Have we, as a human population, dumbed down? Where are the John Adams, the Rodins, the Brahms? We do not discuss ideas and communicate at the level that seems apparent in past centuries. Our speech has lost its beauty and rhythm. Our vocabulary has lost its intricacies, clarifying ability, and poetic value. Many shun valuable and meaningful conversation when it is offered in favor of shallow and thoughtless gibe and gibberish. I believe that what I sense is more than personal injury because small talk is not my forte. I feel that something has been truly lost in the placidity with which we accept mediocrity in thought, intellectual effort, and lingual communication. Can we blame the media, ease of lifestyle, technology, or should we claim more responsibility for our own idle practices?
2 years ago
5 comments:
I don't think that most discourse has ever been at the level of the greatest members of generations past. Most of it is just social, and I also think the great majority of it is what linguists call 'phatic communication' (http://www.nvcc.edu/home/npeck/Handouts/communicationlevels.htm), just the exchange of pleasantries without much content at all.
Is this bad? I think it's probably just the way people are... they are generally unwilling to let other people inside their heads much. Perhaps it's insecurity -- a lot of us have poorly developed ideas or thoughts floating through our heads, and I think many of these thoughts, particularly related to emotions, just bubble up out of lower-level imagery generated by our brains, rather than having any rational basis. People don't want other people to think they are crazy, so they don't talk about those kind of thoughts very much.
I think a lot of conversation is just two people trying to adjust each other's mental 'programming' to make it align with their own. The problem is, unless you know someone quite well indeed, it's unlikely that you are programmed anything like that other person. Therefore, opening up channels of communication is dangerous, because inevitably there would be conflict, 'how can you think that?!'-type moments.
Most adults reach a point where they think that they have figured out enough of themselves to function in the way they want, and the heck with what other people think. Thus, not much philosophizing, otherwise known as the attempt to reprogram oneself, or possibly others, occurs among people once they reach a certain age. But then, most people don't get very far developmentally.
I doubt very much that quality discourse ended with past generations, though. There are surely still people who practice it, you just have to find them. Some people maintain a kind of freshness about them, while nearly everybody else calcifies.
- Will (first comment in a loooong time)
I think that it all depends on the person you are talking to. For instance- I have a handful of friends, who when I talk to them, I want to talk about deep, meaningful, personal and philosophical things because a. I find their minds interesting and they make me think in ways I didn't before, b. I am always striving to know them better, understand them and strengthen bonds and, c. if you are in this handful of friends, you probably enjoy great conversation as I do and therefore it will be worthwhile.
On the other hand, I agree with Mary, most people with 'chat' with- is just that, chat. I can name another handful of friends, co-workers, and acquaintances I do this with- but I do not think this is a bad thing- it's necessary. We protect the intimate and vulnerable parts of our psyche because if we shared everything with everyone, we would be hurt or under appreciated.
I also think that the great discourses from generations past have survived because they were just that- but think of all the conversations that did not survive- that's a whole lot of chat.
Have you ever tried looking at someone, hands on each others' knees (or any other platonic physical contact), just looking straight at them and holding it, with no nervous laughter or balking away -- just Being-with them. It can be a challenge.
I think a couple things are at play here. First of all the remnants of communication from the past are written, which was often an activity of the elite and hardly a good indication of how things were generally in the "good old days", and certainly not in the spoken word. Furthermore language has always evolved from the spoken to the written while the upper-crust of society has ignorantly assumed that people learn language from grammar and other books. (the average 5 year old knows more grammar than has ever been written in any number of books)
Thus the elite are always lamenting the erosion of proper language. I believe it's that elitism that has caused people to clam up to avoid being called "random", "nerdy", "deep", etc. I would also say that people avoid really expressing themselves because they're afraid being considered poorly spoken as well. Which, judging by your post, may be a real threat. I think people should be more willing to express what's in their hearts and minds regardless of whether or not they do it in a "mediocre" way.
The main thing though is the passivity and fear that mass educaiton instills in people. When young people are grouped with others their age at school the main activity taking place is that a social hierarchy forms which detracts from the coersive learning environment, which was poor in the first place. The result is passivity (from the "teaching") and fear (from the social climate). Because what's going on inside a person is unique to them, they can't risk revealing it to others because that could negatively effect their social standing. Occasionally a good teacher will coax enough of what's inside of them out of them to help them realize that what's going on inside is also universal, but it's all too rare. (this shift to this global way of thinking is essential to education) Even when it does happen we humans have devised other rules to distinguish the elite from the little people even in creative settings so the purity of expression is devalued in favor of artificial constructs which devide us into ranks. Shameful, but true.
I think Mary's blog is a wonderful example of how people DO still communicate and discuss on a higher level than just small talk. Granted, the internet has become a great one for the destruction of language and intellectual effort as in various forms of instant messengers, chat rooms and all the short-cuts/slang that are almost a new language in and of themselves. However, clearly there are great thinkers and writers even in this small forum and in many other places. I do think our language has evolved and perhaps is not as beautiful as it once was and that may be due to mediocrity and it may not. I don't think it's due to any less intellectual effort though.
Heidi
Post a Comment