Elitism

[1137]

How do you guys feel about the elitist attitude? That sense of a superiority over the majority of the rest of the species. Not based on race or religion but based on one mind versus others. I've noticed I tend to see the elitist attitude as negative, yet I cannot fathom why.

 

[Infinitum]

I think most people are elitists in one way or another. We don't like it especially when we're the ones being looked down or when it turns into obvious arrogance. Still elitism is something that comes naturally to everyone. I think it's a remnant of a type of tribal thinking: "my tribe is better than your tribe". I know I'm sometimes an elitist. I do my best not to be the type of elitist that brings others down because of it.

 

[ScottySatan]

I think being elitist and approving of elitism are two different things. I think being elitist is very common.

 

[Adramelek]

All LHP philosophy and religion is elitist. The LHP philosophy was never ment for the mundane masses in a truly christian society. "Natural religious systems are most effective for organizing and maintaining natural structures in society, in the objective universe (OU), and within those segments of the subjective universe (SU) of the believer which still may be dependent on organic models. On the other hand, non-natural systems are most effective for the understanding and conscious development of the Self, which in turn may have an effect on the SU and OU themselves." - Michael A. Aquino, Black Magic

Xeper.
/Adramelek\

 

[1137]

Non-natural? Lol

 

[nash8]

How do you guys feel about the elitist attitude? That sense of a superiority over the majority of the rest of the species. Not based on race or religion but based on one mind versus others. I've noticed I tend to see the elitist attitude as negative, yet I cannot fathom why.

My problem is unfounded elitism. Many of the managers at my work tend to think that they are better than me for one reason or another. Because they hold a meaningless title that is generally viewed as more prestigious than mine, or because they make more money than me, or because they think they're smarter than me.

After repeated intellectual discussion with most of them, they have either clung to one or both of the the first two reasons, or have ceased to continue their elitist attitude with me. In the case of them making more money than me, I can somewhat accept it, but considering my view of the importance of money vs. knowledge, ehh. But as far as the title goes, naw homie.

But as for elitism in general, there is no universally objective quality that makes anyone better than anyone else, so I personally believe that all elitism is unfounded in one way or another.

 

[Erebus]

But as for elitism in general, there is no universally objective quality that makes anyone better than anyone else, so I personally believe that all elitism is unfounded in one way or another.

Not Universally objective no, but would you consider Albert Einstein equal to Billybob who married his cousin and believes the world is 6000 years old? I wouldn't.
That in essence is where elitism rises from, the notion that not everybody is equal. This doesn't have to be a value judgement of a person as a whole either, it can instead be an assessment of their skills. I am fairly useless with computers for example but can be an eloquent writer, this immediately places me below some in the field of IT and above others in the field of literature.

I will agree though that unfounded elitism is irritating. Any moron can call themselves elite, but not everybody can demonstrate why.

 

[Adramelek]

Non-natural? Lol

You really don't like that word do you?

 

[1137]

You really don't like that word do you?

Haha, it does not compute.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think some people are better than others based on pure character. But it's best to keep it in check. You're not automatically better than anyone else simply because you follow one belief over another. Some people just go up their own *** with it.

 

[Quintessence]

I do not find elitist attitudes useful for one main reason: value is relative and contextual. Failing to recognize this and putting yourself on a pedestal will create two critical problems: 1) You will overlook your own weaknesses, and 2) You will overlook the strengths of others. A balanced and honest assessment of strengths and weaknesses is wiser. In particular, it is vital to note that all strengths are weaknesses and vice vera, depending on context and personal values. I've noticed that a person's greatest "strength" is usually also their greatest "weakness" in other contexts.

 

[Orias]

How do you guys feel about the elitist attitude? That sense of a superiority over the majority of the rest of the species. Not based on race or religion but based on one mind versus others. I've noticed I tend to see the elitist attitude as negative, yet I cannot fathom why.

Hmm...I don't really think much about it. I think if you're aware of what you can do, including being aware of what others are capable of doing, it should be made known, and this also comes with knowing when to exploit this....how you exploit it I guess it what constitutes as "elitist". By any means, I would consider "elitist" to be without genuine concern for another persons development (which is also extremely subjective).

I think for the most part, "elitism" comes from not actually knowing how to handle a situation or person that may clearly be less trained in an area than the elitist.

I've encountered this, and it honestly makes it easier to overcome and move on to the next goal, because these people actually have no idea what they're dealing with. So its just best to move on to someone or group of people who does have an idea.

 

[nash8]

Not Universally objective no, but would you consider Albert Einstein equal to Billybob who married his cousin and believes the world is 6000 years old? I wouldn't.

Equal no, but better or worse no as well. If Billybob wanted to marry his cousin and believe the world is 6000 years old than that's his business. If he was happy, treated people with respect, and didn't try to forcefully impose his will on others than I would judge him as no better or worse than Einstein, just different. Nothing, in my opinion is equal, but I view elitism as the belief that one is better than another person based on a specific quality or qualities.

Would you consider a Tibettan monk and Einstein equal?

By your post, it seems as though you place intellgience as your meter of equality, but there are so many different types of intelligence it's hard for me to nail one down as better than the others. If Einstein's toilet broke and Billybob was a knowledgeable plumber, who's more intelligent. (Total stereotyping here )

But I digress, if there was one thing I would consider to substantiate elitism, it would be a high level of knowledge in many different aspects of life.

That in essence is where elitism rises from, the notion that not everybody is equal. This doesn't have to be a value judgement of a person as a whole either, it can instead be an assessment of their skills. I am fairly useless with computers for example but can be an eloquent writer, this immediately places me below some in the field of IT and above others in the field of literature.

I wouldn't view you as elite though in the context that you are inherently better than anyone as you mentioned that you would be below someone in a particular field. Someone who considered themselves elite, would either deem IT irrelevant, or claim that they would be better than another if they desired to take up IT studies. But being qualified as elite in a particular field, I definitely agree with that.

I will agree though that unfounded elitism is irritating. Any moron can call themselves elite, but not everybody can demonstrate why.

It's even worse when they demonstrate unquestionably why they are not, yet still think they are.

 

[Knowledge Gourmet]

You're not automatically better than anyone else simply because you follow one belief over another.

No, but you could be much more likely to be intelligent...

IE atheists vs christians

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, but you could be much more likely to be intelligent...

IE atheists vs christians

Even that's not always true. There's many dumber than a box of rocks atheists and Christians who are quite intelligent and wise. You can't really generalize.

 

[Knowledge Gourmet]

The higher your IQ is the less likely you are to be religious.

Look at scientists, Nobel recipients, etc

 

[1137]

The higher your IQ is the less likely you are to be religious.

Look at scientists, Nobel recipients, etc

Sources. Be aware I already know you are incorrect. Hell, science today was birthed by religious men. Newton, Galileo, the Greeks, science came out of things like Alchemy.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The higher your IQ is the less likely you are to be religious.

Look at scientists, Nobel recipients, etc

I don't care about arguments over IQ. People use IQ data to buttress their prejudices all the time. Racists love to babble on about IQ data, for example.

 

[Orias]

The higher your IQ is the less likely you are to be religious.

Look at scientists, Nobel recipients, etc

Perhaps...

I've noticed that people with higher intelligence aren't "religious" by common definition, the more intelligent people tend to have more extreme and well...intelligent views on things. From my own personal observation people with high IQs tend to be (a)gnostic and pan(en)theistic.

 

[nash8]

No, but you could be much more likely to be intelligent...

IE atheists vs christians

Yeah I've seen that argument before, and "scientific" studies that support it. The problem is that 2% of the world is athiest, and 31% of the world is Christian. I can almost gaurantee you that there are more "intelligent" Christians than athiests due to the law of averages.

Even that's not always true. There's many dumber than a box of rocks atheists and Christians who are quite intelligent and wise. You can't really generalize.

Well said.

The higher your IQ is the less likely you are to be religious.

Look at scientists, Nobel recipients, etc

Formally religious, I would agree. But religious in the sense of some sort of spiritual discipline, I would overwhelmingly argue no.

Sources. Be aware I already know you are incorrect. Hell, science today was birthed by religious men. Newton, Galileo, the Greeks, science came out of things like Alchemy.

Indeed.

I don't care about arguments over IQ. People use IQ data to buttress their prejudices all the time. Racists love to babble on about IQ data, for example.

Very prudent point sir. However, what about the Ashkenazi Jews?
Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But then again, 600 years of intellectual training has nothing to do with intelligence level pertaining to a specific area, right?

Perhaps...

I've noticed that people with higher intelligence aren't "religious" by common definition, the more intelligent people tend to have more extreme and well...intelligent views on things. From my own personal observation people with high IQs tend to be (a)gnostic and pan(en)theistic.

Exactly, I am actually so intelligent I have moved pass the whole agnostic thing, and straight to the pan(en)thiestic thing.