Why I Dislike Know-It-Alls

Greetings all,

I had a coffee date with someone I met online. I could tell he wasn't my type based on the 2 phone conversations we had.

We had decided to meet at Chapters and this one didn't have a Starbucks. He assumed they all have Starbucks so he wasn't anticipating it not having one. I actually never went to that Chapters but I guess maybe intuitively I knew it didn't have a Starbucks so I said on the phone that maybe it doesn't have a Starbucks and he just assumed they all do, which I responded to by saying that not all of them do have a Starbucks.

Well it turns out I was right.

Anyways, we went to a Licks a few stores down and he asked what I did that day so I told him I was working on my You Tube project where I talk about Rudolf Steiner's book Philosophy of Freedom. He asked me what the book was about and so I proceeded to tell him the theories he outlines and how Steiner says Freedom is the highest level of morality achieved. I pointed out his concept of reality being the combination of percept (an object of observation eg something you can see, touch, hear, etc) and concept.

He proceeded to say how wrong this concept of Freedom was and frankly it started to irritate me. First of all, if you haven't read the book, stop acting like an expert. I can see arguing the ideas, based on what I say but to just act like you've poked holes in the book and thus proved it to be inaccurate and just the author's opinion got on my nerves.

I talked about it a bit more and pointed out how you have to have some understanding of history as well to appreciate his ideas and then he points out how he has a degree in Political Science.

So... what?

I've dated a guy who had one as well but that's not history, it may just cover the history of Politics but if you want to know more about history, you get a history degree.

The way I see it, everything is really just one perspective and the whole point is to get things from as many different angles as possible to form a good conception of reality. These know-it-all types just have one point of view and think that's it and they are right.

Get lost I say!

He made a few points I could agree with but I just found him too mentally rigid. You've got to be flexible and creative when it comes to knowledge. Your world view needs to be adaptable because what was true today may not be true tomorrow and what was false today may not be false tomorrow.

He was arguing that people are too lazy to take freedom too seriously, which I can believe to some degree. Sure people don't vote sometimes but it's really because people don't appreciate the rights that they do have. I'm sure if you lived in a country that had a totalitarian government and then one day it was overthrown and became a legitimate democratic government, you'd get off your ass and make sure you vote.

I think many people in these G8 countries take what freedoms we have for granted. We think we know poverty when we don't. We have access to clean water, garbage removal, healthcare, etc and there are places that don't have any of that.

He argued people only want freedom for superficial things like going to Wendys or McDonalds. I likened this to kids growing up rich. They just grew up knowing this reality of having it all so they need to realize how fortunate they are and that not everyone grew up with having whatever they want. Not everyone grows up living in a free country.

I disagree mainly because people go to wars and die so that we all can enjoy the freedoms we have. I may not live in a perfect country but at least it provides my basic freedoms.

It really is up to the individual to decide how politically involved they want to be. Whether it's just knowing what's going on politically, or taking a more active role like participating as a volunteer in a political campaign.

Democracy is not a spectator sport and people need to realize that to have a democratic country took some work and some sacrifice by people who fought and struggled. The least we can do is appreciate the work that went into forming a democracy. It's also going to take some work and effort to maintain a democratic system as well.

Freedom is something worth fighting for and regardless of what anyone says, we all desire to be free and to feel in control of the direction of our lives.

The thing that bothered me throughout the evening was just how he had his opinion and that was it. There was no debating ideas. He had his opinions and seemed firmly attached to them. This was no fun for me. I like to debate as much as anyone but I think they are more fruitful when people are willing to modify and enhance their own perspective, based on hearing the other's point of view.

In improv, someone starts a scene and then another person comes in and adds something to the scene. The one person has their set of ideas and the other their own and the whole point is to accept each other and then make the scene work and create something different. This to me is what debating is all about. You have your ideas and they have theirs. Try to come up with something different and creative, instead of just sticking to your ideas. The scene in improv doesn't move forward unless you are willing to compromise and essentially play with your partner.

This is why I don't like know-it-alls, because they just don't know how to play.