Is there are reason you guys are so anti-intellectual? I understand there are legit...

Is there are reason you guys are so anti-intellectual? I understand there are legit, true-blue morons out there who assume they're smarter just for having a degree, and I think that might be why a lot of people as a reaction are starting to shit talk degrees in general, but I'm curious as to your reasoning.

I've noticed a lot of people, here and in other alt-right areas, tend to talk down to people who have an education as if they know less for having that. They're quick to use the "just cuz you have a piece of paper.." line, along with many others to justify themselves.

Yes, you can be born with an innate intelligence and curiosity, but if you do nothing with it, you probably won't be smarter than somebody who went to school focused on something, and studied a specific topic.

There is a reasonable degree of skepticism on this board about the quality of the education people claim to receive.

And when you look at some of the talking points that can often be found coming from Academia lately, I am not at liberty to discuss it in an open hearing.

>"focused on something, and studied a specific topic"
>I know about fish clades or women's studies
>therefore I'm the authority on politics
>nevermind that I never could find a job out of school and spent $40000 on a degree I "dreamed" of
You're no more "specifically educated" than the mechanic who fixes your car that you feel so vastly superior to.
Fuck off.

The one that really sticks out to me is this rhetoric of "social constructs".

You're going to see a lot of people reject anything you say on that basis immediately, but then you're going to have people like me, who actually knowledge they are but still understand that the fact that something is a social construct is not immediate justification to just dismiss it off hand. Social constructs are malleable to some extent in that they are subjective interpretations that reside in grey area, but they're not lies.

So when someone says something like, "race is a social construct", there is usually an additional implication implied by pointing that out, and usually that is that race itself is bullshit (unless we're talking about how much black lives matter).

You've got college professors who are intentionally taking advantage of the vagueness in half-truth soundbytes toward an agenda and when the students walk out of the room they are oblivious to the actual meaning of the words they are repeating.

Generalizing to the max. Why would we listen to a dumb fuck like you?

sage

We value good degrees, but to lump all degrees together as valuable is idiotic.

I don't need a fucking degree to prove you wrong.


But oh no if I manage to do that your asshole clenches and you refuse to believe it.

It's called a sense of humility, asshat and that's the one quality that fucking vanishes if you consider yourself an "intellectual"

i hope you realize that the way you talk gives away that youre not from here and therefore you look like an extreme shill, especially because you start out with a lie and then just go on like it wasnt one.

sage

>but I'm curious as to your reasoning.

Your classist notions that people with degrees are morally superior belong in a garbage can.

>you probably won't be smarter than somebody who went to school focused on something, and studied a specific topic.

If the topic pertains to medicine, mathematics, programming, etc. and they have a degree in it, their opinion is relevant.

If their degree is anything remotely like women's studies, intersectionalism, etc., then their opinion is worthless.

How is this hard for you to understand?

I would wager that this is the result of people holding to the idea that there is an absolute perception of reality. Usually tied to reason and logic.
This is probably the same phenomena as when people here without thought discredit certain 'feelings' as basis of argument.

I'm anti-academia more than anti-intellectual. The university system in America is the single greatest purveyor of white guilt and leftist dogma in the country. They find ways of supporting each and every depravity (i.e. trannies are actually the opposite sex and nature made a mistake) at the cost of the very social fabric of America. They've helped to turn Americans against each other by creating numerous special interest groups that all nip at each others' throats for a greater slice of the economic and social pie. "Intellectuals" in this country have created a race to the bottom wherein whoever is the most depraved, worthless, or disgusting is put on a pedestal as some sort of brave soul fighting against "injustice."

Our countries are increasingly filled with less-worthy citizens who have only managed to advance their station in our societies by bitching and complaining, rather than by doing anything of merit, and it's mostly due to so-called "intellectuals" in academia.

>t. very well-educated racist

I actually have one of these pieces of paper (masters degree in a STEM field), and the people I met at university were some of the most inane and bluepilled idiots I've ever seen. Not to mention that at least half of them aren't even legit smart, they just learn stuff by heart.

TL;DR: Unless you are already a skeptic or really smart, all university does is make you indoctrinated.

But emotional arguments are always going to be tainted with manipulation of a situation.

This is why it's so difficult to argue anything with the average woman. When a confrontation on being incorrect on something gets spun around into a personal attack. When a confrontation on being concerned with facts and impartiality about a black guy getting killed by the police becomes "whitesplaining", that's when we have a problem.

And the same thing happens on the right when anons spin EVERYTHING into a Jewish conspiracy whether it's true or not.

I learned way more white guilt in K-12 than I learned in my liberal arts school. I don't know what faggot classes you guys decided to take.

I have a degree from Michigan, and in a real subject too. As sad as it is Sup Forums, on average, is probably more intelligent than my average former classmate or TA.

Because "intellectuals" are a) spineless and b) are taught to inhale propaganda
In academia youre a left wing liberal by default due to all the propaganda around you
Just because you're "educated" does not mean you're better at spotting propaganda or are less affected by the msm.

"Intellectuals" also live in a bubble hence why so many are so gung-ho about shit that will never affect them
Go ask someone educted their thoughts on multiculturalism
Simply put they're out of touch and they will always be out of touch
A philosopher never makes for a good king

Oh and don't get anyone wrong
I hate normies too
No one sees the world for what it is

Luckily this breed of "intellectual" is about to see very hard times thanks to student loans

Also
>Other alt-right places
Get out
The alt-right is a made up term that only cucks use seriously

>I learned way more white guilt in K-12
Bullshit
I'm calling complete bullshit
What classes did you have to take freshman year?

I'm not depraved. I'm actually very aware that there is a problem in the transgender community and I speak out about abusing recent legal precedence concerning it.

We had to take general topics in history, art, english, lit classes a couple others. You never had to take a class heavy on white guilt. Overall we spent more time in K-12 learning about racism, the civil rights movement and the holocaust than I did in college.

>tfw Catholic schools K-12

That's a fair assertion, though. I never had to go to shitass public schools with the rest of the hoi polloi (thank God).

>getting a liberal arts degree
>getting a stemcuck degree when there are already a million chinks more educated and willing to work for less
lol

Every single group has some people that look down on others that disagree? It's called being a bigot. However, if you ask the same questions over and over again, criticize without offering a reasonable solution or don't even explain the solution (le socialists), you earn your flame.

Maybe you guys just don't remember or you fucked off in K-12, but a huge amount of the curriculum is required to be on the native american genocide, slavery, the civil rights movement and the holocaust. Remember your language arts, social studies, history and english classes?

In most cases probably would be correct to value rational arguments over emotional ones as they are more likely to be shared in our common perception of reality.
However doing this isn't always as easy as most people around here would claim.

Logic and reason might be more likely to be viewed similarly by different people but in the end they are still based in feelings just as emotional arguments.

It's not that we're remotely anti-intellectual, but rather, we choose not to stoop to the level of faggotry going back-and-forth discussing topics that have no merit (such as "why are cops racist and shooting so many blacks?", a total non-argument with no real basis). When confronted with idiocy, we simply toss out a quick retort, a clever meme, and call it a day.

Being an "intellectual" does not require one to stay on duty all the time and take the high road. Fuck that nonsense, come at us with a stupid question, get a short answer that will tell you to go fuck yourself. Pretty simple, mane.

What are you talking about?

Someone having a university education does not mean that that person is actually intelligent, wise, well informed, or capable of talking authoritatively on things.

Anyone who uses their education as a way of legitimising their argument has a poor argument to begin with, unless you're a literal expert in the field, or the subject is directly related to you area of study.

I have a history degree. That does not mean I can speak authoritatively on anything that happened in the past. Shit, I can't even think about anything I can talk about at all.

Some people I know with degrees are infinitely thicker than some people I know without degrees. I find a university education to be a very poor indicator of intelligence unless its a PHD, or unless its Law/finance/mathematics/physics related. And even then, some of the hyper intelligent people I know who studied mathematics at good universities are unbelievably naive and ignorant of the world.

Oy vey shut it down!!

>I find a university education to be a very poor indicator of intelligence

Fucking this. So many people conflate education with intelligence. I'm decently intelligent, but I don't think my education has much to do with it.

the bait is evolving

Getting a degree is just hoop jumping. All academia is hoop jumping.

It has absolutely no bearing on your intelligence. Probably only about 50% of any degree programs have any value whatsoever.

This is coming from someone with a degree, who has no student debt, who is not a NEET, because I got a fuck ton of academic scholarships. As someone with a degree, I would recommend that no high schoolers pursue a degree outside of STEM.

Indeed, and we should probably just draw the line where an argument is based on pure emotional response.

I'm putting myself in the electric chair here to demonstrate an easy example:
Pedos.

There are a lot of them about, and we'd really rather not have to acknowledge them at all, but they're out there, so encouraging pedos to be open about it at least gives those of us with an objection to this behavior to avoid them. This is a logical argument.

Already, I am having intentions read into my statements that I'm attempting to normalize and encourage pedophilia, even though I'm not. What I am concerned with is at least knowing that they won't get crucified for telling people so I at least have a fighting chance of avoiding them.

Found the Mexican intellectual.

Thing is, we are only ever going to be able to draw our own lines, at best influence a few others.

Adding to your example i think that most would agree with the reasoning you stated, though if we would say that the majority of people did not agree and instead considered the mere notion of encouraging pedophilia far out ways potential pros.
Now their reasoning out weighs yours through shear number of followers.

Now, to change this you would probably try and make a study showing that it helps to have pedos come forth.

This is what is handy with logic and empiric data,t here is very little subjectivity in it.

But lets say that the majority of people absolutely HATE pedos and rationalize your study is bullshit.

Now, who is right? Who's reasoning is better?

indoctrinated ≠ educated

Mine. I didn't have to invoke a fear response to make my case. I reserve the fear response as an afterthought, a consideration afforded to myself and others outside of primary focus in making the case.

My case of course is that we all have a right to know who we expose our kids to, and as of now, our fear response to pedos is to drag them into the street and put a bullet in their head.

The legal precedence here is already effective in that one can find out information about convicted sex offenders in their area.

We should be more concerned with prevention of crime than response to it.

>History, English, lit
>Not heavy on white guilt
Where did you go to school?

My uni also made us take cross cultural and inter cultural classes
The later about minorities in the West

I don't remember shit pre high school and I can tell you know my high school classes were not anywhere NEAR the same in terms of blatant agendas
Also you ignore the atmosphere of a college cause you're a faggot

Yes I do remember those classes
They never talked about white males being oppressors
They talked about oppression sure but not saying white males are the core oppressors

Besides we didn't have social studies

Maybe you just got lucky in your classes and teachers in college but don't try to pretend this isn't a cancer that has taken over academia
Especially not after this past year

Sciences, technical domains, engineering etc are worthy of praise.

Humanities are glorified hobbies.

Social sciences are cancer.

Lurk a book thread some time. I've bought nearly a hundred scholarly, nonfiction and history books since coming here. Start with Stephen Coughlin's Catastrophic Failure.

Now, I'm wise enough to understand that the atmosphere this creates is one that enables pedos to take advantage of the situation where one expects pedos to reveal themselves.

This is still a fear response.

If you're reasonable enough to be conscious that there are unspoken pedos about, then the argument is faulty by invoking the fear response.

The "slippery slope" that we all get a kick out of throwing out there, in spite of the fact that even dumb niggers in Congress appeal with, is still questionable when there are numerous citations that there has been no actual rise in sexual assaults when trannies go into the women's room in spite of this being a concern. I'm not saying this isn't a legitimate concern, but I'm saying that you might just find it more likely that actual sexual predators using the women's room will get their ass kicked by an actual tranny than you will see people pretending to be trannies just to rape women.