Pretty much everyone thinks they are better than some of the people they meet. Not better on all possible features of course, but better on the features that matter most to them. But it seems to be arrogant to say “I often think that I am better than other folks I meet”, and especially so to say it about particular people. As in, “I am better than George.”
This article discusses the mechanism. People who don't have the intellect to understand how other people are thinking default to prejudice against them.
It is pretty simple. If you don't understand someone, you think they are stupid. Doesn't matter why you don't understand them, even if it is because you are too stupid to understand them yourself.
I cannot imagine who Hanson is talking about, but I promise I will search far and wide for these stupid people who dare to imagine they can share a room, blog, stage etc. with such towering intellects as ourselves.
I have to say Quantum mechanics is not really that important in the life of most people.
But that's exactly the point. People shouldn't be interested in quantum mechanics because it's useful; people should be interested in it because it's among the deepest and most important aspects of reality. This is probably how some artists feel about people who make no effort to appreciate art. The only difference is, quantum mechanics is a lot more important than art :)
Patsy Cline has a wonderful song "Why can't he be you?"
You're frustrated because people aren't who you want them to be. They don't show the values, virtues, or competencies you think they "should" have. You're fundamentally not accepting reality.
You imagine a wonderful world of people who are who you want them to be, and find the real world of real people lacking in comparison. You don't look for value in what *is*, you bemoan what *isn't*.
Or at least that's how it seems to me, likely because I used to do that as well. I try to look for the value in what is these days.
You're also a bit cheeky. You seem to expect others to share the values you have, and therefore necessarily agree that you're greater and more wonderful than they are. Or, again, you think they "should" share those values. Are you a believer in Objective Value, by any chance?
Sorry if I'm not as clued in on your views, responding to your blog and all, but I only came to this post from LW. Though your name has positive associations - I'm thinking that you were on my personal "worth reading list" on the old Extropian email list.
It's a brave and stupid new world for the pompous.
Not sure how, "a dog, or a young child with similar intellectual capabilities" is even remotely related to Robins ability to be in the same presence with someone of lesser 'intelligence' than him on a stage or in the classroom.
But, Quote...'C’est la vie' Unquote.
I hope Robin takes pity on us stupid people and the dog who just smiled at him from behind the curtain...At least he acknowledges his shortcomings. I'd have a beer with him
Hmmmm...the more I read the other posts, the more I am realizing that my last position is not actually like Hanson's rather it's about not liking rude, petty and selfish dolts. :)
Every weekend my roomates drink a lot, "hang out", and if they are very lucky bring a drunken girl back from a loud bar. This repeats week in week out. They have relatively few hobbies, read no books, and don't really have a lot of life experiences.
I suppose I could adopt an egalitarian stance that what they do is just as good as anything else, but quite frankly it seems boring as fuck to me. Mostly, they just seem lazy and not curious. I'd rather just get new roomates when my lease is up.
Two thoughts immediately come to mind after reading such poignant piece (at least it is to me and apparently, everyone else who has bothered commenting).;
1) that it is important to remember, even when aware of it's goal of ultimately making an illustrative point, that the analogy regarding the child or dog falls short of accurately depicting the situation as the frustration emanates from the fact that those with whom one is disappointed in aren't dependent beings but supposedly free willed humans. Nietche's bear never had the expectations that a typical human being is held to.
2) what solace can one take when one's best efforts to limit or completely stifle one's own palpable arrogance while not compromising one's ability to contribute successfully ultimately fail?
With the second issue, an obvious solution would be to avoid situations where the collective level of acumen coupled with self doubt is rampant. After all, why should someone of aptitude invest much time there socially or constructively? However, the consistent pursuit of this remedy is folly. There will always be times where the bright bulbs cast light upon the best guarded and dimly lit shortcomings of others simply by being...well, bright. Of course, now and again, this will create resentment simply based upon the nature of one's personality...depending again upon whose presence one is in. At this point, a basic game of "hide the intellect" ensues. Eventually, that attempt in and of itself is enough to alert people to your "irrepressible arrogance" by tipping oneself off or else by appearing aloof and unapproachable or altogether condescending.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't and then damned if you do.
My only viable solution; "fuck 'em."
*this post only applies to situations whereas the author finds himself in the company of the intellectually, spiritually and culturally bereft.
I would say they are trying pretty hard, trying hard to produce the bad governance dystopia they keep predicting. If they do manage to get things together, the destruction of civilization will be catastrophic.
What is Paul saying? Cut a trillion from the US budget the first year? Does anyone really think that starving people are just going to passively die in the gutter with their children?
I am in fact often disappointed by the people I meet. For me it is mostly about their aesthetic appreciation and artistic abilities. They are either little moved by fundamentally beautiful things, or they are moved by them but seem incapable of effectively contributing to the creation of such things.
But for the purposes of this post, I’ll have to own up to this. I am in fact often disappointed by the people I meet. For me it is mostly about their intellectual curiosity and abilities in conversation. They either show little interest in fundamentally interesting things, or they show interest but seem incapable of effectively engaging such topics. C’est la vie.It sounds like Robin Hanson would be on the verge of suicide rather rapidly if he were forced to petition for ballot access for the Libertarian Party. That's been my existence (on and off) for quite some time: continual disappointment with the belligerence and intolerance of my fellow man. Continual disappointment with the job the government schools have done. Continual immersion in the awareness that things aren't going to get better any time soon.
We need to improve our game if we want to improve our social structure. Right now, the libertarian and interconnected futurist movements aren't trying hard enough, and they're not engaging with joe voter.
I think labeling this as narcissism is way off the mark. Hanson is just expressing a desire to among people of similar mental abilities and understanding. Life is more interesting when one can discuss the great ideas with someone that can add to the conversation. Surly you have been to a dinner party where the conversation is insufferably mundane, i.e talking about the weather, football, Oprah, etc. Is it narcissism to want a stimulating and deeper conversation about something of import. An analogy might help. How about if I was an expert skier. I regularly do heli-skiing and off piste steep descents that most people would consider insane. I have a group of like minded friends who enjoy similar pursuits. We occasionally go to regular ski areas and mix-it up with the crowds there. It is fun and one has to do the beginner and intermediate runs to get to the more challenging ones, but I certainly don't want to spend any more time than I have to on them, I find them boring and unchallenging. Am I a narcissist for not wanting to spend more time than I have to on the green and blue runs? The analogy is certainly not perfect but I think it is instructive. Hanson just wants to be challenged and to grow and that is best accomplished with avoiding the average and mundane and seeking out the stimulating and accomplished.
I have learned my from my intellectual inferiors and my intellectual superiors. That advantages me and indicates I have more curiosity than you.
Here I won't try to communicate by generalizing via abstruse formulia, while not mentioning any wider context that might be familiar to the public. You have already won that game because no one would dare admit that most of the time they don't know what the hell you are talking about. You are terrible at communicating ideas clearly. Slinging around acronyms and proper names disguised as adjectives does not constitute a demonstration of brilliance, in my opinion.
Instead I will use,(God forbid) a few humble examples from my experience.One time I was visiting a home for the mentally retarded. I got hungry and tried to get some potato chips out of a vending machine. I was unable to do so despite several advanced academic degrees. One of the retarded residents,kindly helped me.Lesson,smartness is not context free.
I have also benefited from the kindness of people who were either smarter than me or knew more than me. It makes no difference to me which. Those people I honor as teachers. Sure ,they took the superior position in these matters but it was the love of teaching that impelled them. I haven't learned much from intellectual showoffs,but how to be irritated at smart asses.
Dogs and children are quite different to me. Dogs are mostly boring and definitely my intellectual inferiors ( in curiosity and conversation). Children, although also my intellectual inferiors, are growing and learning and interaction with them is fun in some ill defined way due to a desire to help them grow and learn. This is a different pleasure than conversation with adults.I think it is reasonable to be irritated with adults who take my time without being interesting and to not worry about rivalry or recognition of my superior intellect.
Not obvious that this is the universal explanation. I for one do not enjoy spending my time with dogs or children, no matter how smart.
This article discusses the mechanism. People who don't have the intellect to understand how other people are thinking default to prejudice against them.
http://news.yahoo.com/low-i...
It is pretty simple. If you don't understand someone, you think they are stupid. Doesn't matter why you don't understand them, even if it is because you are too stupid to understand them yourself.
I cannot imagine who Hanson is talking about, but I promise I will search far and wide for these stupid people who dare to imagine they can share a room, blog, stage etc. with such towering intellects as ourselves.
Let us find the stupids and flog them!
Wow, are you coming on to Hanson?
I have to say Quantum mechanics is not really that important in the life of most people.
But that's exactly the point. People shouldn't be interested in quantum mechanics because it's useful; people should be interested in it because it's among the deepest and most important aspects of reality. This is probably how some artists feel about people who make no effort to appreciate art. The only difference is, quantum mechanics is a lot more important than art :)
Patsy Cline has a wonderful song "Why can't he be you?"
You're frustrated because people aren't who you want them to be. They don't show the values, virtues, or competencies you think they "should" have. You're fundamentally not accepting reality.
You imagine a wonderful world of people who are who you want them to be, and find the real world of real people lacking in comparison. You don't look for value in what *is*, you bemoan what *isn't*.
Or at least that's how it seems to me, likely because I used to do that as well. I try to look for the value in what is these days.
You're also a bit cheeky. You seem to expect others to share the values you have, and therefore necessarily agree that you're greater and more wonderful than they are. Or, again, you think they "should" share those values. Are you a believer in Objective Value, by any chance?
Sorry if I'm not as clued in on your views, responding to your blog and all, but I only came to this post from LW. Though your name has positive associations - I'm thinking that you were on my personal "worth reading list" on the old Extropian email list.
It's a brave and stupid new world for the pompous.
Not sure how, "a dog, or a young child with similar intellectual capabilities" is even remotely related to Robins ability to be in the same presence with someone of lesser 'intelligence' than him on a stage or in the classroom.
But, Quote...'C’est la vie' Unquote.
I hope Robin takes pity on us stupid people and the dog who just smiled at him from behind the curtain...At least he acknowledges his shortcomings. I'd have a beer with him
Hmmmm...the more I read the other posts, the more I am realizing that my last position is not actually like Hanson's rather it's about not liking rude, petty and selfish dolts. :)
Every weekend my roomates drink a lot, "hang out", and if they are very lucky bring a drunken girl back from a loud bar. This repeats week in week out. They have relatively few hobbies, read no books, and don't really have a lot of life experiences.
I suppose I could adopt an egalitarian stance that what they do is just as good as anything else, but quite frankly it seems boring as fuck to me. Mostly, they just seem lazy and not curious. I'd rather just get new roomates when my lease is up.
Two thoughts immediately come to mind after reading such poignant piece (at least it is to me and apparently, everyone else who has bothered commenting).;
1) that it is important to remember, even when aware of it's goal of ultimately making an illustrative point, that the analogy regarding the child or dog falls short of accurately depicting the situation as the frustration emanates from the fact that those with whom one is disappointed in aren't dependent beings but supposedly free willed humans. Nietche's bear never had the expectations that a typical human being is held to.
2) what solace can one take when one's best efforts to limit or completely stifle one's own palpable arrogance while not compromising one's ability to contribute successfully ultimately fail?
With the second issue, an obvious solution would be to avoid situations where the collective level of acumen coupled with self doubt is rampant. After all, why should someone of aptitude invest much time there socially or constructively? However, the consistent pursuit of this remedy is folly. There will always be times where the bright bulbs cast light upon the best guarded and dimly lit shortcomings of others simply by being...well, bright. Of course, now and again, this will create resentment simply based upon the nature of one's personality...depending again upon whose presence one is in. At this point, a basic game of "hide the intellect" ensues. Eventually, that attempt in and of itself is enough to alert people to your "irrepressible arrogance" by tipping oneself off or else by appearing aloof and unapproachable or altogether condescending.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't and then damned if you do.
My only viable solution; "fuck 'em."
*this post only applies to situations whereas the author finds himself in the company of the intellectually, spiritually and culturally bereft.
I would say they are trying pretty hard, trying hard to produce the bad governance dystopia they keep predicting. If they do manage to get things together, the destruction of civilization will be catastrophic.
What is Paul saying? Cut a trillion from the US budget the first year? Does anyone really think that starving people are just going to passively die in the gutter with their children?
I am in fact often disappointed by the people I meet. For me it is mostly about their aesthetic appreciation and artistic abilities. They are either little moved by fundamentally beautiful things, or they are moved by them but seem incapable of effectively contributing to the creation of such things.
(not really)
But for the purposes of this post, I’ll have to own up to this. I am in fact often disappointed by the people I meet. For me it is mostly about their intellectual curiosity and abilities in conversation. They either show little interest in fundamentally interesting things, or they show interest but seem incapable of effectively engaging such topics. C’est la vie.It sounds like Robin Hanson would be on the verge of suicide rather rapidly if he were forced to petition for ballot access for the Libertarian Party. That's been my existence (on and off) for quite some time: continual disappointment with the belligerence and intolerance of my fellow man. Continual disappointment with the job the government schools have done. Continual immersion in the awareness that things aren't going to get better any time soon.
We need to improve our game if we want to improve our social structure. Right now, the libertarian and interconnected futurist movements aren't trying hard enough, and they're not engaging with joe voter.
I think labeling this as narcissism is way off the mark. Hanson is just expressing a desire to among people of similar mental abilities and understanding. Life is more interesting when one can discuss the great ideas with someone that can add to the conversation. Surly you have been to a dinner party where the conversation is insufferably mundane, i.e talking about the weather, football, Oprah, etc. Is it narcissism to want a stimulating and deeper conversation about something of import. An analogy might help. How about if I was an expert skier. I regularly do heli-skiing and off piste steep descents that most people would consider insane. I have a group of like minded friends who enjoy similar pursuits. We occasionally go to regular ski areas and mix-it up with the crowds there. It is fun and one has to do the beginner and intermediate runs to get to the more challenging ones, but I certainly don't want to spend any more time than I have to on them, I find them boring and unchallenging. Am I a narcissist for not wanting to spend more time than I have to on the green and blue runs? The analogy is certainly not perfect but I think it is instructive. Hanson just wants to be challenged and to grow and that is best accomplished with avoiding the average and mundane and seeking out the stimulating and accomplished.
I have learned my from my intellectual inferiors and my intellectual superiors. That advantages me and indicates I have more curiosity than you.
Here I won't try to communicate by generalizing via abstruse formulia, while not mentioning any wider context that might be familiar to the public. You have already won that game because no one would dare admit that most of the time they don't know what the hell you are talking about. You are terrible at communicating ideas clearly. Slinging around acronyms and proper names disguised as adjectives does not constitute a demonstration of brilliance, in my opinion.
Instead I will use,(God forbid) a few humble examples from my experience.One time I was visiting a home for the mentally retarded. I got hungry and tried to get some potato chips out of a vending machine. I was unable to do so despite several advanced academic degrees. One of the retarded residents,kindly helped me.Lesson,smartness is not context free.
I have also benefited from the kindness of people who were either smarter than me or knew more than me. It makes no difference to me which. Those people I honor as teachers. Sure ,they took the superior position in these matters but it was the love of teaching that impelled them. I haven't learned much from intellectual showoffs,but how to be irritated at smart asses.
Dogs and children are quite different to me. Dogs are mostly boring and definitely my intellectual inferiors ( in curiosity and conversation). Children, although also my intellectual inferiors, are growing and learning and interaction with them is fun in some ill defined way due to a desire to help them grow and learn. This is a different pleasure than conversation with adults.I think it is reasonable to be irritated with adults who take my time without being interesting and to not worry about rivalry or recognition of my superior intellect.