Is that supposed to be a hard question? Obviously the person that thinks they know it all are a pain in the ass to those of us that do.
Quote by: werecat
Convince him of what?
How do we convince a person who is stuck on the supremacy of his own ideas, even when we see how destructive they are?
Hell no. If the intelligent and educated man is newly aware of his condition as the kingmaker of authority then he is easily trumped by wisdom and experience.
Does intelligence and education trump wisdom and experience?
Sure thing but to find those less cerebral takes some doing. But But let me clarify. The culling of the herd would go something like this:
Are those with a higher degree of intelligence somewhat obligation to society, to try and correct the errors of those less cerebral?
Curtis & Leroy saw an ad in the Starkville Daily News Newspaper in Starkville, MS. and bought a mule for $100. The farmer agreed to deliver the mule the next day. The next morning the farmer drove up and said, "Sorry, fellows, I have some bad news, the mule died last night."Curtis & Leroy replied, "Well, then just give us our money back."The farmer said, "Can't do that. I went and spent it already." They said, "OK then, just bring us the dead mule." The farmer asked, "What in the world ya'll gonna do with a dead mule?" Curtis said, "We gonna raffle him off." The farmer said, "You can't raffle off a dead mule!" Leroy said, "We shore can! Heck, we don't hafta tell nobody he's dead!" A couple of weeks later, the farmer ran into Curtis & Leroy at the Piggly Wiggly grocery store and asked."What'd you fellers ever do with that dead mule?" They said,"We raffled him off like we said we wuz gonna do.." Leroy said,"Shucks, we sold 500 tickets fer two dollars apiece and made a profit of $998." The farmer said,"My Lord, didn't anyone complain?" Curtis said, "Well, the feller who won got upset. So we gave him his two dollars back." Curtis and Leroy now work for the government. They're overseeing the Bailout Program. So I figure it will be out of the goodness of my heart and teaching them not so cerebral at the same time to run a scam here and there to see who is who and benefit me and them at the same time. Win Win.
Hardest thing is to determine working definitions and agree on 'em. Assuming understanding of another's position is not without risk when crafting a cutting response. More than once it takes two or three pages for combatants, er, participants in a discussion, to realize that they are both arguing the same position. Also more than once the discussion breaks down over imagined personal insults when it is only ideas that are under fire. Both sides can be so enamored of the hormonal rush that comes when explaining or in defense of their own belief dependent reality. It is hard to be skeptical of one's own positions and still get the dopamine rush of its righteousness, but it is, I believe, necessary to a civil debate. Eventually that exercise in skepticism can compel the hormonal satisfaction also.
Do they have the right to flaunt the degrees they have mastered, and talk down to others, or should they, If they do enter into a conversation, respect those who they deem less informed?
Oh, please beat me.
(These questions have anything to do with anyone from this forum. The last time I posted this I had several people fighting as to who I was talking about. Believe me, if I have issues with others, I will not target anyone on the open board, but you darn sure can expect a PM.)