Are you smart?

[John]

This debate concerns the pressure most of us experience to appear smart, "in the know" or "with it." It is important to note here that the rational within this post assumes; appearing smart and being smart are very much akin.

What are the pro's and con's of appearing smart?

First the obvious pro's: Appearance is everything, as they say. [Who are they?- I don't know but they say it.] If one appears smart it makes possible the maintaining of employment as well as obtaining a promotion a raise or better job. Also one will more likely garner respect from the other pressured people- this being in accord with the need to maintain self-esteem. Also, to be in the know makes one ready to profit from investments in all areas such as: the Stock Market, Real estate, Personal finance, Education, Fashion, Technology, best purchase price, latest gossip, etc.

Now actively being smart involves the ability of ingesting knowledge, facts and data as well as acknowleding one has this capability. This acknowledgement many times is realized through the ability to utilize one's knowledge in an effort to "get ahead," as they say. This activity of being smart is very much akin to appearing smart as there is similiar effort in both goals. Just follow the instructions and you will "get it."

Now the not so obvious con's: Bowing to the pressure to be "smart," results in one's creativity being lost out of fear of making mistakes. Many creative artists know that genuine creativity arises from mistakes, out of errors, from not being constricted by norms and expected results. As Nietzsche noted in regard to a musical composition; "turning a mistake into a magnificient melody."

This above paragraph does not in any way promote the concept of "thinking outside the box," as this sentiment is simply another form of needing to appear "with it."

To have the freedom to assume there are no wrong ways to approach something is usually a luxury only for those who have enormous trust funds and all this implies.

Since most of us have no such safety net- but have to constantly enervate ourselves to "keep our head above water;" One subgroup that may produce genuine creative expressions arises from people who are well off. However; It is more often the case that those who are genuinely creative from this group are considered the losers of the family.

There are also those who are not connected to the main stream and are basically what civilized life has created- and this is people who find themselves impoverished. Poor people. In relation to this last statement: Obviously no one is born poor- they have to be informed they are "poor." They learn this infomation- either by the economic situation they are born into with the lack in basic necessities such as food and shelter or they have to learn this by perceived comparisons.

Now the poor also have much pressure to get it right and usually the first time with little or no freedom to err. They do not have the luxury like their more affluent counterparts do to go out, explore, have a good time until you are ready to "get it right." So if this paragraph appears to be a contradiction; not so fast.

It is usually a poor person- not all by any means but "A" poor person who for whatever reason, has found a way to survive- with little or nothing to lose- One that may find a way to un-yoke themselves from the constriction to "get it right." When this ease or perceived ease of common burdens are lifted- many creative notions as well as material manifestations of creations arise.

The burden of the age old axiom "Death and Taxes"- does, at least on a perceived level, escape some fortunate ones. Now again as noted previously there are some who happen to have been born into wealth who also take a flight of fancy- and these are usually considered "the losers of the family."

When a "left out" becomes rewarded or recognized for their "wonderful" creation this usually results in the diminishment of their creativity by falling into the constriction to appear smart or "to get it right," as in a demand to re-produce for reasons not in accord with genuine creativity-but out of the profit motive- a catch 22 situation if you will. Perhaps you will not?

When people are striving to prove they "know it" and many times out of a sense of inferiority; perhaps owing to many reasons- there is little time or motivation to become critical or to develop a critical eye. A critical eye upon the structures of an oppressive economic and class system is necessary for a genuine effort toward breaking such oppressiveness. Also in order for an oppresive society to be appropriately challenged- many must be able to eschew the "having to appear smart" necessity.

I guess if there is any admonition in this post; It is: One must be smart enough to give up having to be smart.