Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

iverglas

(38,549 posts)
22. not sure why you've mixed my cases
Tue May 15, 2012, 12:20 PM
May 2012

1. there is growing income disparity

2. is there growing IQ disparity?

1 was simply used to explain what I was talking about. I didn't suggest that income disparity causes IQ disparity. Although it would be an interesting idea to explore.


All the factors you cite are discussed in detail in the wiki I linked in my next post.

Ultimately people will remember the entertainment they grew up with as being superior to the entertainment of today. That has always been the case. No doubt your grandparents lament that the idiot-box replaced radio, which was how intelligent people received their news/entertainment. And their grandparents had similar things to say about radio replacing plays/operas. And really why do we need plays when we could be dancing naked around a fire?

No, to any of that, personally. You mistake concerns about the content of the entertainment for something else, it seems. I don't have any objections to video games; I do object to the violent, misogynist content of many of them, for instance.

And it's not what I've said myself, of course. I specifically referred to the internet as a potential stimulus, and I've said I use TV for that purpose myself.

Columbo may have been a smarter show but it was passive: you sat there and watched it and that was it. Passive entertainment isn't exactly known for being stimulating to the intellect.

You see, there's the thing -- I don't agree that all TV is passive entertainment. I'm not being passive when I watch a Brit police procedural. Yes, what I'm thinking about is pre-determined, but once one selects a stimulus, that's true of them all, be it a calculus text or Inspector Morse. My dad interacted with Columbo.

I know I'm probably being a little naive on that point, and it's admittedly a very long time since I read McLuhan and didn't really pay enough attention even then. But even admitting that there's a narrower range within which to operate -- even admitting, say, that television watching is always a passive activity -- are there gradations, and is entertainment increasingly aimed at a lower intelligence level, i.e. does it call for even less engagement? And if so, is there an effect?

Like I say, just questions.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Ya think????? lol Little Star May 2012 #1
lol. well ya. but we actually ahve arguments on du that this shit does not affect us seabeyond May 2012 #2
and yes, obviously can be extrapolated iverglas May 2012 #13
from a sociological point seabeyond May 2012 #16
that's actually really interesting iverglas May 2012 #3
I agree get the red out May 2012 #4
we all love the history channel and a couple others with documentaries. really enjoyed seabeyond May 2012 #5
History Channel 2 get the red out May 2012 #10
our secret shame iverglas May 2012 #6
i watched the first year and was totally hooked. couldnt watch by the second year... nt seabeyond May 2012 #7
Chicken/egg 4th law of robotics May 2012 #8
the study should have answered the question for you. nt seabeyond May 2012 #9
Not really 4th law of robotics May 2012 #12
it would be helpful iverglas May 2012 #15
welcome some actual meat in the sandwich. seabeyond May 2012 #17
I'm not really sure if I could reliably 4th law of robotics May 2012 #20
once the egg has been laid iverglas May 2012 #11
People are insistent that we've been "getting dumber" every generation since 4th law of robotics May 2012 #14
if we leave aside the bell curve iverglas May 2012 #18
just getting started on answering myself iverglas May 2012 #19
It's possible we're reaching a plateau 4th law of robotics May 2012 #26
well isn't that a depressing thought ;) iverglas May 2012 #28
Well, maybe not 4th law of robotics May 2012 #29
you're just trying to trick me ;) iverglas May 2012 #30
Possibly, but being poor in relation to everyone else 4th law of robotics May 2012 #21
not sure why you've mixed my cases iverglas May 2012 #22
I don't think I did mix up your cases 4th law of robotics May 2012 #25
okay, well, we seem to be getting bogged in side issues iverglas May 2012 #27
Egg. laconicsax May 2012 #23
. seabeyond May 2012 #24
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»History of Feminism»Watching 'Jersey Shore' m...»Reply #22