The Veneer of Legitimacy in Varsity Elitism

I was inspired to do this post after De Maitre showed me this blog by Intellectual Snob.

It’s about this student who claimed to be from elite colleges overseas, and being fed-up with what she alleged to be “stupidity” amongst Singapore college students, began a seething attack on the local university system and local university students in general, calling them “frogs”, and lamenting the lack of intellectual depth amongst local students.

However, things came to a head when she admitted that she wasn’t from any overseas elite college, but from a local university and the scandal was announced at ASIAONE News. [Read Here]

The issues I want to explore here are as such:

First, why pretend to be from an elite school?
Second, what is my response to this vociferous attack on the local varsity system?

The pretence to be from an elite school is what I’ve termed “the veneer of legitimacy”. In other words, this alter-ego, this persona, is a mask, a front to create a sense of authority and legitimacy. This creates the impression that what is said comes from someone with immense intellect, allowing for more acceptability amongst netizens.

Of course, it horribly backfired when the author’s identity was exposed. Questions started to emerge. Why the false identity? Why put down your own institution?

What is so wrong with the local university system that has aroused so much dissatisfaction in her?

“As she put it, she could not stand the pervasive “stupidity” amongst local students.

“Stupid” students who give “stupid” points in class?

The thing is, such ideas of “stupidity” are but subjective constructs. And more importantly, the exchange of ideas is a feature of academic culture. It is through the synthesis of theses and the corresponding antitheses, no matter the value, that creates value in the acquisition of knowledge. No idea is immune from criticism, nor should anyone presume that his / her idea is infallible. Arguments can only be defensible. And intelligence stems from the ability to defend one’s ideas, and to improve on others’ ideas.

Besides, knowledge is shared, not monopolised by those claiming to be intelligent.

Is “superior intellect” being able to articulate effectively? There are lots of people who are articulate but not intelligent, and not articulate but very thoughtful and intelligent.

Intelligent expression is not just how a person says certain things, but what is being said, and why.

There is no value in eloquence if there is no substance in what is being said.

Intellectual Snob is articulate. I have to admit this. But the irony is that this eloquence have exposed the very lack of intelligence she so despised – in herself.