Thoughts on anti-intellectualism – pt. 1 of whatever

This evening I wondered whether part of the wider scorn towards intellectuals is due to the perceived nature of intellectuals. On a base value system where the strongest, toughest or most ‘alpha’ (along those lines) man ‘wins’, perhaps intellectuals are hated because many people find themselves being intellectuals out of social rejection for failing to pass that basic test – insight gained from viewing everything from a distance; compensation, if you will. Are intellectuals thus regarded as defective, for channeling their energy into mental pursuits in lieu of having the ‘umph’ to follow one’s simple instincts?

Of course, as an arbitrarily traditionalist/’paleo’/third position/new right sort, I believe the idea that mental and physical prowess are or should be mutually exclusive to be poisonous, but the fact is that the brains/brawn dichotomy exists at the very least as an abstraction in most people’s subconscious minds. There is an ingrown resentment towards the man that does not follow his impulses – that he lacks the manly essence that women crave.

What I really applaud about ‘game’ theory is it helps the higher-plane thinkers internalise actions that come naturally to the proles (who are essentially automatons to their evolutionary impulses). As the arguable bulwarks of civilisation, it is important that the higher castes stay in touch with their inner beasts and thus maintain sway over the female population – as well as being vigilant over the destructive elements of society, which thrive when they know the respectable elements shirk away from conflict.

I apologise for the tangential nature of this one. I hope maybe a handful of you are on the same page.

~ by CallistoRising on July 4, 2011.

One Response to “Thoughts on anti-intellectualism – pt. 1 of whatever”

  1. A rather sharp German fellow once put it like this:
    “Consider how kindly and heartily a girl who is passably pretty will welcome one who is downright ugly. Physical advantages are not thought so much of in the case of man, though I suppose you would rather a little man sat next to you than one who was bigger than yourself. This is why, amongst men, it is the dull and ignorant, and amongst women, the ugly, who are always popular and in request.”

    The human brain comes with an enormous metabolic cost, which we evolved at the expense of everything else; you can be both smart and strong relative to other humans, but you’ll never be as strong as a chimpanzee because your brain requires too much sustenance. As such, I think humans instinctively recognize that most real advantages lie in the brain, and that may be why we resent people with better brains than our own. Also, while you can have both brains and muscle, you need brains to be in command. Lacking extraordinary brainpower means that you’re going to spend your life being told what to do, which can engender resentment.

    As to remaining in touch with the inner beast, I don’t think it’s a big problem. When you become more intelligent, the inner beast just manifests differently – one wants to conquer continents and build corporations rather than beat up somebody. And as you pointed out, there’s nothing a man-beast can do through instinct that an intellectual can’t do through analysis (e.g. game).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: