DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Is America getting dumber?

Susan Jacoby:
Is America getting dumber?


Call me elitist if you will, but we're becoming a nation of dummies


09:04 AM CDT on Sunday, March 9, 2008

"The mind of this country, taught to aim at low objects, eats upon itself." Ralph Waldo Emerson offered that observation in 1837, but his words echo with painful prescience in today's very different United States. Americans are in serious intellectual trouble – in danger of losing our hard-won cultural capital to a virulent mixture of anti-intellectualism, anti-rationalism and low expectations.

This is the last subject that any candidate would dare raise on the long and winding road to the White House. It is almost impossible to talk about the manner in which public ignorance contributes to grave national problems without being labeled an "elitist," one of the most powerful pejoratives that can be applied to anyone aspiring to high office. Instead, our politicians repeatedly assure Americans that they are just "folks," a patronizing term that you will search for in vain in important presidential speeches before 1980. (Just imagine: "We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain . . . and that government of the folks, by the folks, for the folks, shall not perish from the earth.") Such exaltations of ordinariness are among the distinguishing traits of anti-intellectualism in any era.

The classic work on this subject by Columbia University historian Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, was published in 1963, between the anti-communist crusades of the McCarthy era and the social convulsions of the late 1960s. Dr. Hofstadter saw American anti-intellectualism as a cyclical phenomenon that often manifested itself as the dark side of the country's democratic impulses in religion and education.

But today's brand of anti-intellectualism is less a cycle than a flood. If Dr. Hofstadter had lived long enough to write a modern-day sequel, he would have found that our era of 24/7 infotainment has outstripped his most apocalyptic predictions.

Dumbness, to paraphrase the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, has been steadily defined downward for several decades, by a combination of heretofore irresistible forces. These include the triumph of video culture over print (and by video, I mean every form of digital media); a disjunction between Americans' rising level of formal education and their shaky grasp of basic geography, science and history; and the fusion of anti-rationalism with anti-intellectualism.

First and foremost among the vectors of the new anti-intellectualism is video. The decline of book, newspaper and magazine reading is by now an old story. The drop-off is most pronounced among the young, but it continues to accelerate and afflict Americans of all ages and education levels.

Reading has declined not only among the poorly educated, according to a report by the National Endowment for the Arts. In 1982, 82 percent of college graduates read novels or poems for pleasure; two decades later, only 67 percent did. And more than 40 percent of Americans under 44 did not read a single book – fiction or nonfiction – over the course of a year. The proportion of 17-year-olds who read nothing more than doubled between 1984 and 2004. This time period, of course, encompasses the rise of personal computers, Web surfing and video games.

Does all this matter? Technophiles pooh-pooh jeremiads about the end of print culture as the navel-gazing of (what else?) elitists. In his book Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter, science writer Steven Johnson assures us that we have nothing to worry about. Sure, parents may see their "vibrant and active children gazing silently, mouths agape, at the screen." But these zombie-like characteristics "are not signs of mental atrophy. They're signs of focus."

Balderdash.

Despite an aggressive marketing campaign aimed at encouraging babies to watch videos, there is no evidence that focusing on a screen is anything but bad for infants and toddlers. In a study released last August, University of Washington researchers found that babies between 8 and 16 months recognized an average of six to eight fewer words for every hour spent watching videos.

I cannot prove that reading for hours in a treehouse creates more informed citizens than obsessing about Facebook profiles. But the inability to concentrate for long periods of time – as distinct from brief reading hits for information on the Web – seems intimately related to the inability of the public to remember even recent news events.

It is not surprising, for example, that presidential candidates have talked less about the Iraq war in the later stages of the primary campaign than in the earlier ones; video reports of violence in Iraq have been scarce. Candidates, like voters, emphasize the latest news, not necessarily the most important news.

No wonder negative political ads work. "With text, it is even easy to keep track of differing levels of authority behind different pieces of information," cultural critic Caleb Crain noted recently in the New Yorker. "A comparison of two video reports, on the other hand, is cumbersome. Forced to choose between conflicting stories on television, the viewer falls back on hunches or on what he believed before he started watching."

As video consumers become progressively more impatient with the process of acquiring information through written language, politicians are under great pressure to deliver their messages as quickly as possible. Harvard University's Kiku Adatto found that from 1968 to 1988, the average sound bite on the news for a presidential candidate – featuring the candidate's voice – dropped from 42.3 seconds to 9.8 seconds. By 2000, according to another Harvard study, it was down to just 7.8 seconds.

The shrinking public attention span fostered by video is closely tied to the second important anti-intellectual force in American culture: the erosion of general knowledge.

People accustomed to hearing their president explain complicated policy choices by snapping "I'm the decider" may find it almost impossible to imagine the pains that Franklin D. Roosevelt took, in the months after Pearl Harbor, to explain why U.S. forces were suffering one defeat after another in the Pacific.

In February 1942, Roosevelt urged Americans to spread out a map during his radio "fireside chat" so that they might better understand the geography of battle. In stores throughout the country, maps sold out; about 80 percent of American adults tuned in to hear the president. FDR had told his speechwriters that he was certain that if Americans understood the immensity of the distances over which supplies had to travel to the armed forces, "they can take any kind of bad news right on the chin."

This is a portrait not only of a different presidency and president but also of a different country and citizenry, one that lacked access to satellite-enhanced Google maps but was far more receptive to learning and complexity than today's public. According to a 2006 survey by National Geographic-Roper, nearly half of Americans between 18 and 24 do not think it necessary to know the location of other countries in which important news is being made. More than a third consider it "not at all important" to know a foreign language, and only 14 percent consider it "very important."

That leads us to the third and final factor behind the new American dumbness: not lack of knowledge per se but arrogance about that lack of knowledge. The problem is not just the things we do not know (consider the one in five American adults who, according to the National Science Foundation, thinks the sun revolves around the Earth); it's the alarming number of Americans who have smugly concluded that they do not need to know such things in the first place.

Call this anti-rationalism – a syndrome that is particularly dangerous to our public institutions and discourse. Not knowing a foreign language or the location of an important country is a manifestation of ignorance; denying that such knowledge matters is pure anti-rationalism. The toxic brew of anti-rationalism and ignorance hurts discussions of U.S. public policy on topics from health care to taxation.

There is no quick cure for this epidemic of arrogant anti-rationalism and anti-intellectualism; rote efforts to raise standardized test scores by stuffing students with specific answers to specific questions on specific tests will not do the job. Moreover, the people who exemplify the problem are usually oblivious to it. ("Hardly anyone believes himself to be against thought and culture," Dr. Hofstadter noted.)

It is time for a serious national discussion about whether, as a nation, we truly value intellect and rationality. If this indeed turns out to be a "change election," the low level of discourse in a country with a mind taught to aim at low objects ought to be the first item on the change agenda.



web page

Quote:

---

Is America getting dumber?

---

I don't know, i couldn't read the article cause there were to many big words in it for me.

Nice post, Jules. Should be a good hot topic . . .

I fear for the education system in this country, but I'm not giving up on it. I think there are good schools, teachers, and PARENTS out there that will keep the ball rolling toward the future.

Although, I look at the ratings for reality shows and think there are a lot of dumb people out there.

Blaming video for the dumbing of society is stupid.

It's not form, it's content.

The content on the video sucks. I get into this debate all the time with my roommate who's obsessed with reality TV (the absolute worst of reality TV, I'm talking Rock of Love and all the VH1 crap).

Meanwhile, he crucifies me for watching a VERY COMPLEX AND WELL WRITTEN "Batman: The Animated Series" just because it's a cartoon. (Don't believe me that it's a pretty deep show? Do some research.)

Then frowns upon me for watching Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (another show you've gotta bring your intellectual A-game to), and thinks I'm off my rocker for thinking The Crow is one of the greatest love stories ever told.

It's not that video itself is making society stupider, it's that society WANTS to watch the dumbest crap imaginable and very few want to think independently.

Probably one of the biggest challenges among people my age is knowing when to think independently and when to go with the flow. For every "dumb" topic I have I have another intellectual topic to go with it...that's how I balance myself at least.

I have nothing against TV and really like the Sarah Connor show.. but I think you are missing the point. It's not all about content, yes some is better than others but that's not the point.

He's making the point for me.

Good read.

To answer the question, yes.

I agree with Ms. Jacoby. The general publics ability to concentrate is slipping, and lack of reading is a major cause.

Dumber ...... Lazy ...... More dependent ...... More complacent .....

We cater to the lowest common denominator instead of challenging the best and brightest. Worse yet, we do so out of some misplaced sense of "compassion". We refuse to allow failure, despite the fact that failure is often the very best teacher.

We carry those who refuse to provide for themselves.

We, as a society, seem intent on removing all incentive to excel, acheive and accomplish. It starts in homes, schools, our political centers, and even our news and entertainment.

The scariest part is that we get so tied up in our day to day lives that we ignore what is going on all around us.

My biggest pet peeve .... at least someone else out there thinks there's something wrong

I hate the fact that people think being ignorant is "cool." A student will say something totally wrong and off the wall, and God forbid if you correct them. They were just spouting something they heard on MTV, nevermind if the person your talking to has read countless papers on the subject or has intimate knowledge of what they were talking about.

Is America getting dumber? Yes, and they like it!

Quote:

---

Meanwhile, he crucifies me for watching a VERY COMPLEX AND WELL WRITTEN "Batman: The Animated Series" just because it's a cartoon. (Don't believe me that it's a pretty deep show? Do some research.)

---

LMAO, no wonder why you can't sleep, your too busy watching cartoons

Do you recreate scenes with your little dolls too? Ammo you answered this question in a way which I expected, you have given us all proof that yes America is getting dumber. College kids watching cartoons. Please don't respond with the it's complex and well written nonsense, it's still a cartoon intended for littler kids then yourself. Cartoons.

If the majority of college kids are like you (which I pray they are not) this country is going down the crapper faster then I thought, Cartoons.

that is the point I was alluding to in my comment about Ammo missing the point about quality video programming verses bad quality video programming... when you read you visualize, you use your imagination, you think... when you watch television or movies, you don't do nearly as much of that. It's like the difference between playing with an old style non-animated toy verses playing a video game. There is little room for creativity and self-expression, heck even the endzone dances are preprogrammed in...

I prefer cerebral shows like Antiques Road Show. For those of you who haven't seen it, follow close, here's how it works. A guy brings in a jug and another guy tells him what it's worth. I must still be pretty sharp because I almost always yell at the TV telling the moron I'd never pay his at auction price.
No experts gonna put anythin over on a keen intellect like mine. I'm not getting older I'm getting better.

Bah just because something is animated doesn't mean it's for kids. Most of the adult shows in Japan are animated. I will pit some of those shows ("Cartoons" from japan) up against any storyline from the modern media era. You can pooh pooh it all you want, but there are some great animated shows out there. You just happen to have a preconceived notion that all animated shows are for kids, and kids have a lower intellectual aptitude than an adult in most cases.

Quote:

---

heck even the endzone dances are preprogrammed in...

---

Only if you hit the correct sequence of buttons!

Quote:

---

Once you no longer feel shame, you lose respect for almost everything except self.

---

I would think that once you no longer feel shame, that self-respect is the very FIRST casualty. If I have no sense of shame in dressing like an idiot or acting like an idiot or failing in school, then I would think my self-respect has probably taken the biggest hit of all.

Yep & add Lazy..........

They are either getting dumber or I am getting smarter.

Which one would you put your money on?

I don;t think its just the States.... it's the entire western world....

I think DC was the one that said it...its allowing all things to cater to the lowest common denominator and letting mediocrity slide.

I dated a teacher back in the day and she would have to modify course material to cater to certain kids. The result? Kids in grade 7 at a 3rd grade reading level..... ridiculous.

As I recall, he's about the same age as you.

It wasn't me, but I do agree with it. In an effort to make everybody "feel better about themselves" the successful, hardworking, overachievers tend to get held back from achieving their full potential.

I dated a girl before I got married and her dad was a teacher and he often complained that he spent 90% of his time dealing with the bottom 10% of his students but, even back then, he couldn't just ship them out or put them in a class for discipline problems or slow learners, he just had to deal with them, meanwhile the top 10% got almost no attention because they were being good and doing their work and he didn't have time... and they often got to listen to the same lecture 2 or 3 or 4 times while they could have been moving on, they were stuck waiting for the slowest of the slow to catch up. Sad really.

I'm not saying the slowest of the slow should be written off or abandoned, I'm just saying that at some point in a kids academic career (probably around 4th grade) you need to start separating the intelligent hardworking kids from the less intelligent less motivated discipline problem kids so that both groups can get the attention they need... and to do that, the groups are going to get labeled... sorry.

You can seperate kids very easily.... but allowing kids to fail a grade.

Unfortunately, its damn near impossible for a kid not to move forward because the educational system will accomodate them.

Let them fail. Let them realize that things aren;t going to be handed to them. And let THAT motivate them to do better.

Thats funny! Sorry man, when I was around Ammo's age this show called the Simpsons came out, so I am far from being as old as you think, the difference is by that age I was already independent, worked, lived on my own, put myself through school, etc...

Most people in my age bracket gave up watching cartoons around 10-12, and if you watched cartoons when I was 12 you pretty much were picked on or basically got your ass kicked by your peers. Today's generation lacks maturity and allot of that proof can be seen right on this board. Sorry but when I read that a 20 something is still watching TV programs which are intended for children I do get a good chuckle, and does prove that this article is pretty accurate. There comes a point and time when you need to grow up, and just by looking at the numbers I find it sad that allot of mid to late 20 year olds still live at home, and thats a damn shame. Gotta grow up sometime.

You do have to grow up sometime... however, you seem to have gotten old in a hurry as well.

The show Ammo referred to is an animated show meant for fans of a comic book character...and by most accounts, a character with a darker image. I'd say that, apart from big budget movies (which I don;t think anyone would classify as kids shows), animation is probably the most effective way to depict the Batman story.

There's many animated series that are geared towards adults. Just because this particular one doesn;t float your boat, that doesn't mean that animation is meant for pre-teens.

For someone who is such a self-made man, you should work on broadening your horizons a bit.

Quote:

---

Private, church, and home schools kids generally are going to do better for reasons that are obvious to me.

---

I agree. We may however disagree on a lot of the reasons... I happen to think that the biggest reason is that the public schools became an agenda filled, bureaucrat driven mess and concerned parents with money (whose kids tend to be the most successful anyway) said that's enough. I think the public school system began failing and the better students left, not the other way around.

I don't disagree with that....I guess it would be hard to pinpoint...kind of like what came first, the chicken or the egg??

I still feel that the underlying biggest problem we have in this country, with respect to education, is far too many parents who are either too busy to too unconcerned to stay on top of what their kids are doing in school. Blame it on divorce, blame it on single parent households, blame it on government reliance, blame it on general apathy, blame it on whatever you want... but the fact is when the parents don't care enough to find the time and put forth the effort, the kids suffer. Which is my single biggest reason to support homeschooling, if a parent is willing to take on that level of effort for their kids, then darn it, they deserve every ounce of support I can give them.

Just a thought on when the change started to happen.

Possibly when teaching at the elementary level went more from a calling to a job.

I think it started to recruit people or people got in to it for the wrong reasons.