(b) This whole 64bit discussion was initiated by one hill60 who gave 64bit as an example of a revolutionary change.
...as an example of revolutionary change which caught the industry by surprise, requiring the simultaneous release of custom hardware and software as it did.
Which Apple has NOW and others are yet to catch up.
Off course I expected you to minimise this achievement which is why I set the trap.
Much like the posters citing references like The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, reality television and daily talk shows, your link only shows ignorance on your part if you think that's an accurate representation of Americans.
Much like the posters citing references like The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, reality television and daily talk shows, your link only shows ignorance on your part if you think that's an accurate representation of Americans.
While it's true that all of these TV bits edit out the smart people and only show the dumb ones, because people who actually know the answers aren't very funny, it's also true that Americans are notoriously ill-informed about things that matter. That's not to say that there aren't plenty of idiots in every country in the world, but we're supposed to be the "most powerful nation on earth". I've posted this before, but:
In 2011, Newsweek gave a "Citizenship Test" to 1000 Americans and 38% failed. 29% couldn't name the Vice-President. (I pray none of these people vote.)
Other "highlights":
88% could not name one writer of the Federalist papers.
80% could not name the President during World War I (Wilson)
40% could not correctly name who we fought in WWII. (Japan, Germany and Italy)
73% could not correctly name "Communism" as our main concern during the Cold War.
81% could not name a power of the Federal Government.
43% did not know that the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights.
70% did not know that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
Ask people what happened to Justin Bieber recently and I bet 90% know the answer to that. Ask them to name the House Majority Leader and I bet not more than 20% know that answer. But it doesn't just have to be about Government or politics: ask people to name five elements on the periodic table, to name three classic American authors, to name the approximate years of the Civil War or even Word War II, to solve 3x + 4 = 13 or whether the earth is billions or 5000 years old, or even how many feet there are in a mile and see what kind of answers you get. And you don't get much better results asking college grads than you do asking less formally educated people.
It shouldn't be surprising when we live in a society where we judge success only by financial parameters, where sports dominate, where much of the country is comprised almost entirely of strip malls, banks and gas stations and where intelligence is frowned upon unless it makes one money. We care almost nothing about history, architecture or culture.
This is why it's not surprising that in 2012, a poll claimed that 17% of registered voters thought Obama is a Muslim who was born outside of the United States.
I honest to goodness did not realize at first glance that the OP intended Spewgle to be Google.
I've never understood how middle school taunting and efforts at made-up derogatory nicknames are supposed to make a poster sound more authoritative and intelligent. Are there really that many teenagers on AI?
Really??? You're surprised by infantile behavior on the internet? It seems to me that on most boards that I participate in, it's the normal coping style of a fair percentage of the posters. And it's far worse elsewhere than it is on here. Go to a Yahoo board on almost any topic and every idiot in the world comes out of the woodwork.
In 2011, Newsweek gave a "Citizenship Test" to 1000 Americans and 38% failed. 29% couldn't name the Vice-President. (I pray none of these people vote.)
Other "highlights":
88% could not name one writer of the Federalist papers.
80% could not name the President during World War I (Wilson)
40% could not correctly name who we fought in WWII. (Japan, Germany and Italy)
73% could not correctly name "Communism" as our main concern during the Cold War.
81% could not name a power of the Federal Government.
43% did not know that the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights.
70% did not know that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
This is why it's not surprising that in 2012, a poll claimed that 17% of registered voters thought Obama is a Muslim who was born outside of the United States.
See, I question every aspect of this kind of thing. All studies of this nature show the same results, consistently, everywhere.
Not that I approve of most of the utter nonsense that passes for “culture” or “general intrigue” these days, myself.
Other "highlights": 88% could not name one writer of the Federalist papers. 80% could not name the President during World War I (Wilson) 40% could not correctly name who we fought in WWII. (Japan, Germany and Italy) 73% could not correctly name "Communism" as our main concern during the Cold War. 81% could not name a power of the Federal Government. 43% did not know that the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights. 70% did not know that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
1) I could only remember Madison as writing the Federalist Papers and even looking up the answer I remembered Alexander Hamilton but seem to have zero recollection of the name John Jay associated with them.
2) The US President during WWI escaped me as well. It's simply not something I need so despite having learned it and aced one or more quizzes and tests on the subject many years it's now shelved somewhere in my brain and will liklet be forgotten again soon after I finish writing this post.
3) WWII Allies and Axis powers I do readily recall. Not many people seem to know China was an Allied Power but I also wouldn't expect most to know that.
4) Now we're up through the 1980s with the Cold War. If you were born in the 70's or earlier it's likely hard to forget the broad strokes, but If they interviewed someone today who is 21yo that means they were born in either 1992 or 1993. I could completely see them not remembering.
5) I'm not certain what is meant by power but I assume they mean branches of the federal government. Not what I'd call a clean question if that is how it was worded but if they did ask which branch I would hope most would know them all if they had to choose from a list.
6) The first 10 amendments being called the Bill of Rights seems like a hard one to forget but perhaps that's just my bias in readily remembering the term. I think I can only name about half of the amendments to their proper bill.
Let's see…
Congress shall make no law blah blah freedom of speech.
An object in motion must stay in motion unless acted upon by another object so long as it's not a communist object.
No solider is allowed to play quarters with civilians in their home or do keg stands.
A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Yep. I know five of them.
7) The Supreme Law of the Land always sounded clumsy to me. I bet if they asked people, "If there are conflicting laws between federal and state, which one automatically wins in accordance with the supremacy clause? Where is this supremacy clause written?" I think more would answer correctly.
Something to consider is if naming a proper noun off the top of your head when put on the spot is part of the issue. People get anxious because they don't want to look stupid which can ultimately them look stupid. This doesn't mean they are stupid.
Well, I remember, as I stated earlier in another thread, that most Americans believe we fought AGAINST the Soviets in WWII. So, we aren't the brightest bulbs in the tanning booth, overall.
Something like half (I forget the percentage, now -- it's early) couldn't locate Louisiana on a US map? Come on. Louisiana?! It's about as easy to find as Texas.
I love my celebrity news and sports as much as the next person. I follow fashion diligently. I can tell all sorts of things about what Tom Ford did this last NYFW, or that Taylor Swift cut her hair, or that Jennifer Jones, the Canadian skip in Curling, is undefeated at 5-0 and curling about 94%. But I ALSO CAN FIND FUCKING CHINA ON A WORLD MAP!
I realize that ignorance has become some sort of "badge of honor." I realize that the InterWebs, while giving us unlimited access to knowledge has also made us dumber by the day. But for ****'s sake, people: Get a god damned grip! The Bill of Rights?! Really? What the hell are they doing in schools anyways? We learned that shit by 4th grade, at the latest.
I'm so fucking sick of people justifying the total, utter ignorance of our populace. There is no justification! The fact that these people can even vote is vomit-inducing to me. I'm sorry, but until people feel BAD about being ignorant fools, there is no answer.
Well, I remember, as I stated earlier in another thread, that most Americans believe we fought AGAINST the Soviets in WWII. So, we aren't the brightest bulbs in the tanning booth, overall.
Something like half (I forget the percentage, now -- it's early) couldn't locate Louisiana on a US map? Come on. Louisiana?! It's about as easy to find as Texas.
I love my celebrity news and sports as much as the next person. I follow fashion diligently. I can tell all sorts of things about what Tom Ford did this last NYFW, or that Taylor Swift cut her hair, or that Jennifer Jones, the Canadian skip in Curling, is undefeated at 5-0 and curling about 94%. But I ALSO CAN FIND FUCKING CHINA ON A WORLD MAP!
I realize that ignorance has become some sort of "badge of honor." I realize that the InterWebs, while giving us unlimited access to knowledge has also made us dumber by the day. But for ****'s sake, people: Get a god damned grip! The Bill of Rights?! Really? What the hell are they doing in schools anyways? We learned that shit by 4th grade, at the latest.
I'm so fucking sick of people justifying the total, utter ignorance of our populace. There is no justification! The fact that these people can even vote is vomit-inducing to me. I'm sorry, but until people feel BAD about being ignorant fools, there is no answer.
/rant
Like curiosity, ignorance has no value, good or bad. Getting wound-up at people for their ignorance is hysterical, hypocritical and pointless.
I realize that ignorance has become some sort of "badge of honor." I realize that the InterWebs, while giving us unlimited access to knowledge has also made us dumber by the day. But for ****'s sake, people: Get a god damned grip! The Bill of Rights?! Really? What the hell are they doing in schools anyways? We learned that shit by 4th grade, at the latest.
I'm so fucking sick of people justifying the total, utter ignorance of our populace. There is no justification! The fact that these people can even vote is vomit-inducing to me. I'm sorry, but until people feel BAD about being ignorant fools, there is no answer.
/rant
A couple things here I take issue with. I don't think we are dumber but it's impossible to accurately measure. All we can measure is the answers for a given test but how do you know if a test is objective. If you grew up during or on the cusp of WWII you are likely to know a lot more about it than say someone who came decades later. The same for pretty much everything. What was everyday life to us is going to be history to future generations. I don't think that should be a mark against someone because the focus is very different.
That said, when talking about the Bill of Rights or Federalist Papers it's history to all of us. Why does it appear less people know about these things today? Did they fail themselves? Was it their parents? Was it their underpaid teachers? Was it a poorly funded school system? Is it society as a whole? What are the fundamental changes to the culture that may be the cause of this? I have no answers to those questions.
Also, you use both dumber and ignorant. One means stupid, as in a lowered capacity to learn as compared to something else, and the other means a lack of knowledge. If kids today are indeed dumber then we surely can't blame them. If they are ignorant can we blame them? You said you learned about the Bill of Rights in 4th grade, I'm also around that time, but if kids today aren't learning about it then I can't see that it's their fault. What 10yo would seek out that information? Certainly not me.
Finally, consider today's communication. There is so much noise to cut through that it's any wonder anything can get accomplished. Perhaps we are seeing the result of a generation that has a great deal of information in multiple areas or perhaps we're seeing a generation that is taking a cue from Albert Einstein by not wasting time memorizing what is easily looked up.
A reporter interviewed Albert Einstein. At the end of the interview, the reporter asked if he could have Einstein's phone number so he could call if he had further questions.
“Certainly” replied Einstein. He picked up the phone directory and looked up his phone number, then wrote it on a slip of paper and handed it to the reporter.
Dumbfounded, the reporter said, "You are considered to be the smartest man in the world and you can't remember your own phone number?”
Einstein replied, “Why should I memorize something when I know where to find it?”
PS: Even this 3 minute post is time I could have been doing something truly useful (even though I tell myself It helps me to focus certain ideas). I really should be studying Spanish 6-8 hours per day until I'm satisfactorly fluent, but it's somewhat of a chore because it doesn't come easy to me. No language does, which includes computer languages with complex syntax, like Obj-C. I am stunted by only having ever learned English as a child and seemingly have no natural aptitude for it. Now spatial recognition I am quite naturally gifted which confounds me when people can't find what I think are obvious places on a map, but again, that could simply being innate bias.
I realize that ignorance has become some sort of "badge of honor." I realize that the InterWebs, while giving us unlimited access to knowledge has also made us dumber by the day. But for ****'s sake, people: Get a god damned grip! The Bill of Rights?! Really? What the hell are they doing in schools anyways? We learned that shit by 4th grade, at the latest.
/rant
One of the problems is that many public schools, because of the demands of "testing", don't teach history in most elementary school grades anymore. I found this out recently and was totally shocked by it. My daughter lives in upstate New York. She home schools my granddaughter because the public schools and even the local private schools are so incredibly awful. In the fifth grade, the public school kids take only four subjects: Math, "Literacy", Health and Phys Ed. Once every six or seven schooldays, they get one session in art or music. That's it. I happened to mention this to a co-worker, who lives somewhere in New Jersey, and she told me that her elementary school kid doesn't get any history instruction either. So no science or technology, except what's included in the Health course, no history and no what we used to call "Language Arts".
Is there any wonder that we're raising a nation of idiots? There are certainly some people getting a great education - those are the people who become the successful entrepreneurs or become important executives at leading companies at young ages. But the masses know so little as to be frightening and IMO, it's one of the reasons we have such a high unemployment rate. There are actually a great number of jobs available for skilled knowledge workers. The last time I checked Apple's site, there was something like 2500 open positions, not including any of the retail jobs. The Audio Engineering Society site lists a fair number of open jobs. There are jobs for minimum wage service workers. But there aren't very many jobs for anyone else. You have to be able to generate value for a company, you can't just be a "body" anymore. Back from about '86 to '96, I was a senior technology executive at a major media company. We bought another company and most of the VPs who were retained didn't do much more than checking in with their subordinates every once in a while and handling HR issues. They were out the door every day at 4pm (based on an 8am start time). Those days are long over - those execs would be out of a job today because they added no real value to the company. It was nothing more than an old boys club.
Even most college grads who I've met, unless they've graduated from an Ivy League school (and sometimes not even then) seem to know very little. We even seem to usually want to elect a President who is dumb. So Clinton was hated in part because he was a policy wonk. Bush II was (initially) loved because he seemed like a guy you wanted to have a beer with even though he had massive troubles putting a sentence together (never mind an idea).
That said, when talking about the Bill of Rights or Federalist Papers it's history to all of us. Why does it appear less people know about these things today? Did they fail themselves? Was it their parents? Was it their underpaid teachers? Was it a poorly funded school system? Is it society as a whole? What are the fundamental changes to the culture that may be the cause of this? I have no answers to those questions.
I think it's pretty obvious if we look around us. What kind of topics dominate the conversation? What do the news outlets care about? Which public figures are considered to be worthy and which are criticized?
Most of the conversation is about badly behaving actors or musicians, celebrities of the moment and athletes. The news rarely goes beyond the headline. If you're a Bieber or Khardashian, you go to the top of the news pile. People spend countless hours sending out trivial tweets or trying to make the world think that every trivial aspect of their lives should be important to other people by posting on Facebook. How many people, especially younger people, do you see walking down the street with their head down staring at their phone. It's said that the average high school girl sends out 200 text messages a day.
Back when the three TV networks dominated, even when people began to give up reading newspapers, at least the news presented on TV was somewhat serious....extensive coverage of Vietnam or the civil rights movement. CBS ran a series called "Health In America" in prime time. That would never happen today. Fewer people watched the recent State of the Union than ever before.
Back before radio deregulation, most radio stations fulfilled their public service requirements by having five minutes of news every hour. It wasn't great news, but at least it kept listeners somewhat aware of the issues of the day. With no such requirements today, people who listen to music radio hear only music. But even the all-news stations don't go beyond one sentence past the headline. Compare that to a BBC broadcast.
Most people get their news from websites today, but because most people refuse to pay for information and the sites are funded by advertising, it's clicks that count and sites get clicks by posting absurdly outrageous stories with almost no detailed content or "shades of gray".
For the most part, we don't consider history or literature important. Science is no longer trusted. Our heroes are not great thinkers - instead they're either people who manipulate themselves into some form of celebrity or those who make a lot of money, without giving much thought as to whether what they're producing, if anything, has any true inherent value. Much of the country is nothing more than strip malls and gas stations. And our kids spend more hours playing video games than they do reading. People who are intelligent are considered to be geeks and nerds. Why shouldn't scientists and engineers be as celebrated as a football player?
Liberals are opposed to standards testing and conservatives have pretty much made teachers the enemy. Not that paying a teacher a very high salary guarantees success, but in most school systems, teachers make far less than they could make in the corporate world (assuming jobs were available). When I was in high school and the strong unionization movements of the day make teaching a competitive occupation with industry, I had fabulous teachers, many of whom were authors, and I received a really terrific public school education. But as public school teaching salaries didn't keep pace, most of them moved on to teach at the college level.
How many students attempt to really achieve and how many are satisfied to simply get by? When I see the local high school students coming off the subway in the morning, they're never carrying any books. How is that even possible? Why is it our culture so readily accepts people who make no attempt whatsoever to gain knowledge (and frequently punishes those who try to). Except in sports.
When we had an expanding middle-class, education was seen as a way to get ahead. But with few jobs available for the masses anyway, education (except for those with very specific high-level knowledge worker skills) is no longer seen as a direct path to a better life.
Look at our cities and compare them to European cities where at least an attempt is made to preserve architecture and culture. We preserve McDonald's and other fast food chains, Starbucks, gas stations, drug stores, banks, giant shopping malls, big-box stores and sports arenas. Want to cut hours at the library? No problem. Want to force teachers to take less money? No problem. Local bookstore on Main Street closing down because the national fast food chain can pay far more rent? No problem. My kid wants to spend hours playing the latest video game console? No problem. I choose to believe what idiots post on the internet rather than what trained scientists have come to agree upon? No problem.
During the last presidential primary, not one Republican candidate said they believed in evolution. (Now I don't happen to believe that they really didn't believe in evolution, I think they just didn't want to alienate their insane base, but still).
The issue isn't finding a reason why we've gotten dumber, it's sorting through the multitude of reasons why we have.
I think it's pretty obvious if we look around us. What kind of topics dominate the conversation? What do the news outlets care about? Which public figures are considered to be worthy and which are criticized?
Most of the conversation is about badly behaving actors or musicians, celebrities of the moment and athletes. The news rarely goes beyond the headline. If you're a Bieber or Khardashian, you go to the top of the news pile. People spend countless hours sending out trivial tweets or trying to make the world think that every trivial aspect of their lives should be important to other people by posting on Facebook. How many people, especially younger people, do you see walking down the street with their head down staring at their phone. It's said that the average high school girl sends out 200 text messages a day.
That reminds me of this…
[VIDEO]
Are the kids to really to blame when this is what "adults" on the news are doing?
The issue isn't finding a reason why we've gotten dumber, it's sorting through the multitude of reasons why we have.
Again, I still don't see how people are more dumb today than yesterday. All I see are people being more ignorant toward things previous generations held more dear, but the older generations tend to be ignorant to what the younger generations know. I don't see how replacing one nugget of knowledge for another indicates that one has less capacity for learning or lacking in general intelligence.
Each generation says this about the next but do you feel you're less intelligent than people from 100 years ago? I would say I know about exceptionally more things than they ever dreamt, but when it comes to a specific field that they had more of their life to experience I am at a disadvantage. I know what agriculture and animal husbandry is, and have grown vegetables but I couldn't run a farm. I couldn't milk a cow well even if I read a How To page, or harvest a crop.
Furthermore, I have taken astronomy and understand the basics, which include many constellations (in the Northern Hemisphere), mathematical proofs and detailed information about the distances and components of celestial bodies better than nearly everyone in human history, but I certainly can't navigate by the stars. I couldn't build my own sextant if my life depended on it. I could look it up, study it, and build one but I don't have that knowledge right now… but why should I?
We are so overwhelmed by information today that I'm not surprised that people often seem more ignorant. Why memorise something when you know you've got it at your fingertips?
We think we know so much more than our ancestors, but I don't think that's true. We know a little about lots of subjects, but they say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. In order to really understand a subject, you still need to specialise for a long time.
In fact, one could argue that having such easy access to so much information actually discourages specialisation, which means we may never achieve the heights of skill that past generations reached.
These days, it's considered good to have a broad education. Yet I would argue that the greatest man has achieved has occurred due to geniuses applying an intense focus to a very specific field.
Are the kids to really to blame when this is what "adults" on the news are doing?
Again, I still don't see how people are more dumb today than yesterday. All I see are people being more ignorant toward things previous generations held more dear, but the older generations tend to be ignorant to what the younger generations know. I don't see how replacing one nugget of knowledge for another indicates that one has less capacity for learning or lacking in general intelligence.
John Stewart highlighted that video and reacted with disgust. But again, this is what happens when we live in a society in which quality means little. Ratings mean much because they drive dollars. And we judge success only by dollars. No one objects when the news channels pull crap like the above. But a lot of people object when CPB or NPR, which at least attempts to do better, gets a few cents per person in taxpayer money. Back in the days of the big three networks, news was considered a public service, not something you had to make a lot of money from. But we live in a world today where the markets demand that every bit of revenue be optimized. The market couldn't care less what anyone is broadcasting as long as it makes money and has growth. It doesn't care one bit about the effect that programming has on society. So "Jersey Shore"? Bring it on. News that doesn't really have much news? No problem. So now we have news shows that aren't much above the level of the National Enquirer.
OK, I'll admit that I don't know whether we're more dumb or more ignorant, but the end result in the same, so it doesn't make much difference. Replacing one bit of knowledge for another does make a difference when we replace knowledge that any reasonable person would deem worthy with "knowledge" that any reasonable person would think was totally trivial. It's not hard to come to the conclusion that knowledge of say English literature is more worthy than knowledge of what Justin Bieber is doing or what the hot tweet of the day is.
But having said that, there has been tremendous research into how brain activity drives intelligence and how brain activity can offset the effects of aging. So there is a case to be made that ignorant people do actually become dumber over time. I think it's also why very young children almost all seem absolutely brilliant. Many four-year-old boys can name all the dinosaurs and are incredibly imaginative, but a few years later they find it difficult to retain any facts at all if it's not a subject that they're intensely interested in. Young girls generally are superior to boys at mathematics and problem solving, but once peer pressure steers them away from those subjects, they lose ground, especially once they reach puberty.
Thanks for your replies. I admit that I went a bit overboard and was generally just ranting. Sometimes I boil over, go on some over-the-top rant, then I just return to being sad again.
I agree that it's tough to measure whether we're dumber. But it sure seems like it (I realize that that's purely subjective and not at all objective). However, I do really believe that ignorance is a choice. A person can chose to learn and educate one's self, or he or she can choose not to.
No doubt about it.... Apple needs to spread their product range out and quit trying to be the end all that was all they had in their 90's Niche market. They didn't succeed by killing the clones back then, just like they failed when Apple sued Clone maker Franklin Computers out of business prior to Apple III launch. The result? Apple III crashed and burned and Apple failed to sell higher profit margin software they could have been selling had they not killed the clones in each era.
Look back at Steve's decision to kill the clones in an effort to turn lower profit Apple Mac hardware into the Niche only market it became? The clone market was not only paying Apple license fees, but they were buying Apple's software. Mac OS market share grew from an all time low of around 3 to 4% to well over 10% by the time Steve killed them with a contract loophole. Next thing you see is that Mac OS market share tanked back down to that prior 3 to 4% ratio throughout the remaining 90's. But.... it was Software sales to clones consumers that really took the hit.
Apple no doubt needs to come out with low cost smartphones if they even want to compete in the same markets Android is cleaning up on, while growing their market share ever closer to being Ubiquitous, windows PC clones were and still are! Elitism has no place in business when you're trying to grow market share. They just end up like Ferrari.... making less and less cars so they can only claim how rare and how high the profit margins are growing. Remember that Ferrari is owned by Fiat and they are largely just a "Come On" to get customers in the door. As long as they get them to buy their less expensive Fiats for everyday consumers..... FIAT IS HAPPY!!! .......and there is no better time than now to spread out product offerings so they cover the high end, mid range and low end consumers wants and needs too!
Comments
(b) This whole 64bit discussion was initiated by one hill60 who gave 64bit as an example of a revolutionary change.
...as an example of revolutionary change which caught the industry by surprise, requiring the simultaneous release of custom hardware and software as it did.
Which Apple has NOW and others are yet to catch up.
Off course I expected you to minimise this achievement which is why I set the trap.
I doubt Tim's story of the origins of the name Europe and I doubt that Americans are as stupid as he's implying.
This is a bit taken from an Australian show.
This is a bit taken from an Australian show.
Much like the posters citing references like The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, reality television and daily talk shows, your link only shows ignorance on your part if you think that's an accurate representation of Americans.
Much like the posters citing references like The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, reality television and daily talk shows, your link only shows ignorance on your part if you think that's an accurate representation of Americans.
While it's true that all of these TV bits edit out the smart people and only show the dumb ones, because people who actually know the answers aren't very funny, it's also true that Americans are notoriously ill-informed about things that matter. That's not to say that there aren't plenty of idiots in every country in the world, but we're supposed to be the "most powerful nation on earth". I've posted this before, but:
In 2011, Newsweek gave a "Citizenship Test" to 1000 Americans and 38% failed. 29% couldn't name the Vice-President. (I pray none of these people vote.)
Other "highlights":
88% could not name one writer of the Federalist papers.
80% could not name the President during World War I (Wilson)
40% could not correctly name who we fought in WWII. (Japan, Germany and Italy)
73% could not correctly name "Communism" as our main concern during the Cold War.
81% could not name a power of the Federal Government.
43% did not know that the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights.
70% did not know that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
Ask people what happened to Justin Bieber recently and I bet 90% know the answer to that. Ask them to name the House Majority Leader and I bet not more than 20% know that answer. But it doesn't just have to be about Government or politics: ask people to name five elements on the periodic table, to name three classic American authors, to name the approximate years of the Civil War or even Word War II, to solve 3x + 4 = 13 or whether the earth is billions or 5000 years old, or even how many feet there are in a mile and see what kind of answers you get. And you don't get much better results asking college grads than you do asking less formally educated people.
It shouldn't be surprising when we live in a society where we judge success only by financial parameters, where sports dominate, where much of the country is comprised almost entirely of strip malls, banks and gas stations and where intelligence is frowned upon unless it makes one money. We care almost nothing about history, architecture or culture.
This is why it's not surprising that in 2012, a poll claimed that 17% of registered voters thought Obama is a Muslim who was born outside of the United States.
I honest to goodness did not realize at first glance that the OP intended Spewgle to be Google.
I've never understood how middle school taunting and efforts at made-up derogatory nicknames are supposed to make a poster sound more authoritative and intelligent. Are there really that many teenagers on AI?
Really??? You're surprised by infantile behavior on the internet? It seems to me that on most boards that I participate in, it's the normal coping style of a fair percentage of the posters. And it's far worse elsewhere than it is on here. Go to a Yahoo board on almost any topic and every idiot in the world comes out of the woodwork.
In 2011, Newsweek gave a "Citizenship Test" to 1000 Americans and 38% failed. 29% couldn't name the Vice-President. (I pray none of these people vote.)
Other "highlights":
88% could not name one writer of the Federalist papers.
80% could not name the President during World War I (Wilson)
40% could not correctly name who we fought in WWII. (Japan, Germany and Italy)
73% could not correctly name "Communism" as our main concern during the Cold War.
81% could not name a power of the Federal Government.
43% did not know that the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights.
70% did not know that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
This is why it's not surprising that in 2012, a poll claimed that 17% of registered voters thought Obama is a Muslim who was born outside of the United States.
See, I question every aspect of this kind of thing. All studies of this nature show the same results, consistently, everywhere.
Not that I approve of most of the utter nonsense that passes for “culture” or “general intrigue” these days, myself.
1) I could only remember Madison as writing the Federalist Papers and even looking up the answer I remembered Alexander Hamilton but seem to have zero recollection of the name John Jay associated with them.
2) The US President during WWI escaped me as well. It's simply not something I need so despite having learned it and aced one or more quizzes and tests on the subject many years it's now shelved somewhere in my brain and will liklet be forgotten again soon after I finish writing this post.
3) WWII Allies and Axis powers I do readily recall. Not many people seem to know China was an Allied Power but I also wouldn't expect most to know that.
4) Now we're up through the 1980s with the Cold War. If you were born in the 70's or earlier it's likely hard to forget the broad strokes, but If they interviewed someone today who is 21yo that means they were born in either 1992 or 1993. I could completely see them not remembering.
5) I'm not certain what is meant by power but I assume they mean branches of the federal government. Not what I'd call a clean question if that is how it was worded but if they did ask which branch I would hope most would know them all if they had to choose from a list.
6) The first 10 amendments being called the Bill of Rights seems like a hard one to forget but perhaps that's just my bias in readily remembering the term. I think I can only name about half of the amendments to their proper bill.
Let's see…
Yep. I know five of them.
7) The Supreme Law of the Land always sounded clumsy to me. I bet if they asked people, "If there are conflicting laws between federal and state, which one automatically wins in accordance with the supremacy clause? Where is this supremacy clause written?" I think more would answer correctly.
Something to consider is if naming a proper noun off the top of your head when put on the spot is part of the issue. People get anxious because they don't want to look stupid which can ultimately them look stupid. This doesn't mean they are stupid.
Signatures are limited to a certain number of pixels. Darn.
Well, I remember, as I stated earlier in another thread, that most Americans believe we fought AGAINST the Soviets in WWII. So, we aren't the brightest bulbs in the tanning booth, overall.
Something like half (I forget the percentage, now -- it's early) couldn't locate Louisiana on a US map? Come on. Louisiana?! It's about as easy to find as Texas.
I love my celebrity news and sports as much as the next person. I follow fashion diligently. I can tell all sorts of things about what Tom Ford did this last NYFW, or that Taylor Swift cut her hair, or that Jennifer Jones, the Canadian skip in Curling, is undefeated at 5-0 and curling about 94%. But I ALSO CAN FIND FUCKING CHINA ON A WORLD MAP!
I realize that ignorance has become some sort of "badge of honor." I realize that the InterWebs, while giving us unlimited access to knowledge has also made us dumber by the day. But for ****'s sake, people: Get a god damned grip! The Bill of Rights?! Really? What the hell are they doing in schools anyways? We learned that shit by 4th grade, at the latest.
I'm so fucking sick of people justifying the total, utter ignorance of our populace. There is no justification! The fact that these people can even vote is vomit-inducing to me. I'm sorry, but until people feel BAD about being ignorant fools, there is no answer.
/rant
Like curiosity, ignorance has no value, good or bad. Getting wound-up at people for their ignorance is hysterical, hypocritical and pointless.
Like curiosity, ignorance has no value, good or bad. Getting wound-up at people for their ignorance is hysterical, hypocritical and pointless.
I completely disagree. Sorry.
A couple things here I take issue with. I don't think we are dumber but it's impossible to accurately measure. All we can measure is the answers for a given test but how do you know if a test is objective. If you grew up during or on the cusp of WWII you are likely to know a lot more about it than say someone who came decades later. The same for pretty much everything. What was everyday life to us is going to be history to future generations. I don't think that should be a mark against someone because the focus is very different.
That said, when talking about the Bill of Rights or Federalist Papers it's history to all of us. Why does it appear less people know about these things today? Did they fail themselves? Was it their parents? Was it their underpaid teachers? Was it a poorly funded school system? Is it society as a whole? What are the fundamental changes to the culture that may be the cause of this? I have no answers to those questions.
Also, you use both dumber and ignorant. One means stupid, as in a lowered capacity to learn as compared to something else, and the other means a lack of knowledge. If kids today are indeed dumber then we surely can't blame them. If they are ignorant can we blame them? You said you learned about the Bill of Rights in 4th grade, I'm also around that time, but if kids today aren't learning about it then I can't see that it's their fault. What 10yo would seek out that information? Certainly not me.
Finally, consider today's communication. There is so much noise to cut through that it's any wonder anything can get accomplished. Perhaps we are seeing the result of a generation that has a great deal of information in multiple areas or perhaps we're seeing a generation that is taking a cue from Albert Einstein by not wasting time memorizing what is easily looked up.
PS: Even this 3 minute post is time I could have been doing something truly useful (even though I tell myself It helps me to focus certain ideas). I really should be studying Spanish 6-8 hours per day until I'm satisfactorly fluent, but it's somewhat of a chore because it doesn't come easy to me. No language does, which includes computer languages with complex syntax, like Obj-C. I am stunted by only having ever learned English as a child and seemingly have no natural aptitude for it. Now spatial recognition I am quite naturally gifted which confounds me when people can't find what I think are obvious places on a map, but again, that could simply being innate bias.
I realize that ignorance has become some sort of "badge of honor." I realize that the InterWebs, while giving us unlimited access to knowledge has also made us dumber by the day. But for ****'s sake, people: Get a god damned grip! The Bill of Rights?! Really? What the hell are they doing in schools anyways? We learned that shit by 4th grade, at the latest.
/rant
One of the problems is that many public schools, because of the demands of "testing", don't teach history in most elementary school grades anymore. I found this out recently and was totally shocked by it. My daughter lives in upstate New York. She home schools my granddaughter because the public schools and even the local private schools are so incredibly awful. In the fifth grade, the public school kids take only four subjects: Math, "Literacy", Health and Phys Ed. Once every six or seven schooldays, they get one session in art or music. That's it. I happened to mention this to a co-worker, who lives somewhere in New Jersey, and she told me that her elementary school kid doesn't get any history instruction either. So no science or technology, except what's included in the Health course, no history and no what we used to call "Language Arts".
Is there any wonder that we're raising a nation of idiots? There are certainly some people getting a great education - those are the people who become the successful entrepreneurs or become important executives at leading companies at young ages. But the masses know so little as to be frightening and IMO, it's one of the reasons we have such a high unemployment rate. There are actually a great number of jobs available for skilled knowledge workers. The last time I checked Apple's site, there was something like 2500 open positions, not including any of the retail jobs. The Audio Engineering Society site lists a fair number of open jobs. There are jobs for minimum wage service workers. But there aren't very many jobs for anyone else. You have to be able to generate value for a company, you can't just be a "body" anymore. Back from about '86 to '96, I was a senior technology executive at a major media company. We bought another company and most of the VPs who were retained didn't do much more than checking in with their subordinates every once in a while and handling HR issues. They were out the door every day at 4pm (based on an 8am start time). Those days are long over - those execs would be out of a job today because they added no real value to the company. It was nothing more than an old boys club.
Even most college grads who I've met, unless they've graduated from an Ivy League school (and sometimes not even then) seem to know very little. We even seem to usually want to elect a President who is dumb. So Clinton was hated in part because he was a policy wonk. Bush II was (initially) loved because he seemed like a guy you wanted to have a beer with even though he had massive troubles putting a sentence together (never mind an idea).
That said, when talking about the Bill of Rights or Federalist Papers it's history to all of us. Why does it appear less people know about these things today? Did they fail themselves? Was it their parents? Was it their underpaid teachers? Was it a poorly funded school system? Is it society as a whole? What are the fundamental changes to the culture that may be the cause of this? I have no answers to those questions.
I think it's pretty obvious if we look around us. What kind of topics dominate the conversation? What do the news outlets care about? Which public figures are considered to be worthy and which are criticized?
Most of the conversation is about badly behaving actors or musicians, celebrities of the moment and athletes. The news rarely goes beyond the headline. If you're a Bieber or Khardashian, you go to the top of the news pile. People spend countless hours sending out trivial tweets or trying to make the world think that every trivial aspect of their lives should be important to other people by posting on Facebook. How many people, especially younger people, do you see walking down the street with their head down staring at their phone. It's said that the average high school girl sends out 200 text messages a day.
Back when the three TV networks dominated, even when people began to give up reading newspapers, at least the news presented on TV was somewhat serious....extensive coverage of Vietnam or the civil rights movement. CBS ran a series called "Health In America" in prime time. That would never happen today. Fewer people watched the recent State of the Union than ever before.
Back before radio deregulation, most radio stations fulfilled their public service requirements by having five minutes of news every hour. It wasn't great news, but at least it kept listeners somewhat aware of the issues of the day. With no such requirements today, people who listen to music radio hear only music. But even the all-news stations don't go beyond one sentence past the headline. Compare that to a BBC broadcast.
Most people get their news from websites today, but because most people refuse to pay for information and the sites are funded by advertising, it's clicks that count and sites get clicks by posting absurdly outrageous stories with almost no detailed content or "shades of gray".
For the most part, we don't consider history or literature important. Science is no longer trusted. Our heroes are not great thinkers - instead they're either people who manipulate themselves into some form of celebrity or those who make a lot of money, without giving much thought as to whether what they're producing, if anything, has any true inherent value. Much of the country is nothing more than strip malls and gas stations. And our kids spend more hours playing video games than they do reading. People who are intelligent are considered to be geeks and nerds. Why shouldn't scientists and engineers be as celebrated as a football player?
Liberals are opposed to standards testing and conservatives have pretty much made teachers the enemy. Not that paying a teacher a very high salary guarantees success, but in most school systems, teachers make far less than they could make in the corporate world (assuming jobs were available). When I was in high school and the strong unionization movements of the day make teaching a competitive occupation with industry, I had fabulous teachers, many of whom were authors, and I received a really terrific public school education. But as public school teaching salaries didn't keep pace, most of them moved on to teach at the college level.
How many students attempt to really achieve and how many are satisfied to simply get by? When I see the local high school students coming off the subway in the morning, they're never carrying any books. How is that even possible? Why is it our culture so readily accepts people who make no attempt whatsoever to gain knowledge (and frequently punishes those who try to). Except in sports.
When we had an expanding middle-class, education was seen as a way to get ahead. But with few jobs available for the masses anyway, education (except for those with very specific high-level knowledge worker skills) is no longer seen as a direct path to a better life.
Look at our cities and compare them to European cities where at least an attempt is made to preserve architecture and culture. We preserve McDonald's and other fast food chains, Starbucks, gas stations, drug stores, banks, giant shopping malls, big-box stores and sports arenas. Want to cut hours at the library? No problem. Want to force teachers to take less money? No problem. Local bookstore on Main Street closing down because the national fast food chain can pay far more rent? No problem. My kid wants to spend hours playing the latest video game console? No problem. I choose to believe what idiots post on the internet rather than what trained scientists have come to agree upon? No problem.
During the last presidential primary, not one Republican candidate said they believed in evolution. (Now I don't happen to believe that they really didn't believe in evolution, I think they just didn't want to alienate their insane base, but still).
The issue isn't finding a reason why we've gotten dumber, it's sorting through the multitude of reasons why we have.
That reminds me of this…
[VIDEO]
Are the kids to really to blame when this is what "adults" on the news are doing?
Again, I still don't see how people are more dumb today than yesterday. All I see are people being more ignorant toward things previous generations held more dear, but the older generations tend to be ignorant to what the younger generations know. I don't see how replacing one nugget of knowledge for another indicates that one has less capacity for learning or lacking in general intelligence.
Each generation says this about the next but do you feel you're less intelligent than people from 100 years ago? I would say I know about exceptionally more things than they ever dreamt, but when it comes to a specific field that they had more of their life to experience I am at a disadvantage. I know what agriculture and animal husbandry is, and have grown vegetables but I couldn't run a farm. I couldn't milk a cow well even if I read a How To page, or harvest a crop.
Furthermore, I have taken astronomy and understand the basics, which include many constellations (in the Northern Hemisphere), mathematical proofs and detailed information about the distances and components of celestial bodies better than nearly everyone in human history, but I certainly can't navigate by the stars. I couldn't build my own sextant if my life depended on it. I could look it up, study it, and build one but I don't have that knowledge right now… but why should I?
Thank you for your eloquent reply.
We are so overwhelmed by information today that I'm not surprised that people often seem more ignorant. Why memorise something when you know you've got it at your fingertips?
We think we know so much more than our ancestors, but I don't think that's true. We know a little about lots of subjects, but they say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. In order to really understand a subject, you still need to specialise for a long time.
In fact, one could argue that having such easy access to so much information actually discourages specialisation, which means we may never achieve the heights of skill that past generations reached.
These days, it's considered good to have a broad education. Yet I would argue that the greatest man has achieved has occurred due to geniuses applying an intense focus to a very specific field.
That reminds me of this…
Are the kids to really to blame when this is what "adults" on the news are doing?
Again, I still don't see how people are more dumb today than yesterday. All I see are people being more ignorant toward things previous generations held more dear, but the older generations tend to be ignorant to what the younger generations know. I don't see how replacing one nugget of knowledge for another indicates that one has less capacity for learning or lacking in general intelligence.
John Stewart highlighted that video and reacted with disgust. But again, this is what happens when we live in a society in which quality means little. Ratings mean much because they drive dollars. And we judge success only by dollars. No one objects when the news channels pull crap like the above. But a lot of people object when CPB or NPR, which at least attempts to do better, gets a few cents per person in taxpayer money. Back in the days of the big three networks, news was considered a public service, not something you had to make a lot of money from. But we live in a world today where the markets demand that every bit of revenue be optimized. The market couldn't care less what anyone is broadcasting as long as it makes money and has growth. It doesn't care one bit about the effect that programming has on society. So "Jersey Shore"? Bring it on. News that doesn't really have much news? No problem. So now we have news shows that aren't much above the level of the National Enquirer.
OK, I'll admit that I don't know whether we're more dumb or more ignorant, but the end result in the same, so it doesn't make much difference. Replacing one bit of knowledge for another does make a difference when we replace knowledge that any reasonable person would deem worthy with "knowledge" that any reasonable person would think was totally trivial. It's not hard to come to the conclusion that knowledge of say English literature is more worthy than knowledge of what Justin Bieber is doing or what the hot tweet of the day is.
But having said that, there has been tremendous research into how brain activity drives intelligence and how brain activity can offset the effects of aging. So there is a case to be made that ignorant people do actually become dumber over time. I think it's also why very young children almost all seem absolutely brilliant. Many four-year-old boys can name all the dinosaurs and are incredibly imaginative, but a few years later they find it difficult to retain any facts at all if it's not a subject that they're intensely interested in. Young girls generally are superior to boys at mathematics and problem solving, but once peer pressure steers them away from those subjects, they lose ground, especially once they reach puberty.
To SolipsismX and zoetmb:
Thanks for your replies. I admit that I went a bit overboard and was generally just ranting. Sometimes I boil over, go on some over-the-top rant, then I just return to being sad again.
I agree that it's tough to measure whether we're dumber. But it sure seems like it (I realize that that's purely subjective and not at all objective). However, I do really believe that ignorance is a choice. A person can chose to learn and educate one's self, or he or she can choose not to.
No doubt about it.... Apple needs to spread their product range out and quit trying to be the end all that was all they had in their 90's Niche market. They didn't succeed by killing the clones back then, just like they failed when Apple sued Clone maker Franklin Computers out of business prior to Apple III launch. The result? Apple III crashed and burned and Apple failed to sell higher profit margin software they could have been selling had they not killed the clones in each era.
Look back at Steve's decision to kill the clones in an effort to turn lower profit Apple Mac hardware into the Niche only market it became? The clone market was not only paying Apple license fees, but they were buying Apple's software. Mac OS market share grew from an all time low of around 3 to 4% to well over 10% by the time Steve killed them with a contract loophole. Next thing you see is that Mac OS market share tanked back down to that prior 3 to 4% ratio throughout the remaining 90's. But.... it was Software sales to clones consumers that really took the hit.
Apple no doubt needs to come out with low cost smartphones if they even want to compete in the same markets Android is cleaning up on, while growing their market share ever closer to being Ubiquitous, windows PC clones were and still are! Elitism has no place in business when you're trying to grow market share. They just end up like Ferrari.... making less and less cars so they can only claim how rare and how high the profit margins are growing. Remember that Ferrari is owned by Fiat and they are largely just a "Come On" to get customers in the door. As long as they get them to buy their less expensive Fiats for everyday consumers..... FIAT IS HAPPY!!! .......and there is no better time than now to spread out product offerings so they cover the high end, mid range and low end consumers wants and needs too!
See, those two things have nothing to do with one another.
Apple no doubt needs to come out with low cost smartphones if they even want to compete in the same markets Android is cleaning up on
News flash: they don’t want to compete.