Your last sentence says it all, "And people who are really wise know that they don't have to always flaunt what they know."
Knowledge is what you know; wisdom is knowing when to keep silent and listen.
Nobody likes to look like a fool, but the truly wise person knows he isn't a fool, therefore doesn't need to make sure everyone else knows he isn't. Wisdom is knowing who you are and what you're about. It doesn't matter to you if others know it. The irony is that by keeping silent, and just marveling in what others have to offer, you 1) naturally seem smarter just by demonstrating maturity and a cool head, and 2) just may learn a little something that you didn't know you didn't already know.
The hallmark of wisdom is someone who knows he doesn't know everything, and desires to learn.
A friend of mine is extremely smart. Has his PhD in Chemistry from a very prestigious university. When he was about a year from his doctorate, he said, "The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know." I thought that was a brilliantly wise observation.
Anyway, to answer your question: the core of it all is pride and self-esteem. Most of us are insecure in some way or other. Those who correct others or get offended when someone corrects them, probably have been fed the message that they're not worth much unless they excel intellectually/academically. This can come in the form of subtlety from a parent: "You should take a look at your sister's writing..." It can be overt: "Why can't you be more like your sister? She gets straight As." Or outright abusive: "You stupid idiot!" (a la my own father)
Anyway, I think everyone has a little voice inside them that says, "Yes, I'm worth something!" even if there's a louder voice within saying, "You're worthless." The warring internal dialogue causes people to strike out at others because the alternative is unthinkable: to strike at oneself. It's easier to point the finger at someone else than it is to deal with our own flaws.
P.S. Not everybody knows it's "duct" tape. Many people think it's "duck" tape. lol Kind of like when people say, "For all intensive purposes".........that's one of my pet-peeves. But I'll try to keep silent on the subject. ooops! too late! lol ; )
2006-07-19 12:27:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jen 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
My personal response is this: Maybe it is part pride, but more something else. I think it is more of self-esteem and lack thereof for most. We can never know the background of an individual, or some event that triggers him/her to respond defensively when they believe their intelligence is under attack.
A Freudian concept is: And this is my metaphor for the "personality": that which resides collectively in some sort of ego in which one's behaviors and feelings are regulated by perceptions of interpersonal relationship demands with significant people, who are represented in this personality as introjected objects.
2006-07-19 12:13:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Josh M 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
to respond to the question of the interest - what good is 0.5 an eye fixed? This for decades became an truly good paradox dealing with evolutionists and a topic utilized by technique of many creationists to attack Darwin's theories. in spite of the indisputable fact that, searching at mollusc species facilitates us understand the evolution of the interest. the least puzzling eye is only a set, or grouping, of photosensitive cells on an organism's floor. one of those eye, in spite of the indisputable fact that, does no longer enable for focusing of light, and so the so-called "pigment up" structure advanced the position the photosensitive cells are contained in a depressed or folded area of the floor. This eye structure promises only constrained directional sensitivity and so in some species has advanced right into a pinhole eye structure, as in some contributors of the cephalopod kin Nautiludae. the subsequent level in complexity is to have a retinal lens, as in marine snails, and then we get to the complicated eye equivalent to the only we've, got here upon contained in the octopus. So why is it that no longer all species have the better complicated eye? with the intention to appreciate this we ought to diverge from the concept organic determination leads to "proper" creatures, completely adapted to their surroundings. This no longer the case. organic determination can only act on what the organism already includes in its genotype. it is to assert that an organism with a specialized, complicated eye which has advanced over thousands and thousands of years can not evolve a sparkling style that could provide it a better physically powerful benefit because it isn't everyday adequate to start up off with. to placed it yet in a special way, to be sure that the species to get the recent eye they could first ought to revert to a a lot less specialized one and then evolve the recent one. To revert in this manner breaks the completed concept of organic determination and so this isn't considered. the different ingredient to think about is that an organism received't waste its aspects on coming up a complicated function no matter if it isn't required. For organic determination to act on a function it ought to provide both a selective benefit, wherein case it may well be chosen for, or disadvantage, wherein case it may well be lost from the inhabitants. There for if an organism only needs to be in a position to tell apart between, say, darkish and mild, a complicated eye isn't required, so why evolve it? on the accurate of the day, in spite of the indisputable fact that, as said by technique of Dawkins: "5% of an eye fixed is larger than no eye in any respect".
2016-12-01 23:02:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by skelley 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oh, I beg to differ! No cares about intelligence these days. They just want to be, excuse my cliche, "cool." Popularity is what is most sought, not intelligence. That is to be regretted, but it is true.
Please note, intelligence is very different than getting good grades and putting on that whole show. Intelligence involves knowledge--something which few people have.
2006-07-19 12:33:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by an amateur 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
people like to feel superior to others and intelligence is a way for them to rate themselves against other people it's survival of the fittest at it's very best everyone wants to be right everyone wants to be praised and fawned over so by being right is just a ploy for self gratification
2006-07-19 12:07:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by iflifewerebeautiful 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
it's because society values those who are intelligent and are able to make a contribution to society as a result of their intelligence. most ppl have a false sense of their intelligence, either being too self-satified or completely deflated. the ones who usually try to be smart are only making themselves feel better. it may not be that they are trying to make you feel inferior.
2006-07-19 12:08:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by swiftassailant77 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
it's pride.. they want to seem smart answering a question with big words... i do that, but that's cuz i don't want ppl to think i'm stupid... maybe it is pride.. well i have some of the world's biggest smart alecs in my family so it kinda rubed off on me...
:^S
2006-07-19 12:08:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by ♫♥Ashlyn♥♫ 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
You got it, I believe. Pride.
People think that you admire them more if they are smart (or at least they admire themselves more if you know that they are smart).
Besides, people tend to make fun of stupid people. So no one wants to be seen as stupid. People are afraid of being seen as stupid.
2006-07-19 12:11:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Randy G 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You my dear are wise! And I agree with you 1000%....thanks for sharing your deLIGHTful insight. <3
Aloha ~
2006-07-19 12:06:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋