Posted on 05/15/2009 7:20:03 AM PDT by BBell
Author Mark Bauerlein aims to provoke in his new book, "The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future" (Tarcher/Penguin). Do you agree? Take a look at eight reasons the Emory University English professor gives to ''not trust anyone under 30'' -- see which you think is the best. Disagree, or have your own spin? Have your say on this message board. Or see if Bauerlein answered your question directly in a chat from Wednesday, May 14.
1. They make excellent "Jaywalking'' targets
Bauerlein writes: "The ignorance is hard to believe ... It isn't enough to say that these young people are uninterested in world realities. They are actively cut off from them. ... They are encased in more immediate realities that shut out conditions beyond -- friends, work, clothes, cars, pop music, sitcoms, Facebook.''
2. They don't read books -- and don't want to, either
"It's a new attitude, this brazen disregard of books and reading. Earlier generations resented homework assignments, of course, and only a small segment of each dove into the intellectual currents of the time, but no generation trumpeted aliteracy ... as a valid behavior of their peers.''
3. They can't spell
Lack of capitalization and IM codes dominate online writing. Without spellcheck, folks are toast.
4. They get ridiculed for original thought, good writing
"On MySpace, if you write clearly and compose coherent paragraphs with informed observations on history and current events, 'buddies' will make fun of you,'' Bauerlein says. Wikipedia writing is clean and factual, but colorless and judgment-free. Often the most clever students, with flashes of disorganized brilliance on MySpace, switch to dull Wiki-writing formats for school papers, he says. "If we could combine the style and imagination of MySpace with the content of Wikipedia, we might get good stuff."
5. Grand
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
HA!!
True-true.
So glad you too have noticed, ummmm, the *trend*? ;^)
furthermore, i note there are no ukases with respect to grammar or punctuation on FR’s founder’s statement...
That is very worrisome. Poor command of facts will cause no end of difficulties down the road.
But that's where attitude comes into play; kids know they're being bull-sh!tted in a way that I don't remember from when I was their age. And they're canny about it, too.
And another thing.... I think our friendly professor guy simply hasn't grasped the implications of cell phones, texting, and all of that instant communication that kids have at their disposal. (Nor have I, for that matter....) He bemoans spelling ... while ignoring the incredible web of communications in which it takes place.
That type of communication and connected-ness is a sea change in society; probably comparable to the impact of moveable type on the dissemination of knowledge back in Renaissance times.
Whether it's a good or bad thing remains to be seen; but I really think that we're headed for something completely different than what we grew up with.
I agree - my son has information from all over the world at his fingertips - even a fleeting thought can be researched in seconds on the internet. My son’s understanding of the economy and our government would put some college grads to shame.
and i will continue to do, with gusto, if just to give meaning to the lives of pedants everywhere. how sad that some are in such dire need of some vestige of self esteem that they seek to feel superior over something so petty. oh well, if i can help them in some way with my posts, i will do so.
Hell we had a freeper who couldn’t grasp the proper use of their, there, and they’re - it was a crapshoot as to which word she would use in any given sentence! She was close to age 50 so this isn’t a problem of this generation only. ;^)
wow, this has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read?
so my generation is the dumbest because we have computers and play Grand Theft Auto IV?
For example, I recently heard some compositions by a local kid; really jaw-dropping stuff. Sophisticated orchestral music, too, not just your typical angst-fest. You'll probably hear about him within a few years....
I heard his music in the context of a show put on by my daughter's dance ensemble; a compilation of various performance arts pieces organized, written, composed, choreographed, or otherwise created; and performed by the kids themselves.
Having watched that show, I found myself rather more optimistic about the future than when I went in.
How can you deny reality? Good public policy must be based on reliable data, not anecdoctal observations. It has nothing to do with gloom and doom, but rather, facts that we need to deal with if we are going to solve the problem of a society that can't produce the skilled and educated workers we need to be competitive globally.
Statistics don't address individuals, nor do they address the actions and motivations of individuals. Nor do they address how individuals respond to tough times. This professor yutz is engaged in the time-honored navel-gazing lament, "why, oh why, can't the kids of today be as brilliant and swell as I am?"
And your response is being a Pollyana? Everything is going to be alright? It is this same kind of attitude that has prevented this country from addressing the existential challenges that threaten its survival. The entitlement programs, energy independence, failed immigration policies, etc. must be discussed in order to formulate public policy. We have some very serious problems in education that will have a detrimental impact on this country's future. You miss the professor's point because you perceive it to be "gloom and doom." So is there a problem or not? Will almost 50% high school drop out rates in our 50 largest cities have any impact on this nation? You are the one living in a fantasy world, not the professor.
The thing is, I've encountered some truly remarkable teens who run counter to what the contents of this guy's navel is telling him. Not just talented, but there's also something about their attitude, which is far more important; if I had to describe it, I'd start by saying that they're cynical about the right stuff. Real change is driven by that sort of attitude.
Yeah, more hope and change from the young, the majority of whom embraced Obama and know little about their country's civic institutions and history. Diversity and multiculturalism have replaced critical thought. Our schools are failing us. When adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided, you know you have a problem.
Sure, you can moan about Hispanic immigrants (which of course you would....), but they're not the ones who would make a difference in any case.
By 2050 one in three in this country will be Hispanic unless you don't believe the Census Bureau. The fact that Hispanics have 50% out of wedlock birthrates and about the same for school drop out rates should be a cause of concern for everyone. It is our future.
Not even mentioned is that never in history has a generation had access to so much information to back up opinions or factual statements and do so little with it. I call this the age of unreason as there also has never been so much inaccurate information available as we see with the actions of today’s liberals. Their belief that terabytes of poorly sourced touchy feeley opinion pieces can equal one fact is also ruining our society.
Xer Ping
Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
Your choice of data is highly selective, and more indicative of your personal interests than anything else.
And your response is being a Pollyana?
No. I am not at all pollyannish about the difficulties coming our way. But I am also not in thrall to selective statistics. I know that attitudes are more important than just about anything else, and what I have observed gives me hope.
1. he lied about his place of birth
2. he solidly won the 18-29, 30-44 age group and more narrowly, the 45-64 age group.
3. he solidly won the hispanic and black vote.
4. he pulled a majority of votes in both the male and female catagory (more females than males).
5. he won the "all other" religion vote (surprise, surprise) but lost the christian vote.
6. and he solidly won the "new voter" catagory.
That's how we get obammer in the "white" house.
Question now is: how do right thinking Americans reverse all this? I mean, other than running another mcidiot as the prime candidate.
“A recent poll taken of government officials revealed that 95% are liberal-politically, religiously, academically, and socially. That is to say that politically they prefer greater government and thus more human control. Religiously they prefer revisionist interpretations to the literal meaning of Scripture, and they are mostly agnostic and secular humanist. Academically they prefer relativism to reason or absolutes, opinions to evidence, outcome based evaluations and government control over curriculum. Socially they prefer multiculturalism and the absence of moral restraints. The same pollsters took the pulse of the media and discovered that 95% were both liberal and agnostic. Academia is equally skewed with 95% of university professors saying that they hold liberal views. Political correctness is the secular humanist’s version of morality.
This means one or all of the following three things must be true. Academia is manufacturing a comatose society of misfits without a moral compass who can no longer think. Only political, religious, social, and academic liberals are interested in working in society shaping and conditioning fields. Or, the administrators in government, university, and media centers are so biased they will only hire like-minded individuals.”- Craig Winn
Oh Lord! Don’t get me started on all of the grammatical and spelling errors that abound in our society...
SPELLING
I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way
of spelling words.
We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes
alike.
Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing.
I have a correspondent whose letters are always a
refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered
originality about his orthography.
He always spells Kow with a large K.
Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one.
It is better.
It gives the imagination a broader field, a
wider scope.
It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new
kind of a cow.
- speech at a spelling match, Hartford, Connecticut,
May 12, 1875. Reported in the Hartford Courant,
May 13, 1875
Why, there isn't a man who doesn't have to throw out about
fifteen hundred words a day when he writes his letters
because he can't spell them!
It's like trying to do a St. Vitus dance with wooden legs.
- The Alphabet and Simplified Spelling speech, December 9, 1907
...simplified spelling is all right, but, like chastity,
you can carry it too far.
- The Alphabet and Simplified Spelling speech, December 9, 1907
I have had an aversion to good spelling for sixty years
and more, merely for the reason that when I was a boy
there was not a thing I could do creditably except spell
according to the book.
It was a poor and mean distinction and I early learned to
disenjoy it.
I suppose that this is because the ability to spell
correctly is a talent, not an acquirement.
There is some dignity about an acquirement, because it
is a product of your own labor.
It is wages earned, whereas to be able to do a thing
merely by the grace of God and not by your own effort
transfers the distinction to our heavenly home—
where possibly it is a matter of pride and satisfaction
but it leaves you naked and bankrupt.
- Mark Twain's Autobiography
I never had any large respect for good spelling.
That is my feeling yet.
Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms,
men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters
and also added enlightening shades of expression to
what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible
that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence
to us.
- Mark Twain's Autobiography
...ours is a mongrel language which started with a child's
vocabulary of three hundred words, and now consists of two
hundred and twenty-five thousand;
the whole lot, with the exception of the original and legitimate three hundred, borrowed, stolen, smouched
from every unwatched language under the sun, the spelling
of each individual word of the lot locating the source of
the theft and preserving the memory of the revered crime.
- Mark Twain's Autobiography
Those don't bother me as much as when someone is obviously trying to spell something phonetically and even getting that wrong.
At least with there, they're, their your brain generally corrects automatically. If they completely butcher words because they really don't know how to spell them then it bothers me. Maybe you (generic plural) shouldn't use that word till you learn how to spell it and what it means.
And for the provision of that meaning I thank you.
Yep. And it didn't even take 500 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.