Poll: Has the world gotten more stupid/ignorant in the last few years?
- Thread starter Plauged1
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No,they don't become more stupid, they just get more practise at it ;p.The_root_of_all_evil said:Dude, you're only 15. Wait til you're 30 and watch how they just get stupider.Plauged1 said:
I really don't think this would work. Our modern society is much different than the one that was around when this took place. In homes it's not as bad, but in schools I don't think it would work. Teachers these days are different, and giving them the option of corpral punishment is not a good idea. They would go on flogging sprees, since they couldn't previously. I think it has to do more about home. Parents need to raise their kids better, a strong central discipline will eliminate the need for it elsewhere.Trivun said:
No. People are stupid in this generation and people have been just as stupid in past generations. No one remembers the stupidity of past generations that much because we are all fixated on the screw ups of the current generation.
Obama will end up just like Bush. He will do something to make everyone hate him and then will be blamed for all the things wrong with America.Darkside360 said:
Hmm well the number of father-less children have gone up, the number of murders have gone up, moral traditions have been degraded into nothingness, the number of people have gone up as well as the number of poor people, abuse of chemical substances is at an all time high, sex has turned into a past time rather then an act of marriage, viloent media is sweeping in popularity, acts like partial birth abortions are legal, a handful of nations are incredibly well off, while others live in complete poverty, we continue to make weapons of mass destruction, we continue to invade countries without viewing their traditions, and worst of all we turned Winnie the pooh into a show with puppets.
Can anyone say "Roman Empire".
Can anyone say "Roman Empire".
*Puts on DEVO 'Energy Dome' hat to remind people how pervasive this sentiment is and how long it's been around. I tend to think of the perception automatically held by smart people in a society on stupidity at large to be similar to the Shepard tone [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_tone] effect, in which something seems constantly to be shifting but remains the same.
If you take the DEVO example, they were doing music as an art project related to how conformity and societal homogeneity would cause devolution of the individual's abilities, wisdom, and intellect. (That's what made Weird Al's DEVO pastiche so completely brilliant.) Ask yourself; were they ahead of the time, or just observing a stupidity at large that Socrates observed and each generation will observe itself in turn?
If you take the DEVO example, they were doing music as an art project related to how conformity and societal homogeneity would cause devolution of the individual's abilities, wisdom, and intellect. (That's what made Weird Al's DEVO pastiche so completely brilliant.) Ask yourself; were they ahead of the time, or just observing a stupidity at large that Socrates observed and each generation will observe itself in turn?
My personal feeling is that the problem lies in us as a society looking down on intelligence.
As a brit, I see QI as one of the few things on TV that sits in the 'entertainment' category that doesn't rely on idiocy to entertain, and doesn't feel the need to scrape the lowest common denominator up.
There's so much junk on the BBC, and it needs to remember its not there to get massive viewing figures, so much as to entertain and inform, if the masses want to see d list celebs in spandex trying to fit thru holes in a polystyrene wall, can ITV make it please?
On the bright side, they've dared to give Steward Lee a series, and not on BBC4 which surprised me in a good way. He's already getting bad reviews seemingly because he's sneering at popular culture, such as celebrity biographies, and because of his slower, measured delivery, which doesn't cater for the required 3 knob gags a minute needed to be on BBC3.
If only we could shake off the neanderthal view than nerds are bad and jocks are good, and that being all buff is far more important than being smart.
As the writer of Dilbert theorised, women used to crave a large strong man, to defend them and their children from attacks by wild beasts, so surely it can't be long before the ideal mate is a pasty receding guy with a pocket protector full of pens who can fix your networking issues and get you back online in time to get your online grocery order in.
As a brit, I see QI as one of the few things on TV that sits in the 'entertainment' category that doesn't rely on idiocy to entertain, and doesn't feel the need to scrape the lowest common denominator up.
There's so much junk on the BBC, and it needs to remember its not there to get massive viewing figures, so much as to entertain and inform, if the masses want to see d list celebs in spandex trying to fit thru holes in a polystyrene wall, can ITV make it please?
On the bright side, they've dared to give Steward Lee a series, and not on BBC4 which surprised me in a good way. He's already getting bad reviews seemingly because he's sneering at popular culture, such as celebrity biographies, and because of his slower, measured delivery, which doesn't cater for the required 3 knob gags a minute needed to be on BBC3.
If only we could shake off the neanderthal view than nerds are bad and jocks are good, and that being all buff is far more important than being smart.
As the writer of Dilbert theorised, women used to crave a large strong man, to defend them and their children from attacks by wild beasts, so surely it can't be long before the ideal mate is a pasty receding guy with a pocket protector full of pens who can fix your networking issues and get you back online in time to get your online grocery order in.
I feel that with a better access to knowledge, like new sciences, more effecient math equations, stuff like that, has pushed some common sense out of our heads to make room for this as well as more room has been made for storing advertisments for crap we really don't need.
He has strengths that the previous President did not have, and Bush has strengths that the new President does not have.Darkside360 said:
Both of them are politicians. Both of them are human. Therefore, both of them will do what human politicians do. And every President before and after them are/will be pretty much the same - human politicians.
Welcome to the world. Being particularly picky about any particular human politician is kind of like criticizing retarded monkeys all in one cage.
Fair enough, as I say, I agree with you about homophobia, and homophobia is in general a bad thing. As far as I'm aware, at least, nobody I know is homosexual, yet if any of my friends came out then I'd accept it. I'd be shocked and surpirsed, of course, but I wouldn't treat them any differently. However, as for the 'vampire' thing, I also agree with the fanbase thing. The thing is, even referring to Bram Stoker and Dracula, there is no set definition for 'vampire'. The first vampire myths arose in two, possibly three, different places: The Far East, Eastern Europe, and (I think) North America, all hundreds, if not thousands, of years ago. The first real vampire fiction that wasn't just local myth or legend was Bram Stoker's 'Dracula', based partly on the sadistic Prince Vlad Dracul of Romanian history (a real person in Transylvania, for the record). However, even that is in dispute. Since vampires are based on myth and legend, any interpretation of vampires can be held as acceptable. However, sparkly vampires is still pretty much taking the piss, even if I am a Twilight fan... Anyway, despite being a fan I definitely agree with you about the whole fanbase thing (I am a fanboy of various things, including Twilight and Halo, yet find mself hating other fanboys/girls of those things simply because of the negative reputation they give the proper fans...).Plauged1 said:
Not really, there's just more for them to be ignorant of.
Assuming you've grown less ignorant in the past few years you're just starting to notice.
Assuming you've grown less ignorant in the past few years you're just starting to notice.