this comment isn't about whether you are patronizing. i'm not going to go into that.
adam, it appears that you put a lot of time into your blog. the things you write are very well thought-out and usually very long. and, though i'm sure you have a number of readers who do enjoy sitting at their computer screens reading your musings for a significant amount of time... i tend to drift off a bit sometimes.
i've been wondering why that is, seeing as the content of your writing is very interesting. and (disregarding the fact that you are opposed to any literary tools that might make your writing--gasp--ENTERTAINING) i believe i may have found the reason.
paragraphs. your paragraphs are like three feet long. shorten the damn paragraphs, adam, and give your readers bites that are easier to chew! nobody wants to eat a whole sandwich in one gulp! and though the meat of your writing may be very nutritious, it is overwhelming to have to consume this way.
that was an awesome metaphor.
well, anyway, that's just my little tip, and don't think that I'M being patronizing or anything now, because that's not my intention. and don't take this personally. you and colin seem to have formed from these little internet spats the opinion that i don't like you two or something. not true. i just like to argue, i suppose. and it's nice to argue with intellectuals; it doesn't numb your brain.
so thanks. and GOD SPEED.
Colin said:
Yay! She doesn't hate us!
Colin said:
Oh, and on the patronizing topic:
I learned the meaning of "patronizing" from an SNL monologue done by Al Gore. It was funny. Okay, never mind about that.
To me, you aren't really patronizing. Of course, as I am sort of one of the "intellectuals", at least someone that won't rot your mind if you talk to me, that probably affects how you speak to me. So, to me, you are not patronizing, but I cannot make a good judgement about your patronization toward others.
Your reputation as an über-smart guy is surely a result of either a presence of lack of patronization, but I'm not sure which. Either because you treat everyone as inferiors, they look up to you, or because you treat everyone like they're smart, they think you're smart. I'm not sure, and whichever way it is, this theory is getting me nowhere.
Patronizing, to me, is a direct reflection of ego. If you honestly believe that someone is your inferior (you have a high ego), then you will patronize. But if you believe that someone is at least capable of operating on the same level as you (not quite so high ego), then you are less likely to patonize. So, when it comes down to it, it's up to you to recognize if you think others are inferior, and if you treat them so. From many of your rants on the general stupidity of people, then I'd say you are likely to be a patronizer.
But that also brings up the issue of whether or not patronizing is a bad thing. It is generally used with a negative connotation, but does patronizing really deserve this? If someone truly is your inferior, at least, say, mentally, then is it bad to dumb things down for them? I know that I find myself often patronizing, particularly when helping people with Spanish and other subjects. So, as a conclusion, if you think you do patronize, then at least recognize it and change it if you come to the conclusion that it's a bad thing (which you probably will).
Wow I wrote too much.
Adam Anderson said:
I hate all of this incessant talk of us being "intellectuals." We are not intellectuals. We are adolescents with particular interest in academic areas of thought. To those who in school who don't either have aptitude or interest in scholastic things, we merely seem smart. Although it goes against my very principles of believing in the relativity of everything, the opinions of others do not necessarily determine reality. In the context to which I was referring: patronize - v. to treat condescendingly. Yes, it's a bad thing.
Colin said:
Okay, I know we're not really intellectuals, but I still like using that word. And I guess that context of patronize is a bad thing, but the concept of treating someone as if they are lower than you may not be all that bad, but condescendingly connotes lack of respect, which is bad. And the opinions of others don't necessarily prove whether or not you're a patronizer, but they do at least provide some insight into the matter.
But my question is still this: do you think that you're patronizing? I'm sure you at least have the suspicion (why else would you have put it in your blog?), but you haven't said whether or not you truly believe that you are deep down inside.
Maxwell said:
goodness gracious me
john said:
\Pa"tron*i`zing\, a.
Showing condescending favor; assuming the manner of airs of a superior toward another.
Related terms: arrogance, arrogant, arrogantness, assumption of superiority.
It's true. You are patronizing in your blog. It's genetic. You got it from me. And Lindsay's right, you need to shorten those paragraphs, and your writing could be more entertaining.
Leave a comment
Search
About this Entry
This page contains a single entry by Adam Anderson published on May 2, 2004 8:52 AM.
this comment isn't about whether you are patronizing. i'm not going to go into that.
adam, it appears that you put a lot of time into your blog. the things you write are very well thought-out and usually very long. and, though i'm sure you have a number of readers who do enjoy sitting at their computer screens reading your musings for a significant amount of time... i tend to drift off a bit sometimes.
i've been wondering why that is, seeing as the content of your writing is very interesting. and (disregarding the fact that you are opposed to any literary tools that might make your writing--gasp--ENTERTAINING) i believe i may have found the reason.
paragraphs. your paragraphs are like three feet long. shorten the damn paragraphs, adam, and give your readers bites that are easier to chew! nobody wants to eat a whole sandwich in one gulp! and though the meat of your writing may be very nutritious, it is overwhelming to have to consume this way.
that was an awesome metaphor.
well, anyway, that's just my little tip, and don't think that I'M being patronizing or anything now, because that's not my intention. and don't take this personally. you and colin seem to have formed from these little internet spats the opinion that i don't like you two or something. not true. i just like to argue, i suppose. and it's nice to argue with intellectuals; it doesn't numb your brain.
so thanks. and GOD SPEED.
Yay! She doesn't hate us!
Oh, and on the patronizing topic:
I learned the meaning of "patronizing" from an SNL monologue done by Al Gore. It was funny. Okay, never mind about that.
To me, you aren't really patronizing. Of course, as I am sort of one of the "intellectuals", at least someone that won't rot your mind if you talk to me, that probably affects how you speak to me. So, to me, you are not patronizing, but I cannot make a good judgement about your patronization toward others.
Your reputation as an über-smart guy is surely a result of either a presence of lack of patronization, but I'm not sure which. Either because you treat everyone as inferiors, they look up to you, or because you treat everyone like they're smart, they think you're smart. I'm not sure, and whichever way it is, this theory is getting me nowhere.
Patronizing, to me, is a direct reflection of ego. If you honestly believe that someone is your inferior (you have a high ego), then you will patronize. But if you believe that someone is at least capable of operating on the same level as you (not quite so high ego), then you are less likely to patonize. So, when it comes down to it, it's up to you to recognize if you think others are inferior, and if you treat them so. From many of your rants on the general stupidity of people, then I'd say you are likely to be a patronizer.
But that also brings up the issue of whether or not patronizing is a bad thing. It is generally used with a negative connotation, but does patronizing really deserve this? If someone truly is your inferior, at least, say, mentally, then is it bad to dumb things down for them? I know that I find myself often patronizing, particularly when helping people with Spanish and other subjects. So, as a conclusion, if you think you do patronize, then at least recognize it and change it if you come to the conclusion that it's a bad thing (which you probably will).
Wow I wrote too much.
I hate all of this incessant talk of us being "intellectuals." We are not intellectuals. We are adolescents with particular interest in academic areas of thought. To those who in school who don't either have aptitude or interest in scholastic things, we merely seem smart. Although it goes against my very principles of believing in the relativity of everything, the opinions of others do not necessarily determine reality. In the context to which I was referring: patronize - v. to treat condescendingly. Yes, it's a bad thing.
Okay, I know we're not really intellectuals, but I still like using that word. And I guess that context of patronize is a bad thing, but the concept of treating someone as if they are lower than you may not be all that bad, but condescendingly connotes lack of respect, which is bad. And the opinions of others don't necessarily prove whether or not you're a patronizer, but they do at least provide some insight into the matter.
But my question is still this: do you think that you're patronizing? I'm sure you at least have the suspicion (why else would you have put it in your blog?), but you haven't said whether or not you truly believe that you are deep down inside.
goodness gracious me
\Pa"tron*i`zing\, a.
Showing condescending favor; assuming the manner of airs of a superior toward another.
Related terms: arrogance, arrogant, arrogantness, assumption of superiority.
It's true. You are patronizing in your blog. It's genetic. You got it from me. And Lindsay's right, you need to shorten those paragraphs, and your writing could be more entertaining.