The Alienation of Intellect.

     I'm writing this based on a presumption. I will never call myself "Intelligent" for the same reasons that a wise man will never say they are wise. They realize an above average status, but supposing wisdom, like intelligence, supposes both a measurable standard, and that there is a limit. I have a great deal of room to grow, but since I am told that I'm intelligent, here's my assertion.

     Intellect is as personally beneficial as it is socially alienating. Knowledge and intellect are based on facts and either necessary or sufficient conclusions that follow those facts. For example, If we suppose that a black hole has a gravitational pull strong enough to draw in light, it necessarily follows that we cannot see a black hole since our eyes require light to operate. An absence light restricts vision, it does not enable it. Conclusions like this are hugely gratifying, especially when they are personally beneficial.

     But it also causes you to alienate yourself. When you know fact from fiction, and a friend or family member makes choices based on a fictional elements, there is no good way of handling the problem. You point out their error, and potential upset them. You don't, and that error could be damaging to that person. So, do you be an asshole by caring, or do you avoid being the asshole, and let them potentially hurt themselves?

     In a disagreement of fact, there is a right and wrong answer. What caused the collapse of the housing market is not subject to interpretation. Factual occurrences lead to a conclusion, and there is no room for debate. Yet stating facts and a conclusion that someone disagrees with (errors of knowledge or intellect) turns the subject into a debate. You have two choices, stick with the facts and don't back down, or allow the person to continue with their erroneous conclusion. Again, in one way, you are an asshole, in the other, you let someone go on with false conclusions that may cause them to hurt themselves (or in a democracy, others.)

     Lastly, is the "arrogance" and/or "talking above" someone in a conversation. As was recently pointed out, the use of complex rhetoric, be it linguistic or scientific, puts people either on the defense or makes them apathetic to your conversation.

     Defensiveness occurs when the person tries to follow a conversation but cannot define a word or doesn't understand a concept, and develops a feeling of inadequacy as a result. The only proper responses are getting upset, or admitting fault.

     Apathy occurs when the conversation is wholly irrelevant to the person you're speaking to. Apathy's alienation is explicit. You are, or the content of your mind is insignificant to the person you're speaking to, and you receive the same amount of care and concern that you would expect to obtain from a stranger you pass on the street.

     Defensiveness is the same result from before: "You asshole, how dare you insult my intelligence." Regardless of your intent, you are alienated for indirectly exposing another person's lack of knowledge. I have and do make errors of knowledge as well, but htis is why I ask people to correct me, and I enjoy it when they do. I don't care about pride. I want to be correct, and knowledgeable.

     I have realized recently, that I am not human. Generally, humans are more concerned with how they feel, and less concerned with facts or fiction, nor the consequences. I am alone because I am not human in this regard. I'm not sure what I would be, if not human, but I certainly don't fit the description of humanity.

     Harry Truman gave a favorite quote of mine... "They think I'm giving them hell. I'm just telling the truth, and they think it's hell." I might suggest the fact that while I seem like an asshole, what I'm really trying to do is protect what I love, and I really love you all.