Anti-Intellectualism Response

In his essay “Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids,” Grant Penrod, Arizona State University student and second-place winner of the Devil Contest, argues that the intellectuals of our society are overshadowed, disregarded, and even hated by the people of our society Penrod explains three reasons for this “trend, including social stereotypes, public examples, and monetary obsession”. He begins his argument by explaining how social stereotypes begin at the high school level, when “the trend to dislike intellectuals stems at least in pan from an inescapable perception that concern for grades and test scores excludes the coexistence of normal social activities”.

Penrod moves on to clarify that the origin of the “anti-intellectualism” is set by public figures, who seem to have the highest level of success, sometimes even without finishing high school, and illustrates this by giving examples of public figures, such as Christina Auguilera and Kid Rock, who did not receive a high school diploma.

This point is further confirmed by our society’s obsession with money Penrod points out that “the existence of such amazingly affluent yet strikingly uneducated individuals” should make us question the “legitimacy of intellectualism”.

These individuals make such a great deal of money that it calls into question whether or not the intellectuals of our society matter, without being “rewarded” monetarily, it seems as though these people do not matter, further proving Penrod’s claim that society does not care about the intellectuals. He ends his argument by stating, “society looks down on those individuals who help it to progress, ostracizing its best and brightest”.

Get quality help now

Writer Lyla

Verified

Proficient in: Culture

5 (876)

“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

In his essay, Penrod is speaking specifically to college-aged people. His argument is mostly aimed at the teenagers and college-aged students who live in the middle of an era where the great thinkers of our time don’t matter in comparison to the pointless gossip of celebrities.

The problem begins at the high school level, where teens are incredibly susceptible to the powers of mass media as well as the pressures of their social life. By aiming his argument to people of this age, Penrod is attacking the problem where it begins Without the context of our society, the argument would be completely different. Within our current society, mass media plays a huge part in the way we view intellectuals, I completely agree with Penrod when he explains how mass media skews the way we see intellectuals Without mass media creating wealth for uneducated people, we would not be in a society where those people are more important than the “nerds,” Popularity rules our society, and notjust at the high school levelr Popular actors, musicians, and athletes are continuously raised up while the philosophers, scientists, and authors are pushed to the background.

Instead of living in a society where a great leap of science is celebrated throughout the world, we live in a society where the great leaps of science are celebrated only among those scientists and researchers. This is seen in the high school level just as much as the worldly levelr Penrod explains how the “nerds“ in high school are continuously left out of social events but are cruelly bullied for not attending these events. This is continued to the larger society where the intellectuals are left out of the big picture and pushed to the background intellectuals barely have a reason to do what they do because of the pressures of mass media; it this does not end, the people who carry us as a society will no longer matter in the slightest, we need the intellectuals to survive as a people.