h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think we've got a population who can't be bothered to learn anything much, because they don't see the point. I think the point is very sharp and shiny, and needs to be poked into all the people who don't bother to even try learning (I don't care if they don't have massive IQs, everyone can try. They may not all get as far, but they can all try) to make them do something useful for a change. A well-educated population - and I mean 100% of it, not just a few who overshadow the rest - is an essential for a better world.

<>

Erm... wouldn't that be slightly detrimental to the economy?[End Preemptive Digression]


So are we to say that not all people are capable of deep thought? I understand your sentiments entirely, P-C, but I'm not sure we can really guage the potential of other humans. Perhaps adults, yes, but that's most likely due to the psychological phenomenon called crystallization: over time, the human mind (unless it excersizes otherwise) gets caught in a paradigm. Memory becomes unchangeable, as do behaviors and beliefs. This is not, however, a doom from birth. I might ask, do the families and/or friends of everyone here think quite a lot? It seems to me that the capacity for deep thought grows almost solely from the cultivation of it in youth. An example: it was known, several hundred years ago, that only a gifted few had the mental capacity to read and write. [dramatic pause]

What are you doing right now? [another dramatic pause]

How many people do you know who /couldn't/ do what you're doing right now? [yet another dramatic pause]

Aren't you also thinking deeply? [one last dramatic pause]

This is the reason I so severely doubt that there's a significant majority who are born incapable of thinking deeply. On the other hand, I'm quite disturbed that there are so many people conditioned /not/ to think deeply. I hope we may find a remedy. Anyone have any ideas?

(I don't think I'll scrub any barnacles off that one)

It doesn't necessarily require deep thought. Deep thought generates ideas and paradigms, but to choose between them only requires the same kind of mental equipment you would use to choose between tea and coffee.

It's just depressing that many people put more mental effort and critical evaluation into choosing their next car than choosing their beliefs.

All someone needs to do to become an armchair philosopher is to be ready to challenge existing beliefs.

If we put as much effort into choosing between tea and coffee as we do discussing and contemplating in the FFFF, caffiene addiction would be a thing of the past.

Good point Artenshiur, I hadn't thought of it like that. Perhaps more people would be capable of independent thinking if they were taught how. To answer your question though, I know quite a few people who are unable to read, many of them because of an inability to learn rather than a lack of education. Perhaps some people may have an inability to learn to think also.

Artenshiur, I'm not an economist but it seems to me that advertising is not great for any economy. Surely it just sucks resources and time away from productive activities?

Quite a few of you keep coming back to the position that, although not everyone is mentally gifted, everyone *ought* to try to improve their understanding of the world. This forum is populated by those who *are* mentally gifted , "...and your wise man don't know how it feels, to be thick as a brick."

For a group that fosters (religious) tolerance, we aren't doing at all well in this matter. Empathy, and an appreciation of differing viewpoints, is perhaps what we ought to be trying to improve.

This is just a thought, but turn the discussion around for a moment, and consider your physical fitness. Not everyone has the natural advantages of David Beckham or Lennox Lewis, but we can all try, right? Is there a duty on all of us to optimise our physical condition? How much exercise do *you* take? Just how serious is your pursuit of physical perfection? Mine is between minimal and non-existent, and I suspect many of you are the same. Are we letting ourselves and the rest of society down? Quite probably. Why? Because we live our lives as we choose to, according to our own priorities.

If I choose to live my life inside a beer glass, ignoring the big harsh world out there, just who are you (any one of you) to tell me I'm wrong? If I'm a Sun reader, do *you* have the right to look down your Guardian-reading nose at me? I think not, and this is my objection to the intellectual elitism we're considering here.

Hi Deackie, and welcome back! It's nice to know I'm not entirely alone on this one!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Artenshiur: <>

Now that you've put that in black and white for me, I realise I've thought so for years. Thanks, Art!

I find that most of those around me, although they are (mainly) intelligent and capable people, do *not* indulge in deep thought if it can possibly be avoided. That's one reason I like it here! I don't think even my wife appreciates quite how much of my life takes place inside my head, and in forums like this one.

Does this strike any chords with anyone, or am I alone in feeling this way?

<>

There is an anti-intellectual bias in the population as a whole: "No-one likes a smart-ass". I've always assumed it's based on jealousy, but maybe that my attempt to whitewash the issue? Whatever the reason, there is a genuine wish in many people to keep thought of all kinds within 'reasonable bounds', don't you think?

Suspend for a short time your own attachment to the ways of the mind, and help me consider: are there any good reasons why we should try to persuade people away from deep thought?

Can too much thinking limit the time available for doing? If so, would this be a Bad Thing?

Do Deep Thinkers lose their grip on day-to-day real-world living?

Can deep thought coexist with the 'lesser' things of which most human lives consist?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Pattern-chaser: <>

I recently have realized that I'm the only one in my family who even considers thinking critically. The others aren't trained in it, and don't find the idea of doing it appealing, it seems. Sometimes that leads to tension, but usually I can accept that they're just like that, and work around it. I'm sure they also have to work around me being the way I am, which must seem strange to them. They do seem to like to ask me for help when there's a situation in which critical thinking is called for, but that doesn't bother me. They also ask me to reach things on the top shelf. (Yes, I come from a long line of short, intuitive types.)

P-C The 2 of us on the same side of an argument

I think society in general would probably view our deep thought in the FFFF as a meaningless waste of time. I think the term is 'naval gazing'

Mmm, yes I do think people should try and keep themselves fairly fit (sorry P-C, had to disagree with you on something out of principle :-p) I don't aim to reach the level of fitness of Beckham and I certainly don't have that sought after, well-toned bod, but a 20 mins brisk walk each day keeps my cardiovascular system pumping well. Besides, walking provides ample time to contemplate mine and everybody else's navals

I think that like everything else, a balance has to be struck. It's difficult to choose which is the lesser of two evils, the person who doesn't think, just does, or the person who thinks but does nothing. The term that gets banded about at college is 'knowledgable doer'. Hopefully that's what I aim to be.

And as for empathy - I try to exercise that as well. I meet a variety of people from different ethnic, religious, economical and educational backgrounds. While I freely admit that I find it a lot easier to relate to people from the same cultural* background as myself, I hope I manage to relate to others as well. I doubt I could do what I do otherwise. I'm constantly having views challenged that I wasn't even conscious I held - always a good thing. Perhaps that's the beginning of all productive thought, not discovering the views and beliefs of other people or learning about other cultures but learning about yourself. I can't remember who I read that suggested before you can understand anyone else, you must understand yourself first.

*My definition of culture as being based not just on ethnicity but age, domicile, economic status, religious beliefs, family traditions, etc.

GTB - There's a lot to be said for intuition as well As I just said, it's all to do with finding balance.

<<...I'm sure they also have to work around me being the way I am, which must seem strange to them.>>

Now that I think about it, I'm sure that the non-deep-thinkers around me just assume that my life is empty. Their aversion to deep thought (quite 'normal', IME) leads them to assume it doesn't exist, I suspect. So the time I spend thinking must be some kind of catatonic episode, or something similar.

What an odd thought! Still, now I've come up with it, it does seem to explain one or two things.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

This is our day for agreement, deackie. <> Intuition, AIUI, is the visible aspect of the workings of our unconscious minds. Anyone else into the unconscious, or shall I leave the subject here and move on?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

I am currently intending to gradually improve my physical fitness over the next year and beyond, as I intend to join the police and not only need to pass the fitness test to get in, I also need to be fairly fit to cope with it well. It's also generally good for me.

I'm not sure if we have a duty to society to be physically fit, but I will say that while I'm a cop, I'd rather I was fit and everyone else wasn't, if you see what I mean.

So we actually have a duty to be unfit so that if we break the law we are easier to chase

*needs a to cope with the alternate reality in which P-C and I agree, twice! *

From my perspective as a future police officer who isn't too keen on doing lots of running to catch people, yes.

It's not particularly the running that bothers me - endorphins released when you exercise are one of the best pleasure drugs in the world, and totally safe, legal and free too - but rather the not-particularly-awe-inspiring scene at the end when you either give up and collapse panting while they get away, or have to gasp for air while attempting to inform them they're nicked and that they don't have to say anything etc. etc. etc. Oh, and handcuff them as well. All without falling over. That's the bit I'm not looking forward to!

To be technical, the duty would be not to break the law in the first place. But come on, who does that?

As to people who can't read, the only people i know who can't read can't because of a mental disease. Would anyone be comfortable elaborating on a counterexample?

Well, when people talk about things like that these days, they usually talk about 'functional illiteracy' - where people may be able to read and write in basic terms, but can't use those skills for useful things, like composing letters, or understanding letters from the bank, reading newspapers and things like that (although one could argue about the value of reading a newspaper, it is a skill that people should have, because then they can read humorous novels as well). Figures for that are worryingly high, and I have no idea why - is it just because people don't care enough to have put in any effort when they're in school? Some people are leaving without GCSE English, and I find it hard to imagine that none of those who don't get it aren't intellectually capable of at least a pass grade at Foundation Tier.

You'd be amazed how many people can't read, and not through mental disease. People are so embarrassed though that they hide it exceptionally well. One example is asking to take away a form they are required to fill in so they can check it in more detail at their leisure. This gives them the opportunity to get someone else to fill it in for them. I know one man who can't read but can understand numbers, he never knows the name of the horse he bets on but always knows the colours and the odds. He's very good at working out his potential winnings too! The big problem is people missing out on things because they can't read, eg. not getting full benefits, not attending hospital appointments. I do know of a whole family where only the daughter can read. Is that enough elaboration?

I'd say that's an excellent counterexample.

There's also the ongoing advertising campaign in the UK to get those who can't read or write to attend courses. Adverts are expensive, so I assume that those who authorised the expenditure know that there are people out there who could benefit....

I wonder how the percentage of people who leave our education system without being able to read and write compares with those that pass their GCSE and A-level exams? Part of me wants to hear that 60% of people pass their A-levels, but 70% are unable to read. But that's just me being perverse, and this *is* a serious discussion. Isn't it? Besides, deackie might get upset with me....

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"