TexasCHLforum.com

AndyC wrote:I disagree with you to an extent, Elmo.

I don't think anyone is slamming intellect, the never-ending quest for education or appreciation for the arts in any way - merely those who are arrogant enough to believe that their knowledge of the arts automatically makes their opinions superior to anyone else's opinion.

"I know better, I once had a box seat for the Phantom of the Opera, you know..."

"Mm.."

Heck, that's nothing, Andy. I once had a season's ticket to the Redskins, back in the glory of the Redskins vs. Cowboys days!

Astute, Andy. I believe you are correct, at least with respect to most of the commentators. I will happily and gracefully grant that. I think I was aggravated by comments which appeared aimed directly at me, as a genre, if you will, even though the commentators know me not. They were not shooting at me, as they are, I will assume, not at all familiar with my personal values. My overreaction was a too-typical failure on my part.
But Hoi still likes me (I think), and that is all that matters.

Elmo

Jasonw560 wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote:One important element missing from this whole discussion is whether any particular definition of "cultured" makes one a better person. If we measured culture by knowledge of the arts, does that mean the someone who is more cultured is somehow better than someone who has never studied art? Is someone who can identify an wine by the way sunlight glistens off it better than someone who prefers to drink PBR from the can?
Some of the best people I have ever known would be, by common definitions, considered uncultured. I personally don't care whether people consider me cultured or not, as long as they recognize me as a whole person and not just by this one narrow measure of a person.

I don't think it does. In fact, IMHO, I think considering one's self "cultured", for the most part, makes one a worse person. You get arrogant and haughty, and your inflated sense of self-worth alienates those who would other wise be good friends and colleagues.

I see this here in the Valley. You have people who make more money than they've ever seen before, and they automatically believe they're better than anyone else. There are a few, also, who believe they could hang with the Northeast bluebloods, Chicago old money, and even the Dallas/San Antonio/Austin/Houston nouveau riche. Makes me laugh. I have fun knocking them down a peg or two. [Emphasis added]

As this slamming is showing signs of going on forever, never to die an inglorious death, I simply must observe, with respect to the emphasized sentence above, "Now that is cultured."

We are, each and every one of us, "cultured," if we accept the definition of culture in the World English Dictionary:

1. the total of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values, and knowledge, which constitute the shared bases of social action
2. the total range of activities and ideas of a group of people with shared traditions, which are transmitted and reinforced by members of the group: the Mayan culture
3. a particular civilization at a particular period
4. the artistic and social pursuits, expression, and tastes valued by a society or class, as in the arts, manners, dress, etc
5. the enlightenment or refinement resulting from these pursuits
6. the attitudes, feelings, values, and behaviour that characterize and inform society as a whole or any social group within it: yob culture

Looking at #6, one must ask, are not the members of this forum a social group within our society? Have not the overwhelming majority of the comments we have seen here gone a long way toward defining that social group's "culture," or at least that of a large portion of that social group? How can that be denied?

I consider the above definition as being rather neutral as I look at the views expressed by commentators here.

Perhaps, on the other hand, they believe "culture" is as defined in the Bing Dictionary: Educated and sophisticated: educated and informed about the arts and related intellectual activity. Or perhaps as by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: The act of developing the intellectual and moral faculties especially by education.

It appears clear to me that it is the latter definitions which are receiving the slamming. Perhaps one should not slam something here with first knowing what it is they are slamming. For that there is nothing like looking at a dictionary.

Elmo

The Annoyed Man wrote:When my dad died, my brother and I inherited two weapons from him. One was the Ithaca 1911A1 which was his sidearm in WW2. The other was an old single shot .22 bolt action rifle that had been his since he was a boy in the 1920s. Unlike most of those dilletantes and their "art" show, my dad actually had killed human beings with weapons, in combat.

Oh, and my dad had TWO Ph.Ds, one in American Literature, the other in English Literature. He was friends with John Steinbeck, William Faulkner, and Ernest Hemmingway......and he owned guns. He also spoke fluent French, by the way, AND, before he met my mom (in Paris), he was a painter, living in a garret in the Latin Quarter, upstairs from a jazz club, where he used to hang out and listen to Charlie "The Bird" Parker and Thelonius Monk.

I'll match his "culture" credentials against any of these boojwah wannabe culture creatures.

I am envious of your dad's days in Paris, TAM. What an experience, and one never seen again.

As close as I can come was a long chat with Hemingway many long years ago in the La Floridita. I had many too many of his patented Daiquiris, ending up under the table. At the end of the evening he was as sober as he was at its beginning. I can never forget talking with him for hours, back in the mid-'50s, while sitting on the bar stool next to his 24/7 reserved corner. http://havanajournal.com/gallery/image_full/12/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

After his tragic death that stool became a national treasure, with a bronze life-sized casting now seated on it forever. http://floridita-cuba.com/contenido/res ... ticias.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Looking at this latter photo takes me back to that stool next to Ernest.

You brought on a serious case of nostalgia here, TAM, but that is the greatest part of one's later years. Thank you.

Elmo

Hoi Polloi wrote:Did I get it this time?

We got it. I obviously did not understand how forum polls work, and we were talking but not communicating. My bad. I have senior moments 24/7 now. So sorry. I never could keep my mouth shut. After all, I made my living by the sweat of my tongue for 'lo these many years.

I must say how pleasant it was talking with you, as is always the case, even 'tho I turned everything you said inside out.

Elmo

Hoi Polloi wrote: If I understand you correctly, you are saying that by stating, "See, weapons owners go to college, too!" that if the data showed they might go at a lesser rate than the general population that it would indicate they were less cultured and be counter productive. Is that accurate?

Not really, Hoi. That is not what I said, but rather what was at least implied by the drafter of your questions, else why would the question be on the list? I tried to be careful to say that I did not personally state that the one was necessarily relevant to the other, although nor would I necessarily deny that they may have a relationship.

When I made my first comments here the numbers were in the neighborhood of 7% vs. 20+%. ( I hasten to say that I have not seen the latest forum numbers).

If one accepts the question's assumption that educational level is relevant to one's idea of being cultured, which, again, I neither affirm nor deny, then it directly follows that the comparative numbers we see must affect RPT affect RPT one's ultimate conclusion re: the "culture" of CHLers in a negative manner. I must of course again observe the unreliability of using only one of 18 factors.

I was not expressing a personal opinion here, Hoi, nor do I think it would be appropriate for me to do so. It is too personal a matter to either discuss nor, perish the thought, debate. And for goodness sakes, never ask me what "being cultured" means, and if I cannot define the basic question, how can I have a meaningful opinion?

I hope that clarifies my intentions.

Best regards,

Elmo

Hoi Polloi wrote:

b322da wrote:

karder wrote:In general I have found that people who consider themselves cultured are simply subscribing to a very specific vision of "political correctness"....

With respect, I find that is a rather condescending and arrogant statement, although not surprising here. At least I am pleasantly surprised that the word "elitist" has not surfaced yet.

Elmo

Honest question: how do you find it arrogant? I know a lot of cultured people who wouldn't identify as being cultured, so saying that those who see themselves as cultured often mean they're politically correct doesn't come off as condescending to me, so I'm wondering how you read it.

To answer your honest question, Hoi, with an honest answer and a minimum of words, the latter not easy for me to do:

"Differently."
PS: You are one of the few people here I would hesitate in getting into a debate with.

Elmo

Hoi Polloi wrote: Elmo. You rock!...

... And they paint anyone who could own a weapon as [relatively uneducated].

YOU ROCK TOO, HOI!!!

But, down and dirty, only because you asked for it:

Do not the numbers I reported with respect to educational level, as compared with the results of your poll so far, assuming of course that educational level is indeed meaningful when it comes to "culture" (not my suggestion), give you a little pause in making your broad impression? If the one factor I picked out does not "prove them wrong," is it not reasonable to think this conclusion might spread a little further, or perhaps even tend to "prove them right?" While our logical syllogisms differ here, are they not both rational?

Once again, I am not the one who suggests that educational level is related to one's "culture," which I would hesitate to define. I must assume that whoever drafted those questions makes that suggestion.

(Why do I decide to pick on one of our obviously most well-educated, well-spoken, knowledgeable and intelligent members).

I clearly deserve what I am going to get.

Elmo

karder wrote:In general I have found that people who consider themselves cultured are simply subscribing to a very specific vision of "political correctness"....

With respect, I find that is a rather condescending and arrogant statement, although not surprising here. At least I am pleasantly surprised that the word "elitist" has not surfaced yet.

Elmo

Hoi Polloi wrote: Let's prove them wrong!

If the objective here is to "prove them wrong," Hoi, your poll might be more meaningful if some percentages applicable to the general population were available for comparison purposes. I. e., how do we know whether or not they have been proved wrong?

I do not mean to imply that this would be easy, but there is a wealth of information out there on the 'Net. For example, a quick and easy Bing search re: the educational level of the general population discloses many a responsive web site. I will be the first to admit that the dates reported vary widely, if noted at all. Still, the numbers from various sources appear to be remarkably consistent. For example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educationa ... ted_States" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percenta ... _education" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908670.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I selected these three sources at random. I just selected this category as it appeared to me that some info on the general population might be readily available out there.

In anticipation of comments to come, please recognize, Hoi, that I make no value judgments, and that I address only one of 18 factors. It would be irresponsible to make any value judgment on the basis of such slim data. Perhaps some other forum members can take a look at other factors.

BTW -- It is interesting to note that it appears clear that the percentage of women with college degrees is now consistently higher than that of men.

Elmo