In a previous post about why educators who promote critical thinking shouldn’t burden themselves with the insurmountable task of getting everyone to think better, I made the point that academics and researchers are not celebrities, regardless of how large their contribution(s) to society. This, of course, is sad when you consider that there are actual celebrities out there who believe the Earth is flat or that rubbing themselves with some gemstone is key to a healthier body. It’s laughable, yes, but at the same time, it’s something of which we should be collectively ashamed. These are the people to whom we’ve provided a platform.
Sure, there are a handful of modern academics out there who’ve “made it,” somewhat, in pop culture. For example, I admire the work of Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Brian Cox in bringing their expertise and love of science to the mainstream. But, I wonder, how many people outside of academia could actually name a credible academic? Simply, we need more academic role models.
Now, I’m not sure if being smart was ever really “cool,” but I’m confident it’s something that most people either think they already are or wish they were (regardless of how open they are about such thoughts). Whether or not they’re willing to do anything about it is a different story. Indeed, true coolness is often perceived as effortless, and so, there’s a worry that many might approach “smarts” and good thinking in an equally effortless way. Of course, traces of that worry are evident in how many celebrities publicly apply their thinking, for all to see.
I’ve heard concerns expressed in academic circles about potentially growing academic underachievement among highly capable students, who stop performing consistent with their ability. Various explanations addressed such students as trying to hide what makes them different or stand out, even if it’s high achievement in their studies. Two reasons for this keep popping up in such conversations. The first is to not seem “uncool,” in terms of deviating from the status quo (we don’t like what is different or “not the average”: e.g., nerd, poindexter), and the second is that they don’t want to be viewed as a potential threat to others (e.g., in terms of resource attainment like praise, awards, scholarships, peer attention, etc.).
Of course, such concepts are nothing new, and academic underachievement has been a concern in education for as long as I can remember… and I’m not sure it’s any worse now than it ever was before. However, what is unique over the past decade or so is the growing access younger people have to others’ (poor) thinking online, including the thinking of famous people, and the influence it might have on them.
Why do we glorify individuals who make stands about issues they have no understanding of? Why do some people celebrate their lack of education? When we’re surrounded by examples of poor thinking, how long might it take until we see that rub off on others, even those who are well capable of “good thinking”?
Sure, we might develop some behaviors associated with underperforming to better “fit in” during our developing years, but what about when we’re adults? Older populations can just as easily fall into the same trap. For example, consider a past piece on this blog regarding value signaling, where I describe some people’s willingness to dispense with their own thinking and consideration of social topics, just to fit in with the “moral” majority. Why would someone sacrifice their social standing just to argue against a widely shared perspective? We don’t like dissenters, we don’t like different, and we certainly don’t like a know-it-all. So, we just go along with it.
That said, this might all amount to a touch of scaremongering. It may well be that we’re over-estimating the dumbing down of society in light of increases in noisy information. So, if it may not even be an issue, why should we care?
The future… and that’s why I belabor the point about younger cohorts above.
Mediocrity is perhaps a bigger danger to humanity’s intellectual enhancement than pure ignorance because of its insidious nature. Don’t get me wrong, ignorance isn’t great, but there’s a purity to it. We can recognize ignorance, and we can disregard it to an extent. Mediocrity, on the other hand, slithers in over time, replacing the intelligent and correct with something that is just good enough—perhaps not even good enough, maybe just enough in the sense of what is requisite in a box-ticking exercise.
If your performance is mediocre but you still get rewarded for it, why extend yourself beyond what’s necessary? It’s not you to blame; it’s the culture. Sure, there’s personal fulfillment and intellectual integrity to consider, but are they worth it when it’s your time, standing, and resources on the line? That’s how mediocrity slithers in.
Is intellectual achievement staying consistent or increasing… or has the threshold gradually dropped? Are we tending towards just doing enough, wherein cohorts who would have been the average are now getting top marks because standards have dropped? We talk about high performance a lot, but how often do we actually see genuine high performance?
It’s one thing for you to be mediocre or ignorant. But how will that affect the future, your kids, or your kids’ future? I want the best for my young kids as they develop into their own people, and I want them to be better than me at everything, but that won’t happen on its own. They have to be motivated to apply themselves to the best of their abilities. But that’s hard to do if the culture around you has made things easier—that will be hard when they ace tests without having to study (or, alternatively, coast along, passing tests they shouldn’t). If you have kids, are a teacher, or are worried about the future, I’m sure you’re similarly inclined.
Again, this isn’t intended to scaremonger, but it is a recommendation to exercise caution. We need to lead by example. Good enough is easy, but excellent takes effort. There might be a time when enough is not good enough.
Indeed, I’d argue that we need more now! Making efforts to advance cognitive skills will not be for naught in the long run. As a society, we need to raise the bar. Challenges are not inconveniences; they’re opportunities to grow. Sure, there’s a lot to this (and things bigger than us), including policy and the wider culture, but for now, a good first step is to take personal responsibility for battling the insidious nature of mediocrity in one’s own home.