|
dbratt@trinidad.net
Reign
of the ‘SMART MEN’
-
Dress up a donkey in a suit and now he is Mr Donkey.
-
Beware of the doctor, poli-tician, columnist, coconut
vendor or taxi-driver who claims to know it all and is
always right.
-
In T&T all you have to do is quote Shakespeare and
you are immediately elevated to near saintly status.
A
problem of paediatricians dealing with children is that
everyone and their nennen think they are experts on children.
Presumably that is because they were once children.
So everybody “knows” what to do for worms (worm
grass) and for fits (worm grass) and for fever (worm grass)
and so on. Nowhere is this attitude more common than in
the field of child psychology.
Freud once declared in exasperation, “No one ever tells
engineers how to build a bridge. Why does everyone try to
teach me psychology?”
The case is worsened in small T&T by those who, under
the guise of intellectual activity (self-proclaimed, no
doubt), do exactly what they “rationally” criticise
in others who, not having command of the English language,
and with little to do at home, call in to radio stations
and attempt to force their vulgar opinions onto the rest
of us because “they know.” The intellectuals do
it in newspaper columns and at cocktail parties.
It is all part of the “I is a boss syndrome,”
now prevalent in a country awash with cheap money. Dress
up a donkey in a suit and he is now Mr Donkey. Everybody
is a boss and everybody knows it all.
Arrogance, however disguised, as either dogma, “rationalism,”
“humanism,” Marxism, capitalism or any other “ism”
is arrogance. Hubris follows.
Beware of the doctor, politician, columnist, coconut vendor
or taxi-driver who claims to know it all and to be always
correct. It is a symptom of a simple mind, even a sick mind.
That is especially true where it concerns a subject as complex
and contentious as the behaviour and psychology of humans.
There are three basic types of knowledge. Eliminated from
this discussion those who believe they are born knowing,
or even worse those who believe they are divinely guided.
Self-knowledge is also not part of this,
The most superficial kind of knowledge is “book knowledge,”
ie information or facts about a particular subject. We accumulate
this type of knowledge throughout our lives. It is highly
regarded in western society and increasingly throughout
the rest of the world.
We go to university to soak up this knowledge and sit examinations
or write papers at the end of several years to demonstrate
our proficiency. Then, more often than not, we spend the
rest of our lives telling people about it.
Most of our commentators and academics fall into this category.
They read, and then speak and write glibly about what they
have read and sound impressive, especially when they quote
someone.
In T&T all you have to do is quote Shakespeare and you
are immediately elevated to near saintly status.
I quote Freud.
Talk is cheap.
Then there are those who have experienced knowledge, those
who have “walked the walk.” This is firsthand
experience with data received through our senses, like seeing,
hearing, feeling, smelling and tasting. This is a difficult
one to evaluate.
Most people learn little from their experiences because
they hurt themselves too much so the experiences end up
being suppressed and manifest themselves as neuroses.
“Neurosis
is the inability to tolerate ambiguity”, said Freud.
Ambiguity is the hallmark of the Trinidadian personality.
Again I quote Freud but the last is mine.
As our experience grows, we need more knowledge to better
understand and appreciate the full value of our experience.
As our knowledge base expands, it gives us the opportunity
to visualise possibilities and begets a desire for even
more fulfilling experiences.
But, to combine those experiences in a rational manner with
book knowledge is difficult and requires years of reflection
and inner turbulence. Occasionally, a rare individual comes
along who can combine book learning with experience. They
are usually quiet modest people only too aware of the tightrope
they walk between wisdom and foolishness. Since they speak
tentatively and laterally, they are usually considered foolish
in small societies.
Do not confuse them with those who “do” a lot
but don’t know what they are doing. They can usually
be found out because of the amount of noise they make. Politicians
fall into this category. The correct position towards these
is one of laughter.
Finally, there are those occasional people who have done
original research into some topic of their interest, either
because of what they have read or experienced or both.
They know a lot about little, but they know this very well.
They run the risk of becoming so enthralled in their little
field that they become pedants: heavy, slow-speaking and
deep-thinking. They forget balance altogether and often
end up forgetting their place in the grand scheme of things.
This happens frequently to economists and public health
workers.
It takes a little time to understand that the more one knows,
the more one knows about how little one knows. Nowhere is
this clearer than in the field of child psychology where
neuroses and ambiguity abound, not only in the child but
especially in the adults around the child.
|
