We know more than others?

Why do we assume that the other person knows less?

Two lines that I came across during a recent election have stayed with me since. A newspaper article which reported that ‘intellectuals have asked people to vote for the betterment of society and vote for a particular party’ and a friend who commented, after listening to couple of crowd pulling netas, ‘Six year olds; that is what our political leaders take us to be’. Both the scenarios highlight that a few (politicians, intellectuals) thought they were more intelligent than many. They knew; the others did not.


What is it that has many of us believe that the other person knows less? That we know more. Many of us also have a tendency to explain, proffer clarifications in scenarios where the receiver is rather better off without them. Wonder what drives these – the opportunity to feel more intelligent and smart than others? This is a domain where otherwise lax individuals turn out to be overzealous human beings. Texts which accompany the links we share over social media are a case in point. Our inherent biases too come out – the city dweller gets some strange right to advise the villager. Likewise, the English speaking person vis-a-vis a person only speaking native language(s). So, where all do we come across this?


Let us begin with homes. The often heard line is – you are too young to know. At some homes it is more of a dead-end line – you do not understand; or worse you will not understand. What profound incremental understanding the adults possess vis-à-vis those younger remains an age old enigma! Individuals who in their younger days despise their parents for these obnoxious statements mysteriously metamorphose into close clones of their parents over time.


From homes we move to the schools. The scenario here is not very different. Teachers by virtue of their processions are supposed to know more! One of the first assumptions many teachers make of students is –the students do not understand. This leads the teachers to indulge in a host of actions that encourage rote-learning as opposed to free thinking and questioning – the list includes text-book reading (and re-reading) and explaining poetry. Not many teachers look at the mirror and question their approaches and methods when the students do not comprehend.


Next come the conferences. Some people read out full-text during their presentations – text which is present on the screen! Chances are high that these people also have (too many~) slides loaded with text and display little respect for time. And then, assuming this is not enough, few of them clarify further as well. Many in the audience wait for the blessed ordeal to get over. I wonder if the idea is more to muddle up the listener and avoid difficult questions than to enable the listener to comprehend. Similarly in meetings some people read out the minutes; minutes which have already been shared.


If meetings are discussed can not-for-profits be left behind? Dumb down the content of the document for the people to understand- is a line I have come across multiple times in offices of not-for-profits. Plush offices in cities where people work for the rural deprived. Some of them also draft (and present) documents discussing equity and equality on their Apple laptops! Why draft incomprehensible documents in the first place?


After meetings, our movies. Large number of film makers take no chance – each point is made clear in every possible manner. The characters also speak up all or most of what the screen depicts. The motto is clear – have faith in low intelligence of the audience. And, these are people who invest huge amounts of funds! Television is not too different either. Its journey during past two decades is representative of a lot around – today it is not uncommon to come across television shows being referred to as ‘insult to intelligence’.


There is an assumption somewhere in all these that those we are speaking to want to listen. And as someone wiser has warned, ‘When you assume you make an ass out of you and me’.