From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 29 Sep 92 01:03:26 GMT
	<ewright.717693983@convex.convex.com>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: ewright@convex.com's message of 28 Sep 92 15:26:23 GMT

In article <ewright.717693983@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:

   In <1992Sep28.051700.3163@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik) writes:

   > An engineering degree is only as attractive as the one who holds
   >it. When you take that degree and flaunt it, it becomes a form of intel-
   >lectual snobbery. 

   Well, that's not quite true.  Charlie and company are forever parroting
   the standard spiel that says people who exercise are superior, not only
   physically, but intellectually, spiritually, morally, and in every other
   way as well.  

While I complain about needing to lose some weight, not having time to
lift, being sedentary all summer?  I think not.

   I keep say that no, they are not.  They have simply chosen
   to concentrate their abilities in one particular area.  People who choose
   to concentrate on things other than exercise may not achieve as much
   physically, but this may be compensated for by the things they achieve
   in the areas that are important to them.  Charlie and company, however,
   will not admit this.  They deny that anyone who concentrates on artist
   or intellectual or spiritual development could possibly achieve more in
   those fields than someone who spends much, or most, or all of his time
   in the gym.  They insist that spending time on athletics does not leave
   a person less time to spend on other things and that, furthermore, exercise
   heightens a person's other abilities and makes it possible to achieve more
   than a nonexerciser possibly could in other fields anyway.

There's plenty of evidence that those who exercise live longer, and
remain mentally active longer.  Doesn't take many years of life to
account for 2-3 hours a week of exercise.

   This is athletic snobbery, pure and simple.  Yet you do not attack them
   for saying it.  Instead, you attack me.  Why?  Because I dare to say
   that people who spend less time on physical fitness and more time on
   other fields of endeavor tend to achieve more in those fields and therefore
   are not inferior to athletes.  For this you attack me as an "intellectual
   snob."

No, just someone who'd rather babble on the basis of prejudice than look
up the facts.

   My question for you is this.  I have never denied that people who
   spend large amounts of time working on their bodies are *physically*
   superior.  Why do you find it so painful to admit that people who
   spend more time working on their minds could have their own areas
   of superiority?  Why is it that when Charlie says that exercise
   makes the people who do it superior to me in every way -- physically,
   mentally, morally, and spiritually -- he's "making a sincere effort
   to help" while, when I concede the physical part but contest the others,
   I'm a braggart?  

Funny, I don't remember saying that.  Does anyone else remember me
saying that?  It can't be misquotation, can it?  I mean, could it
possibly? 
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every
one I meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew
before?/ Who are you that wanted only a book to join you in your
nonsense?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
Newsgroups: soc.singles