2011-04-04, 05:16 PM
Every example Dan thinks of to prove his point involves some socially-deprived study-all-day intellectual doing some stereotypical activity. For example, he mentioned a Nobel laureate going to Chicago to give a presentation. Then, he generalizes this into intelligent people being impatient, arrogant jerks. In his previous post, he generalizes all intellectuals as "nerdy brainiacs" who always put their studies before all else, and he states that this set of people are incapable of socializing properly and that they're better sticking to each other.
Who says that Nobel laureates have to give presentations all the time? Who says that "nerdy brainiacs" can't have fun participating in "normal" day-to-day activities? Dan gives unrealistic stereotypical situations, and I don't see a problem with calling him out on it. I'm not offended by what Dan says. I just don't find his arguments convincing at all, because they come without just bases.
Who says that Nobel laureates have to give presentations all the time? Who says that "nerdy brainiacs" can't have fun participating in "normal" day-to-day activities? Dan gives unrealistic stereotypical situations, and I don't see a problem with calling him out on it. I'm not offended by what Dan says. I just don't find his arguments convincing at all, because they come without just bases.