Are the Americans as dumb as everyone says?

[ForrestGump]

I'd say yes and no.

Seriously, blanket statements are basically doomed to failure, inherently, when it comes to accuracy. But I think the stats show -- as does even a cursory look around at US mass culture, for that matter -- that the US is way behind the rest of the world academically and has been progressively dumbed down over the decades. I've not yet been to a place where the general populace seemed quite as dense as is the case in the US....no...wait, that's not right...it's not necessarily dense, but lacking in education, despite high levels of education, if you know what I mean. A willful ignorance that is tremendously offensive to me, at least, and that -- combined with ethnocentric arrogance -- defines the 'Ugly American' archetype that is all too real and that hugely taints Americans' image overseas. Actually, that archetype is now official US policy.

But I digress.

I think it's also true that the US has among its populace -- homegrown or otherwise -- some of the most phenomenal minds of our times, minds honed to a keen edge by the educational and other resources available here (that, sadly, are all too often underutilized, hoarded, or squandered). Americans are undoubtedly no less capable of learning than are people of any other country, but I think that way too many have bought into a unique kind of laziness, a laziness perhaps born of being a superpower (an imperial power of any kind that's been on top too long and had it too easy, for that matter) and that's reinforced daily, at every turn, by media messages.

That the US boasts such a frighteningly large bloc of uniformed/misinformed and intellectually lazy (even contemptuous of intellectuals) citizens is shameful and, for the world's sole (currently) superpower, exceedingly dangerous. We've already seen some of this in action, with the witch-hunt aimed at Bill Clinton and the subsequent bloodless coup and declaration of war against all who "are not with us," but there are other dimensions that are also of great concern. Certainly, one of my pet peeves is that US citizens are so lacking in science education and unable to understand or create/service the technology that we rely upon more and more. We're intellectually outsourced, to an extent...a power like the US has a responsibility to ensure that its citizenry is educated accordingly, not lagging behind everyone else on the planet. In my own experience thus far, I've been to third-world countries where the average Joseph knew more about geography, world affairs, and English grammar than sweems to be true of most of the Americans I've randomly met (certainly outside of academia, a realm that has obviously skewed my perception a little toward the optimistic).

First person to call me an intellectual snob gets a pre-emptive "Cheney yourself" from me -- I hate intelelctual snobs, with a passion, but I am geneuinely concerned about this country, in this respect, and have been for a long time. Of course, anyone who responds is liable to be another who's mostly looking in at the problem from the outside, even if as a teacher or someone else daily fighting the uphill battle to shape up the minds of the unwilling while keeping the willing contingent (whatever proportion they may be, and I'm sure it's different in different localities) from becoming disillusioned.

Keep 'em dumb, fat, and happy -- a principle that's been working for dictators for a long time (though many opt for the dumb-emaciated-tremblingwithfear alternate).

[Snoggera]

1. What?

I don't get it.

:shrug:

oh well, now to finish my reading of The Pet Goat.

[physioex]

4. How will you know which way to hold it?

:shrug:

[ForrestGump]

8. He could always ask a Canadian

Eh?

[ForrestGump]

5. Let's spell it out together with blocks

:P

[JitterbugPerfume]

2. in a word

yes

but I might be a bit biased---I live in Indiana

[ForrestGump]

6. Indiana? No, I said 'dumb,' 'not 'bigoted'

:o

I'd hate to be a black person living in at least certain parts of Indiana...I saw more overt racism there than I did in far longer a time living in the South. I think the Klan has long been more a presence there than in most of the South, too.

Still, there're some nice places there and, obviously, good people.

[JitterbugPerfume]

19. dumb and bigoted???

HELP ME

[FlashHarry]

3. Which Americans? You used the definite article, I noticed.

Though giving an entire 290,000,000-person populace a pass/fail grade on "intelligence" might prove problematic. You may want to break it down demographically.

[ForrestGump]

7. I meant Americans who are not you or I

Just to clarify...

[Snoggera]

9. I still don't get it

:+

Now what damn page was I on????? CRAP! I have to start over AGAIN!

[ForrestGump]

12. Don't worry about it...you're not alone

If your avatar's indicator of where you live, surely you've been told, when out of state, that you spoke great English. :D

I know it happened to me when I had a New Mexico plate. People asking me what brought me to the US, how long I was staying for, and complimenting me on how good my English was. At least they were nice, and not xenophobic.

And I found it very disturbing to, years later, see that the state had added "USA" to the license plates, as in "New Mexico, USA." I don't recall any other state's plates toting the "USA" thing around.

That's pretty sad.

Viva Neuvo Mexico...make a run for the border.

[Snoggera]

14. I'll never travel out of state again

not after that Indiana thing I read about. No way. Nope. Nada.

Now, where did I put that book this time? Not only real goats run away, it seems! Damn that pet goat. He's caused me so much trouble.

[ForrestGump]

18. And, as proof that Americans aren't the only one, a German girl

who was a friend of a friend (said friend is a native Hoosier who lived in Indy at that time) arrived at Indianapolis' airport and was -- genuinely -- upset that no Indians were at the airport to greet her. She expected warriors on horseback with the warpaint, bows and lances...the whole thing.

[SheilaT]

10. The trashing of the

public schools for the last couple of decades has led many people to conclude that all schools (except the one our own kid attends) are terrible. But if they're all so bad here, then why are thousands of foreigners clamoring every day to get into our colleges? Why do we still produce Nobel Prize winners at a far greater rate than any other country?

Maybe, despite all the genuine flaws, our schools aren't so bad after all.

But I do agree that there is a great deal of willful ignorance, that much of what passes for secondary education here is simply some kind of narrow technical training. It's difficult to get into a real discussion of ideas anymore.

[ForrestGump]

16. The dichotomy between the Nobel Prize winners and the average Freeper

is only slightly more pronounced than the disparities in quality of education among geographic zones in the US. Seems like some states have far better schools than others -- the prairie states, for example -- but there're also much-discussed differences on more local levels.

As for the quality of US education, in general, the way I've always seen it is that the 'liberalization' of education in the '60s (etc) was predominantly destructive and that lowered standards and who-knows-what-else have left many Americans with a fairly hollow shell as their education through to university levels. At undergrad levels, things pick up but -- and even examination of textbooks used and the level of lecture material given will show this -- US unviersities are still behind those in the other countries that I'm familiar with. A first-year student in Country X may be using source material and dealing with concepts that are only introduced in the third year in a comparable US-institution course. I find it very sad that, when I encounter an American university student who has a passion for learning and a true interest in the subject, I am surprised (and delighted) -- that should be the norm. You shouldn't just go to university because everyone goes to university.

Now, the US has a very high per-capita attendance at university -- and some students should even be there -- but I believe that, by the time they finish, most are not up to the level of their overseas counterparts. I don't think that's so much an artefact of a smaller (more 'élite') proportion of university students in most other countries as it is an indicator of some kind of inbuilt restraint on the US educational system(s). Basically, I think that (not entirely, but too much) Americans are bing sold out by their own educational insitutions, certainly up 'til high school graduation and, in some ways, even through university.

Graduate school is where the US' educational riches are really concentrated. Hoarded. Yep, it's grad students -- not the lowly, faceless masses of undergrads who're stuck 500 to a room in Moonie-like lecture experiences -- who interact with these Nobel laureates and get to use all the cool equipment and other doodads that concentrate a university's research and educational budget. And, in some fields (in engineering I believe it was up around 75%, years back), most grad students are not US citizens...most of them will go back home to apply their knowledge to their home country's own benefit. That's great, and anyone here who knows me at all offline will know that I would probably be the last person to begrudge fur'ners coming in here and getting a PhD in whatever subject, but the fact is that it's not doing the US a ton of good.

I don't know the concrete steps necessary to work toward a solution, but I do see the problem, and it seems to me that upping the level of education at primary school and high school is going to benefit everybody, result in a more informed citizenry (of course, not what people like the Bush junta want to see), and be a natural ramp for improving quality of US tertiary education for people who want to go there.

[SheilaT]

27. You are generally describing

the state of undergraduate education as it exists at the large public universities. The smaller liberal arts colleges are typically much more rigorous, do NOT involve huge lecture sections, and are filled with students who are much more likely to be truly engaged in learning.

[ForrestGump]

28. That's true -- I'm coming from the POV of a research institution

If I were doing undergrad, I'd go to a small school...either a small college or two years at a community colelge, to get out of the way what are 'cattle' classes at other schools, and then on to a four-year institution.

Also, though there are plenty of exceptions, teachers at smaller colleges tend to be better. By that I mean that too many profs at large universities resent the time away from research that teaching requires and some, the scummiest of all, take it out on the undergrads. Smaller schools tend to focus more on quality teaching. The same is true of many overseas universities.

Also, research universities hire faculty (typically -- I've seen it way too often) solely on the basis of grant performance, especially if the potential faculty member has a big grant already, and they don't care about how good they are as a teacher. The assumption has long been -- as erroneous as can be -- that a good researcher will make a good teacher. Uh-uh. Add that to the fact that big universities still tend to undervalue their teaching faculty (most state schools, for example, have research, teaching, and service as three stated goals but it's usually only research that's actually the object of any effort or reward) and it's a disaster.

Good teachers at big universities are rarely appreciated, certainly fiscally and in terms of promotions, whereas research stars are highly valued. What makes a good university lecturer that much more remarkable in such schools is that they're likely staying on top of research and grad-student responsibilities (also publishing, etc) AND spending the many, many hours needed to teach effectively -- these people, some of whom cannot sustain that effort, are my heroes.

[Yavin4]

11. I Recall A Charles Barkley Clip

Your post reminds me of former NBA star Charles Barkley talking to his young daughter. He asked her what did she learn in school today, and she hesitated. He then said to her, "Look, you can afford to grow up dumb, but you're not going to be". A large, and growing, percentage of Americans are under the illusion that they can "afford to be dumb" because America is the lone super-power.

[Rabrrrrrr]

13. I think that, in a general sense, yes

Lacking in basic education in the humanities and liberal arts

Lacking in basic education in mathematics and science (how many people will hie for cover in a thunderstorm for fear of lightning, then go spend $50 a week on lottery tickets? Or think that flying is SUPER dangerous, but gladly get in their cars 5-10 times a day? Or otherwise can't differentiate between a percentage, an absolute value, and a comparitive value? Etc.)

Lacking in basic understanding of our own language, let alone a paucity of foreign languages

Mostly, I don't think we need to be dumb - I don't there is anythig inherent in the American "race" that precludes being smart. It's just that the repubs and religious conservatives (of all faiths) have gotten such a stronghold here that being smart and informed is forwned upon (both by the government, but also by society in general). The bookworms at school get picked on; the idiot football playing morons who do the bullying are lauded as heroes. People who are intellectually curious and knowledgable about a broad range of topics and cultures and history are laughed at and vociferously attacked as dangerous and suspect because they are smart, and a fairly uneducated uncurious man who "Sees things as they are and calls it from the hip" is applauded as the new messiah president.

Yes, overall, America is dumb. And it's sad, because it doesn't have to be, but we have a large segment of authority that wants to keep America dumbed down.

[Sandpiper]

15. I wouldn't say dumb

I'd say ignorant.

Your average American is very ignorant of the world outside of the United States, and generally has a very poor knowledge of geography. They're extremely ignorant about U.S. hisotry, let alone world history, particularly when it comes to matters of U.S. foreign policy. The most startling example of that was everyone asking "why did they do this?" following the attacks on 9/11.

I'd say this mostly stems from a couple of things. First is the fact that, like you said, we have a large segment of the electorate that is openly hostile to science and intellectual progress. Intellectualism will not flourish in a climate of hostility.

The second thing is, we as a society no longer place the same value on education that we once did. The chief concern of the powers that be is that school children grow up to be good consumers. Their reading, writing, and 'rithmetic is now secondary to the concern of whether they'll grow up and want to buy cheeseburgers, cars, stereo equipment, DirecTV, and all sorts of other crap that they don't really need.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. I couldn't help noticing that

one of the water aerobics instructors at our Y, a refugee from an African country, has perfect command of many of the grammatical distinctions that baffle native speakers. When I taught on the college level, my foreign students, with few exceptions, were a joy to teach. I would have happily accepted a whole classroom full of foreign students who wanted to learn Japanese. (The ESL instructors just loved their students, with the exception of a few spoiled rich kids.)

I don't think Americans are stupid in the sense of "born unable to excel academically." However, I think our culture, especially the culture promoted in the mass media, teaches people to be ignorant. All that's important in the world of the mass media are sports, celebrities, pop music, blockbuster movies, fashion, and reality TV. Reading material should be limited to Sports Illustrated and People.

For years it's been part of my daily ritual to buy newspapers and read them in a coffeeshop. At least once a week, some young man comes up to me and asks to see the sports pages. I offer him the whole paper, since I'm through with it. No, he just wants the sports pages.

There's nothing wrong with sports, but they're being promoted as supremely important, so much so that every child in America must participate in them or face harm to his or her future character and achievement, so much so that 1/3 of every local newscast is devoted to them. The athletes in a school are treated as young gods and goddesses. We are told that sports build character (as they did for O.J. Simpson, Mike Tyson, and Tonya Harding), teamwork, and responsibility, and the implication is that this is the only way to do so.

Meanwhile, arts instruction is being cut way back all around the country. I don't think this is a coincidence, because artistic activity gets you in touch with the deepest places of your being and is both individualistic and cooperative. Told to paint a picture of the same tree, no two people will paint it exactly the same. No two actors will play Hamlet exactly the same. No two musicians will play a piece or sing a song exactly the same. Practitioners of the arts spend long hours alone, delving into their innermost hearts.

Yet the arts require cooperation. If you're in a play or a musical ensemble, you learn teamwork and responsibility as certainly as any athlete does. If you don't know your part or don't pay attention to your cues or don't practice or aren't where you're supposed to be when it's your turn to stand out, you can ruin the whole performance.

The right wing loves sports, because they're regimented and don't leave much time for thinking, and hates true art, because it's inherently thoughtful, and anyone who's any good is going to break the rules in an intelligent way.

The right wing also doesn't want us to know history or geography or anything else that is not strictly necessary for being a cog in the corporate machine. It is to their advantage when the pop culture makes fun of readers, intellectuals, artists, and musicians.

The right wing also loves it that science is relegated to PBS, because everyone knows that PBS is for geeks, and crazy, ultraliberal pinko geeks at that. (You don't believe me? Ask a random bunch of high school or college students if they watch PBS.)

Where does this dumbing down come from? The right wing didn't originate it, even though it is definitely to their advantage. I believe that it comes from the pioneer ethos, an environment where you needed people who could chop down trees and shoot themselves some dinner, not people who could recite Shakespeare or do higher math. We never had a national system of education, and each community was free to organize its own schools as it saw fit, so that schooling emphasized "practicalities." Being able to read was good; reading "too much" was bad.

We've now had several generations of this, and the result is a nation that is well-schooled for certain jobs, but not educated in the sense of having general knowledge.

And they are suckers for the Republicans, as the GOP presents them with talking points to rattle around in their heads in lieu of logical thoughts.

[luaneryder]

23. Your post brings to mind a neighbor

here in these backwoods. Her grand daughter was engaged to a young man at a nearby liberal arts university. One semester before the young man was to have graduated (with plans to go on to UNC grad school) he dropped out under pressure from his soon to be in laws so he could go to work as a carpenter helper with daddy in law. When I asked this woman why her grandson in law gave up school her reply was that "not everybody can make their living out of a book." So to marry into this family this guy gave up his dream of a better life to drive nails for a few years until his health gives out with nothing to fall back on. These folk think that too much education is some sort of sin. Sad, really.

[Karenina]

26. "We live in a culture that makes us stupid,

keeps us stupid, and gives us the arrogance to think that in our stupidity we are superior."

Malcolm X

[Nay]

20. May I add that shipping tech and science jobs overseas

to save on "big" salaries also discourages achievement? This country isn't shipping those jobs overseas because there's no one to do them here -- they're shipping them because they don't want to pay high salaries to ANYBODY, no matter how much they learn or how hard they work.

You certainly can't actively discourage such achievement and expect people to want to learn. What for? There are no jobs to be had in those fields -- they're all in India and China.

[Snoggera]

21. Uh, scuse me

but has anyone seen a goat around? He's about yay high with a small beard. No mustache.

Thanks!

[moof]

22. Indiana? No, I said 'dumb,' 'not 'bigoted'

America, ... dumb because it is bigoted or
bigoted because it is dumb ?

It seems it is a very large factor.

As long as people are, pick one,
(dumb, ignorant, unlightened, uninformed, dissonant)
they can claim they are not racist with no shame.

It also helps them to ignore the fact that they are all enslaved.

And of course the big blue marble as well as the big sleep are easier
to face if you are not so enlightened that you realize that
this is all there is or ever will be.

Thanks CanuckAmok, dissonance certainly explains a lot.

http://www.opednews.com/Tripp_they_just_don.htm

[Snoggera]

24. You didn't tell me where my goat is

Pickles and Mommy Babs are going to be upset with ALL of you.

Oh, wait a minute. It was only a book. Not a real goat.

Never mind!

(You made a good point there, BTW)

[moof]

25. Sorry, thought the goat question was rhetorical, but

the same people got your goat that
have us all by the short hairs,
their boots on our throats
and their hands in our pockets.