Chapter-Ii 1

Chapter II
REVIEW of RELATED LITERATURE and STUDIES
This chapter presents the related literature and studies which are used by the researcher in
defining the constructs of this study.
Related literature
Smart-shaming is a Filipino culture of anti-intellectualism, something that a lot of smart people
have to deal with. This issue is slowly spreading in the Philippines, it may seem like a small and
unimportant topic to discuss but this has a lot of effects especially to the society.
In the Philippine setting, smart-shaming is really prevalent. As if intelligence is no longer a
blessing, it is more like a curse. It should be something to be proud of and not to be ashamed of.
Technically, some Filipinos do not like the idea of having someone better or smarter than they are. Crab-
mentality they say. If someone cannot have it, everybody should not. That instead of encouraging to
continue the pursuit of knowledge and sharing of new ideas they would mock and tease the intelligent
ones. Another thing is Filipinos settle on ordinariness and mediocrity to the point that they would just
believe things without further research. They prefer things that are already done. They would prefer
gossip than facts. Once they hear philosophical answers or statements, they would shame the person.
Instead of being curious, they will attack those who are and that is tragic. Having different thoughts or
sharing strong opinions is not really entertained that is why the intelligent ones suspend their reasoning.
These are the people who think and are not afraid to question authority when they know that something
is wrong (CynthiaAp, 2016)
This smart-shaming case of few Filipinos partially shows their ignorance, but this does not mean
that they are unintelligent, instead, it means that they tend to see intelligence as a negative trait. One
undeniable example is during elections of Philippine Politics. Some of them seem to see intelligence as a
negative quality of a candidate just like what they say happened before during the 1992 presidential
elections. Senator Miriam Santiago lost against Fidel Ramos because some perceived her strong
personality and high intelligence skeptically. On the contrary, few Filipinos voted for candidates who are
just known for their popularity in the showbiz industry and not by their capability and intelligence. They
do not like the idea of having ‘too smart’ officials because it intimidates them. (Sta. Romana, 2015)
Also according to Vaughan (2017), smart-shaming means a group of people mocking someone
for being smarter or critical thinker than them. Actual smart-shaming begins commonly in school, where
some of the more confident, less intelligent kids will mock their more studious peers. These scenarios
often happen during class recitation wherein intelligent ones would share their mindful statements and
thoughtful ideas or even when they would want to share further examples of their topic. Same goes
through when their text papers are returned and students will start comparing each other’s scores. The
smarter ones would be teased or made fun of for getting the highest score or even a high grades.
In thousands of public or private schools in the United States and Western Europe,
“defactualization” is expanding exponentially. This modern trend is called anti-intellectualism. In this
type of environment, those with the facts behind them often do not prevail. Instead, debates are won by
those with the loudest mouths and the Machiavellian ability to manipulate the not only the emotions
but also the understanding of others. As a result, the vast majority of students at both the high school
and university level hold views and reactions based on a dearth of evidence and a plethora of biased
opinions. Some people tend to just go with the flow without even thinking critically about the topic
especially when they do not really know much about it. They choose to be uninformed and uncritical;
they reject facts in favor of opinion and perceptions.. It seems like aesthetics are now more important
than the art of appreciating true substance (Jeynes, 2015).
This flow is also a widespread on the Republic of China. Confucianism may no longer be the
ruling ideology of China, but anti-intellectualism remains to be a dominant force in Chinese life. Instead
of some Chinese indulging themselves on critical, creative, and contemplative thinking, they appear to
choose to be uncritical, uncreative, and unreflective. Unsurprisingly, the social science research of
ancient and contemporary scholars tends to be descriptive and repetitive. It also lacks in analytical
insight, theoretical innovation, methodological accuracy, and critical engagement with related literature
because such intellectual pursuits carry the risk of offending governmental and scholarly authorities
(Tao, 2016).
Moreover, according to Sison (2015), “anti-intellectualism" is defined as the hostility and mistrust
of intellectual pursuit.. Those who present a typical and common way of thinking deemed a danger to
normality, and are considered outsiders with little empathy for the rest of the population.” This is where
the idea of having more critical and logical thinking means these people are elitist or arrogant. It is as if
society says that being intellectually gifted or smart is a bad thing.
The implementation of K to 12 curriculum last 2011 in the country, played a very vital role in
decision-making skills of the students as to what strand will they pursue in their Grades 11 and 12 lives
that will be a stepping stone towards college. Each strands have their own specialized subjects, while still
having core subjects that are the same to all. For example, STEM have Pre and Basic Calculus as well as
General Physics, Chemistry, and Biology as their specialized subjects, while HUMSS have Creative
Writing, Philippine Politics and Governance, and Disciplines and Ideas in the Social Sciences
(K12Philippines, 2015).
Because of the “hardcore” subjects of STEM students in Math and Science, people tend to
generalize that STEM students are all achievers and are intellectuals. This stigma is one of the main
reasons why STEM students are most likely the victims of smart-shaming.
In Strain Theory, it explains that people want to achieve certain goals but in different ways. Ways
that the society might consider as deviant. Knowing that intellectuals are innovative and experimental in
their own objectives and means. This theory gives an understanding that smart-shaming happens
because the intellectuals who are innovative and experimental are somehow resisting what the society is
used to, defying the norms, culture and tradition (Abuan, et al., 2019).
This type of discrimination is somehow not popular to everyone, some people are not paying
much attention to this issue because of unawareness and apathy. According to Mishina (2012), the social
judgment of an individual depends on how aware and involved he or she is, to an issue. Judgments
depend both on prior beliefs and the helpfulness and I formational that cue is to the individual.
The aforementioned articles are related to the present study because they all emphasize what
smart-shaming is, how serious and spread smart-shaming issue is, the possible victims of smart-shaming,
and how some people are unware of the issue.

Chapter-Ii 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter-Ii 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter-Ii 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter II

REVIEW of RELATED LITERATURE and STUDIES

defining the constructs of this study.

Smart-shaming is a Filipino culture of anti-intellectualism, something that a lot of smart people

In the Philippine setting, smart-shaming is really prevalent. As if intelligence is no longer a

is wrong (CynthiaAp, 2016)

“defactualization” is expanding exponentially. This modern trend is called anti-intellectualism. In this

than the art of appreciating true substance (Jeynes, 2015).

society says that being intellectually gifted or smart is a bad thing.

You might also like