There is a plague that has been in circulation for the hundreds of years, sweeping across the nation, seizing control of citizen’s minds. The plague is called anti-intellectualism. Taken right from Random House Dictionary, an anti-intellectual is someone who is ignorant or hostile to artistic and cultural values, against modern academic, artistic, social, religious, and the other theories associated with them. Richard Hofstadter, who wrote Anti-intellectualism in American Life, defines anti-intellectualism as a “resentment of the life of the mind, and those who are considered to represent it.” Ralph Waldo Emerson commented in 1837, "The mind of this country, taught to aim at low objects, eats upon itself." In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury creates a society where an escapist attitude, or the avoidance of reality by absorption of the mind in entertainment, results in the decline of thought and the rise of mass conformity (Schramer 2008). The similarities that exist between Fahrenheit 451 and American society are a cause for alarm (Schramer 2008). Susan Jacoby has even claimed, “Americans are in serious intellectual trouble.” Fortunately, there are a few things that we can do to combat this issue that will be touched upon later in this essay.
Thomas White claims, “anti-intellectualism is a trademark of totalitarian regimes”. In Fahrenheit 451, mass exploitation, where a single entity or government takes advantage of the majority for selfish gain, is used at a grand scale (Schramer 2008). Beatty, from Fahrenheit 451, discusses new technology that had begun to be popularized by the masses, transforming communication into a marketable good instead of a tool for education. Beatty expands on this in the novel, discussing the ...
... middle of paper ...
...important even if English and philosophy majors don't have the same lucrative job options of a financier (White 2014). If citizens could see that people who value these things can be just as successful, the widely recognized resentment toward the humanities can be diminished.
Ray Bradbury warned against anti-intellectualism, the plague that has been creeping through the minds of America’s citizens for hundreds of years, in Fahrenheit 451. Unless we can make intellect popular and show its benefits, our nation will soon be doomed to follow in the footsteps of Bradbury’s novel. Of course our society has not resorted to the extremist task of burning books, however, a lack of interest and scorn for intellect may accomplish the job equally well. As Bradbury has been quoted to say, “You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.”
As I said before, math and science are important, but the humanities are just as important, if not more. “The humanities, done right, are the crucible within which our evolving notions of what it means to be fully human are put to the test; they teach us, incrementally, endlessly, not what to do but how to be” (Slouka). This quote taken from “Dehumanized” defines and truly puts Slouka’s beliefs into the perspective of what the humanities should teach students and how they should be taught, which I agree with fully. I believe that without the humanities, we, as humans, would all be the same and there would be no room to be different from one another. Whether it be by our culture, religion, or interests, not two people are alike. Individuals should not be bred into being something that they do not want to be or even like Slouka argues, students should not be a “capital investment” for the future of the economy. Students should be investing in themselves to express who they truly are, rather than being something that the economy expects them to
In the book Fahrenheit 451 the theme is a society/world that revolves around being basically brain washed or programmed because of the lack of people not thinking for themselves concerning the loss of knowledge, and imagination from books that don't exist to them. In such stories as the Kurt Vonnegut's "You have insulted me letter" also involving censorship to better society from vulgarity and from certain aspects of life that could be seen as disruptive to day to day society which leads to censorship of language and books. Both stories deal with censorship and by that society is destructed in a certain way by the loss of knowledge from books.
Few books exemplify the consequences of misconceptions more than Farenheit 451. The book speaks of a world in which in citizens think they are living in a utopia, when in fact their world is constantly devoloving into a place where no human could ever flourish. This delusion along with the misconception that books are thing to be feared is the precise reason that the general populace is so easily controlled. The reason behind the propaganda campaign against books is so the people do not realize that their lives are unsatisfying and dull. In other words, this, misconception propagated by the governing force, fuels the illusion of a perfect world. The myth that the world...
Author and Harvard graduate, Leonid Fridman, in an excerpt of his article, America Needs Its Nerds, points out America’s anti-intellectualism. Fridman’s purpose is to inform the reader of the contempt held for the intellectually curious and call for a change in the country’s attitude. He adopts a condemning tone to make the reader aware of the issue and encourage them to change their mindset.
“Our Civilization is flinging itself to pieces. Stand back from the centrifuge” (Bradbury, 84). The novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury is a comment on the habit of mankind to destroy itself, only to pop right back up from the ashes. The main character, Guy Montag, represents the parts of mankind that are becoming aware of this, through awareness, change through tragedy and obligation to spread both the former.
They also relatably talk of the way that they affect students in their higher education. In Gerald Graff’s essay about hidden intellectualism it is implied that we all have intellect within us. It just may be show in different ways among different people. He offers the example that a love for learning about anything can later be converted into a love for learning about academic subjects. Where in the second essay we talk more about people who have feelings of anti-intellectualism which we learn is a negative feeling towards intellect or learning itself. You could say that those who feel anti-intellectualism tend to have dwindling desires to continue in school and gaining this so called intellect, leading them to complacency in their education. Whereas those who have increased desire to further their intellects will tend to stay on a path of fulfillment and
School is a frightening place. It is broken down into multiple social ranks, and many children find themselves at the bottom. With children trying to work their way to the top of the food chain, the actual learning portion is either set aside or forgotten altogether. In Grant Penrod’s essay, Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids, he explains how modern children are growing to dislike intellectual children. The varying social ranks teach children to ignore low grades and try to be popular in school. Anti-Intellectualism is a trend which is becoming increasingly popular throughout the world. People who only strive to be popular tend to tease intellectuals, but this is not half of the story. If the only goal children have in school
Fridman employs a values based premise that states that America’s insignificance towards education creates degrading phrases for the intellectual through “There is something wrong with the system of values in a society that only has derogatory terms like nerd and geek for the intellectually curious and academically serious” (P.1). He expresses that American society’s values, which degrades education, results in demeaning terms to address intelligence which is wrong since intellectuals don’t deserve to be classified negatively for their efforts in studying. He expresses that educated people being offensively labeled due to American society’s values of minoring education is wrong, in order for readers of the New York Times to appreciate intellectuals since their success in studying is not worth being degraded due to it being in the field of education. Next, he utilizes a sociological base premise that conveys America's culture of supporting non education through “For America’s sake, the anti-intellectual values that pervade our society must be fought” (P.6.). This indicates the culture of America is wrong since promoting uneducated citizens regards America as a incompetent country that has unqualified leadership due to unscholarly decisions. Fridman states that American culture advocating unintelligence is wrong in order for readers of the New York Times to appreciate the intellectuals since they
A person who has the ability to think critically, experienced conflicts, educated is known as an intellectual person. Author Malcolm Gladwell agrees with all of Gerald Graff’s asserts. In the article, “Hidden Intellectualism” and “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted” authors Graff and Gladwell both insists that knowledge does not only belong to those people who are educated, but also it belong to the people who gets scholarly from media or from the environment, known as “street smarts”. Gladwell and Graff, both supports education, critical thinking, and wisdom delineates intellectualism.
When Beatty explains to Montag why books are being burned, he describes the method used when teaching students: “Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information...And they’ll be happy” (Bradbury 58). Later, on the train, an advertisement blares, “Denham’s Dentifrice” while Montag struggles to read “the shape of the individual letters” (Bradbury 75). Montag’s society is convinced that education means mindlessly memorizing facts. However, a large amount of information and facts is not a proper substitute for deep, critical thought. When information is just given and not analyzed, it prevents questioning why facts are true and inhibits the development of basic thinking skills, such as when Montag struggles to understand the book he is reading. Additionally, with so much information and entertainment circulated in Montag’s society, significant ideas that promote questioning and changing life cannot be developed. Without thoughts that allow people to question their ways and change themselves, people believe they are perfect, cannot realize their faults, and are unable to change the way they are. When Montag consults Faber for some insight on books, Faber states that books have been abandoned because “they show the pores in the face of life” and, because of this, their society is “living in a time when flowers are trying to live on flowers, instead of growing on good rain and black loam” (Bradbury 79). Instead of taking the time to think and develop thoughts, the citizens of Montag’s city take the easy way in life, by avoiding any deep thought and personal opinion altogether. It is much easier for the citizens to enjoy mindless entertainment than to think about the issues in the world and their solutions. However, this can create problems within
The theme of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 can be viewed from several different angles. First and foremost, Bradbury's novel gives an anti-censorship message. Bradbury understood censorship to be a natural outcropping of an overly tolerant society. Once one group objects to something someone has written, that book is modified and censorship begins. Soon, another minority group objects to something else in the book, and it is again edited until eventually the book is banned altogether. In Bradbury's novel, society has evolved to such an extreme that all literature is illegal to possess. No longer can books be read, not only because they might offend someone, but because books raise questions that often lead to revolutions and even anarchy. The intellectual thinking that arises from reading books can often be dangerous, and the government doesn't want to put up with this danger. Yet this philosophy, according to Bradbury, completely ignores the benefits of knowledge. Yes, knowledge can cause disharmony, but in many ways, knowledge of the past, which is recorded in books, can prevent man from making similar mistakes in the present and future.
“Their optimism, their willingness to have trust in a future where civilizations self-destruction comes to a full stop, has to do with their belief in the changed relationship between humans and their world” says Lee (Lee 1). In “As the Constitution Says” by Joseph F. Brown, Brown talks about a NEA experiment that found American’s have been reading less and less and our comprehension skills are dramatically dropping because of this (Brown 4). Bradbury saw little use in the technology being created in his time, he avoided airplanes, driving automobiles, and eBooks. Bradbury did not even allow his book to be sold and read on eBooks until 2011. If one takes away books, then one takes away imagination. If one takes away imagination, then one takes away creativity. If one takes away creativity, then one takes away new ideas for technology and the advancement of the world. People nowadays have lost interest in books because they see it as a waste of time and useless effort, and they are losing their critical thinking, understanding of things around them, and knowledge. Brown says that Bradbury suggests that a world without books is a world without imagination and its ability to find happiness. The people in Fahrenheit 451 are afraid to read books because of the emotions that they
American culture has evolved, and Society tends to ostracize people for their intelligence, and our culture has been giving these intellectuals derogatory names like nerd and geek. Leonid Fridman believes that these anti- intellectual values that pervade our society must be fought and should stop for the sake of America. The author supports this position in the passage “America Needs It’s Nerds” through the use of rhetoric by giving definitions of terms such as geek, offering comparisons through juxtaposition, adding a tone shift, and posing rhetorical questions to the reader.
In “The Closing of the American Book,” published in the New York Times Magazine, Andrew Solomon argues about how the decline of literary reading is a crisis in national health, politics, and education. Solomon relates the decline of reading with the rise of electronic media. He believes that watching television and sitting in front of a computer or a video screen instead of reading can cause the human brain to turn off, and lead to loneliness and depression. He also argues that with the decrease of reading rates, there will no longer be weapons against “absolutism” and “terrorism,” leading to the United States political failure in these battles. The last point Solomon makes is that there is no purpose behind America being one of the most literate societies in history if people eradicate this literacy, and so he encourages everyone to help the society by increasing reading rates and making it a “mainstay of community.” Solomon tries to show the importance of reading in brain development and he encourages people to read more by emphasizing the crisis and dangers behind the declination of reading.
Imagine a world of uniformity. All people look the same, act the same, and love the same things. There are no original thoughts and no opposing viewpoints. This sort of world is not far from reality. Uniformity in modern day society is caused by the banning of books. The novel "Fahrenheit 451" illustrates a future in which the banning of books has risen to the extent that no books are allowed. The novel follows the social and moral implications of an over censored society. Even though the plot may seem far-fetched, themes from this book are still relevant today. Although some people believe that banning a book is necessary to defend their religion, the negative effects caused by censorship and the redaction of individual thought are reasons why books such as "Fahrenheit 451" should not be banned.