & family during their academic indoctrination processes. One was vet school, and that almost seemed to be cult-like brainwashing and ritual abuse in the aspects of the continuous sleep deprivation for several years straight, cut-throat competition, seemingly arbitrary hazing by professors & other staff. calculated psychological warfare by the system to turn out people who, in most cases, simply cannot buck the system any more. Is it any wonder the medical and allied science professions have acted the way they have with the whole Covid genocide thing?
It's strange. For her, she has an ambivalence towards her PhD that I find curious. She doesn't really use it, but I can tell at the same time she also a product of it.
An example of the interesting level of thinking that arose from it. Early in the pandemic we were sitting outside for the Fourth of July and we exchanged words about Covid.
It felt odd but good to have a get together in July of 2020. I wondered what other members of the PhD program would have thought about a get-together 4 scant months after it raged throughout the globe. But she was already in the workforce by then.
I could tell she worried a lot about Covid. She mentioned to me that she was worried, as she heard through the media, that this was going to be like the Spanish flu.
I replied simply, "This isn't anything like the Spanish flu. With the Spanish flu 55,000,000 people died. Among them were young adults and children. The death rate was substantially higher. This virus primarily is bad for the elderly with comorbidities. It is more a catalyst disease than it is something dangerous in and of itself.
What I found striking is that this is someone with a PhD. She knew how to do research, probably went deeper than I ever did pre-pandemic, and yet she was completely immersed in the narrative.
It was one of the last times we spoke on the subject. I know she thinks I am a hard line conservative, but I am a libertarian. My conservative leanings go so far as "limited government" but if anything, this pandemic has taught me that we need to limit government as much as possible. I am no anarchist, but I recognize that the current bloatware of our current government is way too much.
This rings true...same in my extended family
Amen
Precisely, my former wife is brilliant (on the Asperger's Syndrome spectrum) and curious as the basic research scientist she is but she is definitely a rule follower, whereas I fall into the other category, the kid that won't stop asking questions.....the more I learn the less I know so for each answer leads to a dozen questions....and I've paid dearly for being on the outside and my lack of credentials is one small part of the failure of that relationship......so your observations are aligned with mine....but what do we know, especially on some obscure thread on a blog by a feline.....
"...the more I learn the less I know..."
Amen!
YES!!!! YES YES YES YES this is true intelligence. Love to see this phrase! It means you GET IT.
This is interesting. I have 1 hard core bio MS. I'm female. But I'm also schooled in holistic nutrition (not the RD / gov't food pyramid variety). (And I would call my nutrition work another MS degree, although The Powers That Be would not.) I said HELL NO to these vaxs initially based solely on the new technology for humans, dead ferrets, & based on my personal knowledge/understanding of auto immunity.
However... I am not a very female female. I'm a bit of a tomboy, I don't give a shit what others think or if they want to be around me, that's fine I'll go do whatever it is by myself (and I'll probably enjoy it more without someone yapping in my ear). I don't strive to be a part of the group as so many others do. So I wonder if a prickly disposition contributes to whether people are swayed to take these shots?
i once read a good book called Functional Intelligence, which discussed the difficulties in quantifying intelligence. Areas like math, music, writing, “street”, emotional, etc. can all be exhibited more in some people than others. I think it supports El Gatos premise— that quantifying and discussing facts doesn’t necessarily reflect “poorly” on a group. Some other research may find the same group is at the top percentile in some other dimension of intelligence. Having respect for individuality should reinforce the desire to learn more. I suspect those purportedly protecting collective groups don’t really value or even consider individuals in their internal statistics.
There are many aspects to this. I was thinking of the Jordan Peterson interview where he was asked about the inequity of wages men and women earned. He stated that there were many variables as to why there was a 9% wage gap between men and women, and said that gender, and prejudice were factors, but were not nearly as high as the reasons for the gender gap. Agreeableness was a huge factor. As was what choices in professions men and women tend to choose: ie. in Scandinavian countries where free choice was a laudable goal for professions. Women chose 20 to 1 over men to go into healthcare, and men chose 20 to 1 to go into engineering. Women face a "crisis" in their lives between age 28 to 32 as to the direction their lives will take in regards to family, and there are many other factors. But this is one of those subjects that is verboten.