<p>Ah, dchow, I’m sorry I misinterpreted your use of ‘ignorant’ and misread into your posts.</p>
<p>I maintain, though, that you should try and stretch your idea of ‘intellectual.’ I think it certainly can be found in a host of ways beyond your set definition. Who says wit is merely pseudo-intellectual? I’ve got to say, I’ve learned quite a lot from some really hilarious conversations I’ve had with my friends during my year at school. I’m pretty sure none of us consciously regarded ourselves as intellectuals during such conversations, but I admit that I’ve learned a lot about how people interact and- yes- how they share ideas.</p>
<p>I really don’t want to contest you too much, dchow, since I know you really do enjoy Swat, but that’s my one sticking point, I guess!</p>
<p>When Swatgrad extolled the virtues of marijuana, I think that he was trying to tell you to chill out and I concur that you need to chill out. Please, relax. It is not necessary to smoke weed to be able to relax, so I am not telling to start smoking. Just stop being so analytical! Good conversation and intellectual exchanges will happen naturally when you are among peers with similar interests.</p>
<p>You seem to be despairing at the absence of true Renaissance men and women, but you did come to the realization that perhaps you are expecting too much of students your age. Has it occurred to you that the reason that you are enrolled at a small liberal arts college is so that you can acquire the foundation and tools to become the kind of “renaissance” peer that you seek? </p>
<p>So when you hear that Swatties seem to be more intellectual than kids at other colleges, all that means, is that Swarthmore seems to attract a larger number of students who are truly curious and who want to learn for the simple sake of learning. I know that is what attracted my D to the school.</p>
<p>It is this curiosity and thirst for knowledge that will send you and your peers on the path to becoming the type of “Renaissance” men and women that you would like to have as friends. Learning is a lifetime endeavor. So all I will suggest is that you relax and keep an open mind so that you can become enlightened, … all in due time…</p>
<p>Okay, A.E., a summary: So I thought that by intellectual it meant that everyone knew a lot more than they do now, but I realized that that wasn’t the case, but I don’t mind that much because I had too high expectations, and no college would’ve met my expectations anyway, so I’m happy. Basically what johnwesley said.</p>
<p>johnwesley: I never really thought of myself as very political. I don’t know where you got that impression. Maybe I just made a bunch of political-sounding posts? I dunno.</p>
<p>bubblysoprano: I guess we just have differing definitions of intellectual. But I guess you’re suggesting that I be more open-minded, which is a reasonable thing to ask. And yes, I do really enjoy Swat, and I had a great first-year.</p>
<p>from the very first post in this thread the op reveals himself to be a self centered imbecile who is attempting to slough off his own bad behaviour by attacking the intelligence of an entire student body. he continues to whine and lament the fact that noone other than a couple of campus stoners would indulge him in esoteric conversations of the mind when the obvious truth is that noone else on campus wants to be anywhere in the proximity of the op much less have a boring conversation with him. a cursory analysis of the op’s postings on this thread reveal very disturbing conclusions. it is quite apparent that the op, through his angst about whether to remain at swat, has very few comrades on campus and has become much the social outcast. the fact that he lashes out at the entire institution as unworthy of his own intellect is further argument for possible institutionalization. in light of highly publicized incidents at va tech and columbine and the less publicized incidents at other institutions of learning, i advocate that cc look into who the op is and alert the proper therapists and possibly law enforcement to avert a national incident. this is the perfect argument against interspersing upper classmen and frosh/soph classes in the dorms. for all i know, i could be rooming next to this powderkeg when he goes off.</p>
<p>Some unsolicited advice (based, I hasten to add, on only a hit-and-miss reading of bits and pieces of this thread):</p>
<p>–Your expectations seem to be overwhelming your experiences, leaving you feeling (not surprisingly) frustrated and dissatisfied because (inevitably) your experiences fail to measure up to your own expectations.</p>
<p>–If you really want to learn from, and enjoy, other people, you need to try to see others not simply in terms of how they do, or do not, satisfy your preconceived expectations of what other people should be. Approaching other people in this way is simply another way of looking in the mirror. </p>
<p>–If you’re continually evaluating other people against a fixed set of criteria, you’re just engaged in a process of trying to reduce others to fit yourself. But if you can put your preconceived criteria aside (at least from time to time), you can begin to experience other people on *their<a href=“not%20your”>/i</a> terms, thereby enlarging your own range of experience. Do you want to try to make the world smaller or yourself larger? </p>
<p>–If you know how to look, and listen, you can (believe me) learn at least as much from a waitress at a diner as you can, in a dorm room, from a Kant-spouting Swattie.</p>
<p>dchow08 - Knowledge without wisdom has little value…i appreciate the breadth of your interests and your interest in “intellectual” conversations. i also appreciate that you are receptive to the many thoughtful posts on this thread. but at times, your choice of words (“ignorant”) and your ideas and the way you express them (“if only everyone on campus knew about Marx, Shaw, Bagehot, William James, Montaigne, and Shakespeare…”) lead me to wonder whether others may be put off by (to me) certain “hard-edged,” judgmental aspects of your style of discourse. I hope your efforts to engage others in stimulating conversation help to bring out the best in others as well as yourself. This will sow goodwill and benefit all!</p>
<p>epistrophy: I think your first comment is right, but your other comments suggest that I do not find worthwhile conversations with those I deem not intellectual. I have never said that I only want to speak to intellectuals, or that others aren’t worth having conversations with. I was only concerned to the presence or lack of intellectuals. </p>
<p>davidwk: I submit that I used the word “ignorant” correctly. Take a few examples of the word in books I have readily at hand: </p>
<p>“Here was a marvelous but difficult, inhospitable book being scrambled for in utter ignorance of its contents.”</p>
<p>“The parallel to the lack of musical culture in a performer is the painter’s ignorance of theories and traditions, or the modern dancer’s belief that…”</p>
<p>Let me make myself clear: What I found dissatisfying was not the lack of good conversation I had with people I wouldn’t call intellectual, but rather the lack of good, intellectual conversation I had with people whom I would call intellectual.</p>
<p>And let me make myself clear again: I no longer feel such dissatisfaction.</p>
<p>OK, reading this conversation is starting to make me feel very uncomfortable.</p>
<p>First, Duhvinci, I would like to ask you to consider thoughtfully before you use “institutionalization” as a flippant insult. To some people (people suffering in many institutionalized settings and the activists trying to help then), that is a real battle and a big deal. To read your comment was almost like a blow to the stomach, and I imagine it hurt me and any other readers like me a great deal more than it hurt dchow.</p>
<p>Second, dchow - I think the argument over your choice of “ignorant” lies in the usage. There is a difference between accusing people of being ignorant and accusing people of being ignorant of something. The first implies a broad lack of knowledge, the second a lack of knowledge about one thing in particular. All your example sentences used “ignorant of” while in your posts you simply used “ignorant.”</p>
<p>OK, reading this conversation is starting to make me feel very uncomfortable.</p>
<p>Me, too. I’m not enjoying dchow’s posts and I’m not enjoying the posts attacking dchow for his posts and I don’t think this thread is shedding one ray of light on the student experience at Swarthmore.</p>
<p>I would offer a couple of general unsoliticed observations. My daughter once told me that the first thing she learned within weeks at Swarthmore is that every student there has something interesting to share, in some way or another, whether she knew what it was yet or not. She learned immediately not to underestimate anyone, but instead to be open to learning about their particular cool interest. Swarthmore admissions isn’t enrolling dull young adults.</p>
<p>The Swatties I know through my daughter continually amaze me with their intellectual curiousity. This is not to say that they aren’t fun-loving young people, but that even parties often have some kind of theme that adds a little element of interest – such as a recent Swat grad party my daughter attended where the musical theme was songs written about the fifty states, so it became a bit of a scavenger hunt like - who knew that Sonic Youth had a song about New Hampshire?</p>
<p>Or the informal Swattie grad book club that meets every couple of weeks just to have fun discussing a particular book the group had chosen to read. </p>
<p>These are not necessarily “deep” philosophical discussions. They are, however, typical of the kind of intellectual curiousity that is all around Swarthmore to anyone who is open to that sort of thing.</p>
<p>“Let me make myself clear: What I found dissatisfying was not the lack of good conversation I had with people I wouldn’t call intellectual, but rather the lack of good, intellectual conversation I had with people whom I would call intellectual.”</p>
<p>wouldn’t your lack of ‘good, intellectual conversation’ with those you call intellectual make them only psuedo-intellectuals by your own definition? and therefore unworthy of your presence?</p>
<p>elenlin: not being a licenced health care professional (although pre-med is a possiblity), my only prescription for your discomfort would be a recommendation to stop reading further…for your sake.</p>
<p>the only insult that i passed to the op in my last posting was the use of the word imbecile. having taken a couple of pyschology courses at swat (and also having stayed at a holiday inn express) i feel confident in saying that an analysis of the op’s postings, conclude that we have one sick pup here. he seems isolated, self delusional, infused with feelings of righteous superiority (the need to teach his roomate a lesson and the rest of us being ignorant seem to fit in here), virginal (because we just know, don’t we?) and in more clinical terms, just plain crazy. it is not flippant to say that to protect society as a whole, the op is in need of incarceration in an enviroment that would segregate him from the general fully functioning populace (see how many words i waste when i could have just used institutionalize or its derivative?)</p>
<p>i am happy that you called out the op on his use of the word ignorant. the malicious tone of his use of ignorant cannot be mistaken. the fact that the op is no longer disatisfied is also positive. the meds must have kicked in.</p>
<p>interesteddad: i fully understand why this particular thread is not to your liking. the postings by dchow, and myself for that matter, do not shine the halo’d glow on swat that you try to depict in all your anectdotal postings. i fully understand that your daughter had an almost religious experience at swat, but this thread exposes other parts of swat that are not quite as antiseptic as you would like. sure, maybe we could keep it “all in the family” so to speak, but that is akin to sweeping dust under the rug (wow, i’ve turned into a cliche factory.) so it’s good that people know that there are malcontents at swat as well as people with…heaven forbid…republican leanings and a decidedly un-pc view of the world.</p>
<p>Is any else tired of this conversation? Because I am. I thought we were done! I thought I had come to a reasonable conclusion, and the conversation was over.</p>
<p>Fine, I should’ve said “ignorant of” philosophy instead of “ignorant.” “Ignorant of” is clearer. I didn’t mean “ignorant” as in “the ignorant masses.” I hope we’re settled on this.</p>
<p>And I’m not responding to Duhvinci’s posts, because they only add more confusion and, dare I say, ignorance.</p>
<p>interesteddad: Your post neither contradicts nor is inconsistent with my posts.</p>
<p>So, your daughter’s experience is worthy of more consideration than dchow’s experience, or the experiences of those people who have to put up with the likes of dchow? </p>
<p>As always, good job attempting to marginalize every point of view that you can’t comprehend or don’t agree with.</p>
<p>Let me just respond to interesteddad’s post.</p>
<p>"I would offer a couple of general unsoliticed observations. My daughter once told me that the first thing she learned within weeks at Swarthmore is that every student there has something interesting to share, in some way or another, whether she knew what it was yet or not. She learned immediately not to underestimate anyone, but instead to be open to learning about their particular cool interest. Swarthmore admissions isn’t enrolling dull young adults.</p>
<p>[I don’t understand why you’re saying this. Are you implying that I do underestimate everyone? It is unclear from your post.]</p>
<p>The Swatties I know through my daughter continually amaze me with their intellectual curiousity. This is not to say that they aren’t fun-loving young people, but that even parties often have some kind of theme that adds a little element of interest – such as a recent Swat grad party my daughter attended where the musical theme was songs written about the fifty states, so it became a bit of a scavenger hunt like - who knew that Sonic Youth had a song about New Hampshire?</p>
<p>[I still wouldn’t call that an example of intellectual curiosity, because it doesn’t really have to do with knowledge–it’s just sharing facts.]</p>
<p>Or the informal Swattie grad book club that meets every couple of weeks just to have fun discussing a particular book the group had chosen to read. [I think that would count as intellectual, because that involves the exchange of ideas.]</p>
<p>These are not necessarily “deep” philosophical discussions. They are, however, typical of the kind of intellectual curiousity that is all around Swarthmore to anyone who is open to that sort of thing. [I have never, ever said in this thread that intellectual conversations need to be deep and philosophical. But they do need to have some exchange od ideas.]</p>
<p>Does anyone actually have a constructive comment about my conclusion, that</p>
<p>So, to answer the question, “Is Swarthmore really that intellectual?” the answer would be, "No. But that’s OK, because there honestly would be no college in the country that would have the level of genuine intellectualism I was hoping for. It’s not that students here aren’t intellectual; it’s just that they’d have to be practically Renaissance men for my answer to be Yes. And of course not everyone wants to be having intellectual conversations all the time (That goes without saying.). It’s intellectual enough, and in fact, one poster said that Swatties were the most intellectual people he/she’s met. I’m probably not likely to find a much more intellectual college. I’m fine with that " </p>
<p>Honestly, I thought that after I had agreed with dramatica, the conversation was pretty much over.</p>
<p>dramatica’s wise advice for you was to chill out. If you agreed with her, why don’t you follow her advice?
If you want this conversation to be over (like most of us do), just stop posting on this thread…</p>
<p>I can’t help but be a bit annoyed by all the confusion in this thread. It seems to me that the only people who understand what I am trying to say are bubblysoprano, elenlin, johnwesley, and dramatica. And since I had agreed with all of them, I thought we were good. </p>
<p>I suggest that people who post read carefully that long post I wrote, and know what I am actually saying and what I am not saying, before they say that I am wrong.</p>
<p>nngmm: The only reason I’m continuing to post is because people like epistrophy and davidwk didn’t seem to understand what I was saying, so I am trying to clear up the confusion. I do want this conversation to be over, but there are still people who aren’t getting what I’m saying.</p>
<p>You know what, nngmm? You’re right. I should just stop posting on this thread. Especially since I’ve come to a conclusion.</p>
<p>I have tried my best to make it clear what my opinions, questions, and claims were. Some people understand what I have to say, but others seem to be really off-track. They have not carefully read or considered what I had to say. Maybe it’s harder because it’s a message board and not a face-to-face chat. I acknowledge that I could have been clearer at times. It seems that some people take one paragraph I wrote and overreact to it, for example:</p>
<p>I say, “I haven’t see a whole lot of intellectual conversation on this campus,” and here are some possible responses:
He hates Swarthmore.
He doesn’t have friends.
He thinks Swarthmore is not intellectual.
He thinks that only intellectual conversations are worth having.
He thinks that other people aren’t worth talking to.
He’s obnoxious.
He wants only deep, philosophical conversations.</p>
<p>And I spent, in response, a lot of time correcting these misunderstandings. But I don’t have to. I’ve already made a long post that explained as well as I could my train of thought. I have come to a fine conclusion. There’s no real reason why I should continue this conversation, because if I do, more people will continue to misunderstand, and it won’t make things better. So I’m stopping.</p>
<p>No, that’s an insufficient answer. Intellectualism can be measured according to academic mastery, but also according to intellectual curiosity. You need to be specific in your meaning when you use terms like “intellectual” (or, as you’ve learned, “ignorant”). While the average Swarthmore freshman probably knows roughly the same about quantum electrodynamics as the average freshman anywhere (virtually nothing), and thus cannot discuss it in rigorous detail any better than someone elsewhere, there’s a good chance that the Swarthmorean will be more interested in learning what he can about the topic than someone elsewhere would be, even if said learning takes place in the context of a 20 minute conversation over bong hits with his roommate, at a level that is only superficial and would be insufficient to allow for the Swarthmorean to go out and pass an exam on the material the following day. This is intellectual curiosity in action, and it’s fair to say that it is more common in smarter (higher IQ) people than it is in less intelligent people. As such, it is likely to be more common at Swarthmore (or any other elite institution) than at the University of North Dakota or some such place.</p>
<p>I think that your inability to perceive intellectualism along those lines is precisely why this thread is as ■■■■■■■■ and useless as it is.</p>
<p>I don’t think she would describe it as “religious”. She does describe it as an enjoyable, rewarding four years, and she continues to enjoy being actively involved in the Swarthmore alumni community with a large, and very social, circle of Swarthmore friends.</p>
<p>I know a dozen or so of her contemporaries from Swarthmore – roommates, close friends, and so forth. I think most of them have pretty similar feelings.</p>
<p>She, of course, has described a couple of different “types” of Swatties she learned to avoid (as you would expect in a community of 1400), but I don’t see any benefit to enumerate those in this thread.</p>
Who says wit is merely pseudo-intellectual? I’ve got to say, I’ve learned quite a lot from some really hilarious conversations I’ve had with my friends during my year at school. I’m pretty sure none of us consciously regarded ourselves as intellectuals during such conversations, but I admit that I’ve learned a lot about how people interact and- yes- how they share ideas.</p>