In his essay titled “Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids,” Grant Penrod strives to explain why people demonstrate different socialization preferences and characteristics. He is particularly interested in intelligent children’s experiences within the school setting, where they encounter the wrathful influence of anti-intellectuals. Penrod notes that intelligent children usually have difficulties finding friends among school and classmates because of harmful stereotypes about them (760). Anti-intellectuals advance harmful social stereotypes labeling intelligent classmates names such as nerds “excluded from a social activity because of their label, and that label, in turn, intensifies through the resulting lack of social contact” (Penrod 760). The implications of these stereotypes are far-reaching because some students become reluctant to study to avoid being labeled nerds by anti-intellectuals. Penrod attributes anti-intellectualism to bad influence from peers who have little interest in academic success.
Anti-intellectuals criticize intellectual peers for spending much of their time studying instead of focusing on social engagements. Since the majority of peers tend to acclaim success in sports and other non-academic activities, “intellectuals constantly see their efforts trivialized in the rush to lavish compliments elsewhere” (Penrod 759),. However, much as Penrod makes legitimate assertions, he is not convincing enough with his argument about the cause of anti-intellectualism. Ostensibly, so many cliques exist in school settings that everyone interested in social groups can identify and associate with one. Students with an excessive passion for reading tend to have shared interests and hobbies that should bring them together. Nevertheless, a student can be an academic performer and still perform exemplary in academics. Therefore, brighter students should not use the committed pursuit of academic excellence as an excuse for social isolation.
Works Cited
Penrod, Grant. “Anti-Intellectualism: Why We Hate the Smart Kids.” pp. 759-763.