The bad side of good

This may surprise people, but I'm generally an optimist - a fact that occasionally results in frustration. That's not to say I'm not frustrated - a lot - by other things or in other methods. Probably half the time (or more) the frustration is caused, directly or indirectly, by my optimism.

One example: I don't consider myself extraordinarily intelligent. I know I'm better at pattern recognition that pretty much anyone I know, but while that certainly has broad-scale implications, it feels more like a quirk than anything major. Regardless, my default assumption - and this is done subconsciously - is that everyone I meet is as capable as I am when it comes to understanding concepts: that most people have had a similar background to information (I'm a college drop-out, so it's not like I've had excessive trianing) and can extrapolate similarly from given information.

If I'm discussing something which I don't consider to be my specialization (namely computer technology) - say, philosophy - I expect the other person to have a similar background level of information on the subject; perhaps the known facts are different, but the overall level of competence should be similar (unless it's someone with a degree or advanced training, when I expect to get trounced).

For example, if I'm discussing population (or overpopulation) with someone, I expect them to know: the general rate of increase in world population, the relative rates in industrialized and nonindustrialized areas, the factors that led to such growth (improvements in grain harvests through breeding and genetic engineering, technological improvements for housing, medical breakthroughs for longevity, etc.), the problems inherent in it (resource scarcity, pollution, social destabilization, etc.)... All of this is stuff I've picked up from random reading and logical deduction; I assume anyone else with any casual interest in the topic could easily gather the same information and (especially if they're pontificating on the subject) probably has. I'm by no means an expert on the subject, but to me this all constitutes entry-level "generalist knowledge".

... which is, of course, where I run into the problem. Most people, it seems, are far less informed (by my reckoning) than they "should" be about almost every topic. Furthermore, most people don't seem to understand the basic concepts of logical deduction, rational approach, or even practical extrapolation. I don't think it's necessarily the educational system itself, since many people obviously apply these concepts in specialized areas of their lives: they have the knowledge. They just don't apply it to a wider set of situations.

Despite running up against this wall time and again, I'm constantly surprised by the - "ignorance" isn't necessarily correct; how about "informational blindspots" - of the general population. There are exceptions, of course: exceptions who seem to gravitate together, raising a tendancy for those-who-know to isolate themselves from those-who-don't. I can't completely condone (or condemn) that, but I also don't seem to make much headway on the other side.

I guess one fundamental difference is that I like information, and most people seem anxious about (or even antithetical to) anything they don't already know. Again, I don't think it's a reflection of intelligence: I think it's something else, an attitude or something.