Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Around where I live there are a lot of new construction homes, lots of them are the overdone big-box houses, 6 and 7,000 square feet. They are the epitome of Mcmansions. They combine 5 or 6 architectural styles in one floor plan. I'm not saying my opinion is the only one that matters, just as OP stated, but I find them repulsive. They are gaudy, flashy, and scream "look at how 'rich' I am!!!" I know of a couple with no children and no family members within 2 hours driving distance who recently bought a home with 3 kitchens- why??? The theme with that couple and couples/families like them is that they lack higher thinking skills. They have no problem memorizing and regurgitating information to earn a masters degree in whatever chosen profession it is they do and they have no problem bull****ting their way to a position that pays them a hefty salary, but when it comes down to it these people are just simpletons. They know nothing beyond what the people around them tell them to think.
"Bigger is better", "Brand means everything", "You have to have the newest version" that's what these people think. They know nothing about culture and nothing about the world outside of their immediate surroundings. I'm sorry that's so hard for others to accept about some of their fellow humans, but it it without a doubt true. People who lack the ability to find validation in themselves strive to find it in those around them and often times that manifests itself in what they buy and how they try to look, but because it's a ripoff of the real thing it always looks fake.
Wow. Jealous much?
So basically people have to conform to YOUR idea of what is tasteful.
That is not an indication of being intelligent. It is quite the opposite. That isn't people, that's sheeple.
I want it just to be a discussion thread out of curiosity, not a passing of judgement - so please refrain from flaming and don't go off accusing me of being a snob or shallow or judgmental or whatever.
I find that in general, what is universally considered 'good' taste in these things generally tends to go with the person's overall intelligence level - which, by the way, is not necessarily defined by their profession or education.
In fact, I find these things are a MORE accurate predictor of intelligence than education or career. I've known people who were educated and had successful careers; and yet, they had a certain constrained way of thinking that I would more likely associate with someone from an uneducated background.
What I did notice, is that quite often, the way a person chooses to dress, or the way they decorate their home, speaks of that intelligence level quite accurately.
I just can't see a person who is truly mentally bright and intelligent making [tasteless] choices - and from personal experience, I've been right about this every single time I've gotten to know the person better. Again - this is not to judge the person's character at all.
Thoughts? Do you agree?
I do the same with the way people write. So, I would have to agree to some extent.
People who dress or decorate their home without consideration of: "too much is never better" or "each thing should have meaning", do tend to indicate a disorderly mental thought processes or an inability to make good judgement choices. Same thing with a person's writing. [smiles]
Total rot. And yes, you certainly ARE a snob, shallow, and judgmental.
First off you would have to operationally define "taste" - and that is an impossibility. Taste is totally subjective and varies WIDELY across, and even within, cultures. It also varies across time. Home decor ca the Victorian era, widely considered "tasteful" at the time, would now be widely considered to be gauche and overly ornate. Unless you're Vladimir Putin.
Personally I can't abide most things that are considered "tasteful". A "tasteful classic A-line black dress" is not in line with MY tastes, no matter how "classic" its supposed to be. It's just boring funeral wear. And my IQ is (or was before disability) over 150. There is very little that I share in common with what is considered "tasteful" by the 1%-ers. Whose "taste" or (arguably) lack thereof is not shared with the rest of the hoi-polloi.
So no, no matter what you "believe" - and that is another kettle of fish, this idea that feelings trump facts, hence your title belies your stance - the fact is that there is not and cannot be a correlation, let alone any sort of causation, between "intellect" - which also needs to be operationally defined though there is some hope that could be reasonably done - and the non-existent quality of "taste" as an objective entity.
Around where I live there are a lot of new construction homes, lots of them are the overdone big-box houses, 6 and 7,000 square feet. They are the epitome of Mcmansions. They combine 5 or 6 architectural styles in one floor plan. I'm not saying my opinion is the only one that matters, just as OP stated, but I find them repulsive. They are gaudy, flashy, and scream "look at how 'rich' I am!!!" I know of a couple with no children and no family members within 2 hours driving distance who recently bought a home with 3 kitchens- why??? The theme with that couple and couples/families like them is that they lack higher thinking skills. They have no problem memorizing and regurgitating information to earn a masters degree in whatever chosen profession it is they do and they have no problem bull****ting their way to a position that pays them a hefty salary, but when it comes down to it these people are just simpletons. They know nothing beyond what the people around them tell them to think.
"Bigger is better", "Brand means everything", "You have to have the newest version" that's what these people think. They know nothing about culture and nothing about the world outside of their immediate surroundings. I'm sorry that's so hard for others to accept about some of their fellow humans, but it it without a doubt true. People who lack the ability to find validation in themselves strive to find it in those around them and often times that manifests itself in what they buy and how they try to look, but because it's a ripoff of the real thing it always looks fake.
Yes, that is the "keeping up with the Jones'" mentality. Unfortunately they don't get to retire early because they spend all they earn trying to make impressions that they are richer than they are. To each his own, though. What they do has nothing to do with what I do and has little to do with taste but as you say, more to do with self esteem. So what? If they don't affect you, then what do you care? If they make you feel lesser that is more to do with you than them. A friend once said "I can let myself be offended or not. I choose not."
In as much as taste can be a matter of subjectivity, I think that your socioeconomic status also contributes to what you consider is tasteful, much more so than any degree of intelligence. Although the case could be made that the wealthier you are, typically your intelligence is above average as well.
Generally speaking, to have good taste (and to acquire things associated with having good taste) requires quite a bit of money.
Wine is an excellent example. Some people are perfectly fine drinking wine from a box. It'll still get you inebriated, but it doesn't begin to compare to a bottle of higher priced wine that would be praised by a wine enthusiast. Cars, watches, clothes... same thing.
I do the same with the way people write. So, I would have to agree to some extent.
People who dress or decorate their home without consideration of: "too much is never better" or "each thing should have meaning", do tend to indicate a disorderly mental thought processes or an inability to make good judgement choices. Same thing with a person's writing. [smiles]
The same "things" have different "meanings" to different people - and even different meanings at different times in different circumstances to THE SAME people.
Just because YOU don't like some "thing" doesn't mean it isn't "tasteful".
"Not to my taste" is not equivalent to "not tasteful". You can't get much more "disorderly" in your thinking than believing that your likes and dislikes are objectively "the best".
Yes. My husband. Lol. I buy all his clothes because he can't be bothered to shop for a new pair of jeans when his get actual holes in them.
But, again, I'll repeat what I wrote, as the 'brilliant engineer' type who doesn't care is not what I was describing at all.
Most brilliant programmers or physicists are not likely to be out in public donning, say, a tight muscle T with a fake designer logo, low-rider jeans with a logo underwear waistband sticking out, a heavy gold chain with a cross, and hair sporting half a bottle of gel
Nor are they likely to drape their house in swathes of dusty fake flowers, "precious moments" figurines and
Thomas Kinkade prints
People who can't be bothered to make an effort are one thing. People who go out of their way to 'bother' yet do a horrible job at it, mainly because they overdo it and lack a certain refinement to realize it, are another. Like I said, think of the nouveau riche, or that certain stereotype of the tasteless try-hard that has been poked fun of for ages, even in classic literature. In fact, think of the classic Cinderella story - the way her stepmother and stepsisters are portrayed.
For that matter, I don't think that having good taste automatically makes someone intelligent! There are certainly people who know how to present themselves but still lack that internal sophistication and depth. However, I have not yet seen example of the opposite - people who lack taste, as I see it, yet are open-minded, sophisticated, and intelligent.
I think you are equating intelligence with cultural backgrounds and experiences. Sophistication correlates with knowledge, not IQ. I tend to agree with you on the intellectual curiosity bit --- people who are not intellectually curious are generally uninteresting, but I don't know how much that correlates with IQ scores. Someone can have a high IQ but is unwilling to challenge his ideas and beliefs, or to venture out of his comfort zone.
I had to look up Thomas Kinkade. I don't recall ever seeing one in someone's home and I've lived in several areas, both cities and rurally. The estimate I saw stated that about 5% of American homes have one. I don't think that nouveau riche is what would come to my mind. While Kinkade is not my style, I can see how it might evoke a sense of nostalgia in some people, the same way Rockwell evokes nostalgia for many. Nostalgia is the main reason most people collect or choose the things they do.
In my experience, many of the nouveau riche are more inclined to go with abstracts because they believe it gives them an air of sophistication without having to know anything about art. They are faking it until they make it.
I'm an Old World kind of guy. As a kid I was dragged to museums and art shows all over the US and Europe. I developed an appreciation for most genres. I grew up looking at paintings in our home by two of my artist ancestors. Most of it is Impressionism and I don't think it's just a coincidence that it's the style I prefer today. It doesn't diminish my appreciation of other styles, but I prefer to live with the style I like most. I think it's nostalgia. If I had grown up with Kinkade and mass-produced figurines instead, I think it highly probable that I would find nostalgia in items of a similar style.
I have two friends who think that Art Nouveau architecture and design are creepy and scary. It didn't take much digging to learn that their perceptions came solely from ghost and horror stories/films. Those were their only childhood experiences with it so their dislike for it was formed for life.
Total rot. And yes, you certainly ARE a snob, shallow, and judgmental.
First off you would have to operationally define "taste" - and that is an impossibility. Taste is totally subjective and varies WIDELY across, and even within, cultures. It also varies across time. Home decor ca the Victorian era, widely considered "tasteful" at the time, would now be widely considered to be gauche and overly ornate. Unless you're Vladimir Putin.
Personally I can't abide most things that are considered "tasteful". A "tasteful classic A-line black dress" is not in line with MY tastes, no matter how "classic" its supposed to be. It's just boring funeral wear. And my IQ is (or was before disability) over 150. There is very little that I share in common with what is considered "tasteful" by the 1%-ers. Whose "taste" or (arguably) lack thereof is not shared with the rest of the hoi-polloi.
So no, no matter what you "believe" - and that is another kettle of fish, this idea that feelings trump facts, hence your title belies your stance - the fact is that there is not and cannot be a correlation, let alone any sort of causation, between "intellect" - which also needs to be operationally defined though there is some hope that could be reasonably done - and the non-existent quality of "taste" as an objective entity.
LOL, over reacting much? IQ 150 (internet)? Any tattoos?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
