Hacker News Reader

Comment by martythemaniak | Hacker News Reader

I don't like the message of this post. I do understand (and see) the cultivated disinterest he's talking about, but I would never suggest you try and make yourself like something for the sole purpose of fitting in, ie cultivating disinterest is bad, but so is cultivating this interest.

If you keep and open mind and follow your passions, you'll eventually stumble on something you share enough with others. My disinterest in football is quite genuine, but I enjoy the World Cup and Euro Cup. I also find it hilarious that intellectuals apparently don't go for Heavy Metal, because I'd fall in his "intellectual" category, but spent several years deeply engrossed in Metal and I enjoy the Nordic and Prog subtypes.

View on HN

It's not so much saying you should like something to fit in. It's asking you if you dislike it to not fit in. And if that's the case, then that's elitist.

Snob, elitist, etc... I see a lot of names being thrown around to describe/explain/put down this idea of sports-disdain. Not saying you are, just pointing out that these words are coming up a lot.

At the end of the day, people will like what they want. They will dislike what they want, too. Whether that is because of a valid reason, or whatever silly notion of not wanting to fit in, or anything else is irrelevant.

Not liking sports doesn't make you a snob or elitist. Its when a percentage of people who don't like sports put down people who do that these words come into play.

In this context, I am using elitist as a description, not an insult. It's up to you to decide if that bothers you.

The point of the post is that motivation is relevant. Some people don't want to be elitist; it bothers me. If they apply some introspection to their motivations, they may discover this behavior describes them, and they may want to change. What people "want" is not some inherent immutable trait of their humanity. Sometimes what people "want" is a result of cultural expectations.

Aye, and that goes both ways. Many normal activities are labelled "intellectual" and actively avoided by people who don't want this label.

In this light, there's no need to single out nerds/intellectuals/whatevers. We can just say that cultivating an active disinterest to isolate yourself from others is generally a bad thing.

I also find it hilarious that intellectuals apparently don't go for Heavy Metal, because I'd fall in his "intellectual" category, but spent several years deeply engrossed in Metal and I enjoy the Nordic and Prog subtypes

In recent years there has been a swell in the popularity of metal, but there seems to be a cultural divide between certain styles despite sharing the moniker of "Metal". It's less a matter of the size of the fanbase and has more to do with a difference in sound/style.

Think about rock played on the radio vs indie rock. There is some crossover but not a large amount. Fans of Nickelback don't overlap with fans of The Walkmen. In much the same way someone who listens to Def Leppard is unlikely to also listen to Opeth or Sunn O))).

>so is cultivating this interest.

How so? Taking part in the things most inherent in your culture is arguably a good thing.

It helps you keep in touch with the rest of the world. It helps you carry on and start up conversations with your peers. It's easier to "break the ice".

It makes you feel more connected to society, which is something that I'm sure most of us sitting behind a computer screen 24/7 certainly could use more of.

>Taking part in the things most inherent in your culture is arguably a good thing.

Like being overweight? Eating fast food? Watching the latest wastes of time on the tubes? Because fuck everything about that. I do as I damn well please and spend my time on things that interest me. If that "alienates" losers, who cares? I have more to offer the average portly dimwitted plebian than they do me.

Even if you feel that deep disconnect with the society?

I'm not sure how to describe that feeling precisely - but to give you an example: most people seem to like/watch soap operas, while I actively avoid them and prefer to watch sci-fi, which is shunned by general population. And the reason is, sci-fi series have a point. There's some reason for things, some grander goal, etc., whereas what I see in soap operas are random people making dramas around love, family and money. This, so called normal life, feels so empty and pointless.

I'm not aiming to insult anyone here - what I'm saying is that I just don't grok "normal life". While I have enough empathy and perceptivity to be able to understand the life priorities of an average Joe (in my circles I'm the go-to guy if there's a conflict to fix or someone to cheer up), I don't feel them. I do feel disconnected from society, and honestly, I'm fine with that.

> How so? Taking part in the things most inherent in your culture is arguably a good thing.

Is it really? I'm not a Christian but that would be an easy way for me to have something in common with most of America.

And the value of "it's good to go with the flow" isn't arguably good: http://mic.com/articles/92479/psychologists-have-uncovered-a...

> I also find it hilarious that intellectuals apparently don't go for Heavy Metal

The "Anything But Heavy Metal" paper is based on data from 1993.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com