Interesting article but I am not convinced outward expressions of elitism have much of a correlation with one's academic background. In my experience, the most talented and creative individuals are modest, hard working and often quiet while those lacking demonstrable talent are the ones who make the most noise. I'd wager talent has little to no correlation with academic background.
On Elitism
11–20 of 116 posts
Re: On Elitism
#12The blogger doth protest too much, methinks. We learn all about his academic credentials almost as soon as the blog post begins, but don't hear anything about his real-world accomplishments beyond attending great schools. What does everyone think of the blogger's academics page? http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm Disclaimer: I don't know the blogger, and as far as I know I don't know any of his profession…
That is unfortunately true. There is this old joke: Q: How do you know someone is from MIT {Stanford, Havard, ...}? A: He tells you.
Your joke makes the opposite claim that he does at the end of his post. With no data either way, I guess we all default to our biases.
Re: On Elitism
#13> "The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-et…
If think you replace "smartest" with "most successful", the point he's trying to make does not change.
Re: On Elitism
#14> "The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-et…
True, but they hold something that is generally recognized as a mark of intelligence. Whether or not it is actually a mark of intelligence is irrelevant to his point.
Re: On Elitism
#15It is probably true that people who scholastic reputation will try to make up for it in other ways. However the problem is that there may be too much authority placed in these usual standards of achievements.
Philip forgets that people with academic credentials like himself are being smug when they complain about others. If your academic credentials represent you so well, why should it bother you if someone is simply acting?
Another disingenuous behavior he describes is hiding that you went to a reputable school like Harvard.
The reason people are afraid of living up to "artificially higher" expectations is because their school's reputation really is artificially high. What these type of people want is to have the "Harvard" reputation when it suits them, and the average Joe culpability should they ever fail. They want to further perpetuate the image of superiority that Harvard/Stanford entails without letting the public correct their perception that going to one of these top schools does not make you a Godly Genius.
Re: On Elitism
#16[deleted]
Re: On Elitism
#17> "The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-et…
If think you replace "smartest" with "most successful", the point he's trying to make does not change.
[deleted]
Re: On Elitism
#18The blogger doth protest too much, methinks. We learn all about his academic credentials almost as soon as the blog post begins, but don't hear anything about his real-world accomplishments beyond attending great schools. What does everyone think of the blogger's academics page? http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm Disclaimer: I don't know the blogger, and as far as I know I don't know any of his profession…
Indeed, his point about name-brand universities is entirely backed up, albeit in a slightly ironic fashion, by his namedropping.
Re: On Elitism
#19People from reputable universities don't need to vocally assert their capabilities, because the mere mention of their university is enough for people to acknowledge their capabilities. On the other hand, people from more obscure universities need to vocally assert their skills and experience in order to obtain the same recognition of their capabilities. This is just a plain fact of society and asserting your skills and experience is not in any way arrogant or elitist behavior. He completely confuses being vocal about your capabilities with vocally downplaying the capabilities of others, for instance the capabilities of people from reputable universities. He seems completely unaware that people can feel the need to assert their capabilities without in any way wanting or trying to downplay the capabilities of others.
Re: On Elitism
#20> "The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-et…
He covers that:
'I remember that some of the most arrogant kids were the A-/B+ students who always took the opportunity to assert that, although they did not get as high marks as the A/A+ students, they were somehow 'smarter' in other ways '
(kidding, kidding :)