having been born/raised in the narcissistic Paradise of Texas

I wonder if that has anything to do with the saying everyone goes to Texas once and why they never feel like going back a second time? .

Yea I get a kick out of the Texan oil experts who come up her to North Dakota to work in our oil fields.

If they had half as much work ethic and knowledge as they have ego and arrogance they would be some impressive people to work with but unfortunately by far the reality too many tend to be the most dangerously arrogant people to deal with.

 

But, in areas that are not so obvious to everybody, like intelligence, it seems completely unacceptable to even insinuate that you might be the smartest person in the room, much less brag about it.

I don't know that this is the best snippet to use as a jump-off point, but it'll do.

This is something I've been observing for over three decades. Physical accomplishment is acknowledged and respected and all but worshipped, while mental accomplishment is ignored, scorned, and often actively discouraged. It is cultural and institutionalized and I suspect it has been this way for a very long time and pretty much throughout the world with only relatively small variations here and there.

Just two examples.

A decade or so ago there was a news article in the national news from one of the states back east (either Kentucky or Tennessee, I think it was Kentucky) where the state legislature had passed rules that banned schools from posting lists of Honor Roll students. The reasoning: By posting a list of students that achieve academically, you are implicitly identifying the students that did not achieve academically and thereby injuring their self-esteem and exposing them to ridicule. The very next day, that very same state legislature held their annual Letter Signing Day which glorified and identified individually those high school athletes that had signed Letters of Intent to play football or basketball with highly ranked schools. No one was the slightest bit concerned that, in doing so, they might injure the self-esteem of those that had been implicitly identified as having not signed a Letter of Intent.

Back in the early '90s we had six incoming freshman at the Colorado School of Mines -- a school known for academic excellence and not for athletic achievement -- of which three had been All-State athletic finalists or champions and three had scored perfect 1600s on their SATs. The article in the school newspaper that heralded this proudly gave the names, hometowns, and sports of the three athletes but stated that it was choosing not to print any identifying information about the three scholars out of concerns that they would be picked on by fellow students.

So just what kind of messages do these kinds of actions send to young people? For good or bad, virtually everyone likes to have their accomplishments recognized and celebrated. But we show kids that if you excel athletically you will be put up on a pedestal, while if you excel academically it and you will be hidden from view. Yet we wonder why so few kids place any importance and priority on academics.

Why it is this way? A common explanation is that historically physical prowess was a survival trait and so natural selection groomed us to innately respond to it. Bunk. Human beings are so poorly equipped to compete in the wild that no amount of physical prowess would have made much of a difference. It wasn't the big man that chucked a spear to kill the lion that protected the clan, it was the little guy that figured out a way to make the damn spear! While I have no way to know, I suspect that in the kind of small-clan communities in which we evolved, that the contributions of the mentally-superior were well recognized and well rewarded.

So why it is this way? I'm only guessing, of course, but my guess is that we feel little personal shame when someone else excels athletically for two reasons: First, we don't feel there is much likelihood that people are going to look at us and think, "Well, why didn't YOU do that?". More importantly, we are not likely to think that ourselves. The physical differences are usually so obvious, even if they are purely the result of effort and training, that everyone accepts that we simply aren't capable of such feats. Second, is that we derive enjoyment from watching athletes perform and we tend to idolize that which we enjoy seeing (how else do you explain the celebrity culture we have?). But neither of those come into play when you are talking about academic/mental achievement. There aren't the obvious differences and so people do tend to look at themselves and question why they didn't do as well (or at least better than they did). That bites particularly deep when most people know full well that they could have and should have done much better than they did. But in addition, watching academic performance in action is seldom entertaining. About the closest we come is watching Jeopardy, so being an academic super achiever does not result in being liked as a celebrity and thus affords no protection.

 

I wonder if that has anything to do with the saying everyone goes to Texas once and why they never feel like going back a second time? .

My brother married a girl from Texas back in 1965. He brought her to our place to meet the folks. That year, ABC had a show on called "Land of the Giants" where people landed on another planet of giant people. The show consisted of people running around next to giant props which made them look like tiny people. ABC actually cancelled the show because the giant props were too expensive to keep making.

We were all watching the show. My dad looked at the "tiny" people running around and said:

"That looks like what you get if you take a Texan and let the hot air out of him."

Welcome to the family......

 

This is something I've been observing for over three decades. Physical accomplishment is acknowledged and respected and all but worshipped, while mental accomplishment is ignored, scorned, and often actively discouraged. It is cultural and institutionalized and I suspect it has been this way for a very long time and pretty much throughout the world with only relatively small variations here and there.

Yep, that sums up my high school experience.

 

A decade or so ago there was a news article in the national news from one of the states back east (either Kentucky or Tennessee, I think it was Kentucky) where the state legislature had passed rules that banned schools from posting lists of Honor Roll students. The reasoning: By posting a list of students that achieve academically, you are implicitly identifying the students that did not achieve academically and thereby injuring their self-esteem and exposing them to ridicule. The very next day, that very same state legislature held their annual Letter Signing Day which glorified and identified individually those high school athletes that had signed Letters of Intent to play football or basketball with highly ranked schools. No one was the slightest bit concerned that, in doing so, they might injure the self-esteem of those that had been implicitly identified as having not signed a Letter of Intent.

It might be a cultural thing, but in Greece, universities aren't linked to any athletic league and parents feel extremely competitive about their neighbour's child's grades.

The government awards children who excelled on an international athletic level by granting them free passes into universities, but there things are pretty hard for them, since their current skill set doesn't help them pass classes.

 

It might be a cultural thing, but in Greece, universities aren't linked to any athletic league and parents feel extremely competitive about their neighbour's child's grades.

The government awards children who excelled on an international athletic level by granting them free passes into universities, but there things are pretty hard for them, since their current skill set doesn't help them pass classes.

The mere fact that we can talk about children excelling on an international athletic level and, as far as I know, can't even begin to talk in any meaningful way of children excelling on an international academic level is an indicator of the global nature of the problem.

Out of curiosity, so children that do excel academically get similar free passes from the government to the athletic training facilities?

Seriously, though, do children that excel academically receive comparable support for continuing their education?

 

As far as I know, yes.
Children who excelled in the Mathematical/Physics/Astronomy etc Olympiads get similar bonuses (boni?). But, granted, those competitions are much harder and fewer in number. On the other hand, those kids where pretty well setup for the entry exams.
Like I said, the hard part is after you get in university, not before.

Maybe that's because the universities are publicly funded and their management doesn't need to recruit "local heroes" to raise the fame of each institution.

However, I must confess that children of Greek immigrants, Cypriots, large families, minorities and in general of sensitive social groups get comparatively larger bonuses for the entry in the university.

 

I wish the government involvement in education (not trying to turn political, so please take this as a general philosophical point) were more along the lines of identifying and rewarding achievement that is important to the success of the country. For instance, we hear so much about the need to improve the number of people going into the STEM fields. Okay, if that is so important, then offer scholarships to high school students that excel at preparing themselves to pursue education in STEM fields and make the continuation of those scholarships contingent upon continued excellence while majoring in a STEM field. And it would be pretty trivial to implement. You have the STEM-oriented colleges put together a single common entrance exam that any college wishing to be eligible for a scholarship recipient to attend must agree to accept. The testing is then handled in a way similar to the ACT/SAT via an independent testing entity with the government announcing each year what the scholarship structure will be like. It could be a number of things, but one possibility would be that the top 100 students will receive a full-tuition scholarship to the school of their choice (of the ones that are eligible). The next 100 will receive a scholarship comparable to a full-tuition scholarship at the median-cost private school, but they can use it at a school of their choice. The next 1000 will receive a scholarship comparable to full-tuition at the top-quartile state college. The next 2000, a scholarship comparable to full-tuition at the median state college. You can continue on down like this as far as it makes sense, so that perhaps you award a total of 10,000 scholarships but the bottom ones are for 25% of the cost at a median-cost state school. Perhaps another hook would be that the participating schools agree to grant in-state tuition status for any student receiving any scholarship under this program (or perhaps even for the next tier of students that didn't quite score well enough to get an actual scholarship).

Perhaps with a program like that, families in "underprivileged" areas would truly start to see education as the way up and out of their circumstances for their children. Now, they often times only see athletics as holding that key -- and while it works a tiny fraction of them, most that put their eggs in that basket end up nowhere at the end of the day.

 

Further example of this 'preference' towards promoting physical over mental prowess can be seen in the way sports teams can often get way more promotion and support than any academic 'version', wishing to push their learning.

Football team needs the sports arena until midnight? Sure. Swimmer needs access to the swimming pool at six? No problem. Hey let's have a minibus.

EE student wants to use matlab on a uni computer until midnight? No. Can't have that. Engineering building closes at 5pm. EE student has prepared a five page document outlining his plans and derivations for a new type of antenna, needs some small financial grant to help fund the parts - no can't do that.

Football team needs a new strip this year? Oh yeah sure.

-_-

 

If it wasn't human nature to brag, there would be no scores or rankings of any kind.

 

(Chuckle) Showing off is quite common in the animal kingdom. And no matter how you look at it. The Modern humans (Homo sapiens) is in the end nothing more than an advanced hairless ape

 

Is boasting bad? I think conservative values would say so, but I also think most people, conservative or not, indulge in their own way to some extent. It seems common or even encouraged to boast about obvious abilities.

Take a look at this youtube video of Brian Shaw deadlifting 973lbs. He is competing for the title of World's Strongest Man; nothing more than bragging rights. He has devoted his life, or at least a very sizable portion of it, to proving to the world that he is stronger than anyone else. Nobody seems to be offended by this. Look at the video comments; people are saying what a beast he is. It is impossible to deny what a beast he is, and that he is the world's strongest man, once he's set the record. There is no question.

Similarly, in a room of people, say a classroom or an office, you can look around and see who the strongest person in the room is. If this room full of people got bored and someone proposed an arm wrestling competition to kill time, nobody would be surprised when the big guy wins, and when he wins, probably nobody would take it the wrong way if he did a little celebratory touchdown dance in jest. Let's say a 200Lb Xerox machine needed to be moved across the room and set on a pedestal, and the big guy spoke up in a friendly manner; "I'm the strongest here, I'll take care of it," would anybody disagree or have their ego damaged? I doubt it

But, in areas that are not so obvious to everybody, like intelligence, it seems completely unacceptable to even insinuate that you might be the smartest person in the room, much less brag about it. Treading that ground will quickly have you labeled as a "know it all" and being described by a long list of adjectives like arrogant, conceited, vain, egocentric, etc.

Going back to our room full of people, if someone stood up and said "I'm the smartest person in the room; I'll tackle the complex feat of engineering," I'm sure the class would be unified in ostracizing whoever said that. People get their feelings hurt when you assert that you are smarter than them. They replace the idea of smarter, with better. "Oh, so you think you're better than me?"

Why? Why the special exception for smarter? Would a young woman, upon hearing the big guy's offer to move the Xerox machine, ask "Oh, so you think you're better than me?" No! Nobody construes what he said, because an assertion of strength isn't often confused with an assertion of superiority. But intelligence is.

Just because someone thinks (or knows) that they are smarter than someone else, does not mean that they think they are superior to that person. Intelligence is an attribute, just like height, skin color, bench press max, 100M dash time, visual acuity, clap speed, and how fast one can talk a woman into bed. It is a real attribute, but it seems to have been targeted by the general populace for inclusion into the Handicapper General's Laws of Equality. Nobody is allowed to be smarter than anyone else, unless you win the Nobel Prize in Physics. Then you can brag. But if not, you're no smarter than the next guy.

I understand half of the problem. I understand why people have trouble identifying who is smarter. It's only obvious to the smarter person. Imagine being an adult in a room full of 7 year olds. The 7 year olds see everybody the same, but you, being an adult, are acutely aware of the fact that you're the only person in the room who has the foresight to pee before you leave the house or pay the credit card bill before the end of the month.

Unless you are going to force everybody in your vicinity to submit to an IQ test and then throw your IQ score in their faces, you will just have to accept the fact that you won't always be given due credit for your standing in the hierarchy of intelligence.

The half that I don't understand is why every attempt one makes to affirm their own intelligence is perceived as an attempt to degrade someone else's, and why that perceived degradation is construed to be on the grounds of something more than a simple attribute - more, to the point of being on the grounds of one's value as a human being.



Note: This rant isn't spawned out of frustration with my own attempts to make my intelligence known. I'm sure it sounds that way, but it's actually just a life-long observation that I've only just now been interested in discussing. I have more conservative values and usually don't brag about intelligence or anything else. If I feel the need to be recognized, I usually just go pisss excellence and wait for the compliments to come rolling in .

I once interrupted my boss at a meeting, turned to the audience and stated that the measure of a man isn't what he says about himself, but what others say about him.

Go back through the above, but imagine that it all takes place in a dark room. Any differences? An Ox is likely stronger than any man. What if an Ox grunted in the above darkened room. People are funny in their own way.

 

We have to be careful not to confuse narcissism with healthy self-esteem.

Boasting doesn't indicate self-esteem, just the opposite. To boast isn't saying "I'm wonderful and letting you know it" It says, "I need external validation of my worth"

Also, I want to say to the OP that intelligence is not itself much worth boasting about. It's inherited and not resulting from anything you've done. The athlete who scores a record number of touchdowns (or whatever) has accomplished this through a combination of inherited athleticism and hard work. Similarly, what you accomplish with your intelligence should be celebrated, not just he simple fact that you are intelligent.

 

Boasting doesn't indicate self-esteem, just the opposite. To boast isn't saying "I'm wonderful and letting you know it" It says, "I need external validation of my worth"

We are social creatures so that's a natural desire that does feedback to our internal enjoyment of accomplishment and is completely healthy within cultural norms as we have labels and levels of expertise for almost everything. Boasting is not 'on it's face' bad, we see the term 'it boasts (as in posses something to be proud of) this or that' used in advertisements all the time but almost never hear the word 'brag' (excessive boasting).

 

Context is important. For a product to "boast" an attribute is just a way to point out something, and in marketing, it might be useful to sell a product. But for a person to boast is IMO just a strategy to deal with some other issue. We'll just have to disagree on the point.

 

Context is important. For a product to "boast" an attribute is just a way to point out something, and in marketing, it might be useful to sell a product. But for a person to boast is IMO just a strategy to deal with some other issue. We'll just have to disagree on the point.

Yes we do, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

 

I once interrupted my boss at a meeting, turned to the audience and stated that the measure of a man isn't what he says about himself, but what others say about him.

..... it's what the other people at the unemployment office say about him.

 

Hit the nail on the head. 3 months, had a tiff on the way out. Rehired most the crew on a new installation

 

It might be a cultural thing, but in Greece, universities aren't linked to any athletic league and parents feel extremely competitive about their neighbour's child's grades.
...

Same here in Australia, athletic performance in high school is of a fairly low importance. Schools are places for learning, and young people who want to become football stars don't do that in school, they do it in their own time after school at a football club.

Regarding high schools I think America is a bit "dumbed down".