I think one of the defining features of being me is the important place that good snark and critical thinking has in my life. I was surprised a while back when I was accused of being suddenly “snarkier” than that I have been, because I very much doubt it has been a sudden transition on my part. I think if one was to actually consider the history of my life, one would find I’ve always been disposed to such ideas.

A Brief History
I think one of the most ironic thing is that I’ve been guillible (even until now) all my life. This may be due to my upbringing to be an obedient child to follow religiously what adults told me or maybe a tendency to believe rather than disbelieve what people say. However, from about my early teens (perhaps after noting the way I would repeat to him everything I was told, even if some of the stuff was clearly incorrect), my father had started to tell me to critically think about what I had learnt. He would say time and time again that many people don’t know what they are on about, and that one must go through the process of asking oneself if what was being said actually makes sense or not. He would note to me the importance of science and rational thinking, rather than parroting what I was told. I believe such advice is the best he had ever given me.

Another influence was my tendency as a child to be somewhat of a bookworm, and as I grew older, the less fiction I read and the more non-fiction I absorbed. I read lots of history, art and science books and was especially fascinated by the developments and knowledged afforded by the latter. While admittedly having not terribly good memory nor enough education in any one of those topics to be much of an expert, I nonetheless became familiar with the notion of the importance of evidence, of alternative theories to evidence as well as logical reasoning.

Also as a child in primary school, I was fortunate enough to be best friends with a very clever girl with an awesome sense of humour for her age. There she introduced me to the silly yet delightfully snarky comedy of Monty Python. While it was a good decade onwards that I was able to finally see all the seasons of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, I nonetheless think that what I had seen of the show left a rather lasting stamp on my perception of what humour should be like.

Throughout high school I always liked but was never terribly good at science. I loved learning about how things worked, how things are created but I difficulty stemmed from the way I get confused quite easily. My eventual immersion in the graphics design/personal collectives circles on the internet introduced me to regular doses of internet snark and drama. Great times, great times. :D

One of the best moments I had in high school was a 80 minute long “discussion” that mainly took place between my English teacher and I, at the expense of the entire period of English. It came down to me defending notions of science I think, though looking back, in a rather rough and incoherent fashion. Nonetheless, such an experience thrilled me, and possibly may be have been an influence in me picking law as a subject to do in university.

At university, my first and favourite law tutor created the most lasting impression on me out of all these years of tertiary education. I absolutely loved the way she would emphasis again and again the necessity to consider essays and articles critically, to annotate everything we read and to consider every argument put forth. I don’t think even having done a uni subject on Critical Thinking made such an impact (though it did help me identify logical fallacies). On the net, even having been phased out of graphics design for a while, I nonetheless found a second home in lurking in snarky communities such as Fandom Wank and Jurisimprudence.

Last but not least, I started and still am dating the most intelligent and reasonable man that I’ve ever known. I have not met someone who can be so at ease at breaking arguments down, identifying definitional and logical flaws. It’s sometimes frustrating when I try to defend my arguments and have them torn to pieces but I think most fortunately, neither of us takes it personally. We would argue intellectually on everything under the sun and it is, oddly enough, an incredibly bonding experience.

And so here I am, the opinionated person that is me. I personally don’t think I’ve changed for the worse, even though I feel I am more confident in stating my opinions and less inclined to hastily rush to “let’s agree to disagree” at the first sign of someone taking things personally.

Examples of Snark and Critical Thinkers I Like

  • The Daily Show with Jon Stewart – LOVE IT. I hate politics generally but this is one of the most entertaining yet insightful programs that exists on TV. All it basically does is point out the utter stupidity that the American government gets up to, and does so in a clever and refreshing manner.
  • The Colbert Report – Slightly less than TDS but the snark is definitely more apparent. The one-man-ness of the Repor’ is more lonesome but Colbert puts of an awesome performance most of the time.
  • Fandom Wank – I’ve lurked around FW back when they still had an LJ account. Epitome of fandom snark.
  • “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins – I have yet to fully read the book but so far I’ve been incredibly impressed by Dawkins’ way of undermining the place of religion in society. While ultimately a little bit too extreme, it nonetheless makes so many insightful points about religion.
  • Pomerantz and Breslin “Judicial Humour – Construction of a Statute” (1966) 8 Criminal Law Quarterly 137 – I absolutely love this short article (typed up here!), it shows the ridiculousness of strict legal application of principles (and logical fallacies) in order to prove that a horse is a bird. Who’d think legal articles could ever be funny?

There are undoubtedly more sources of biting opinions and snark that I have yet come across. Do contact me with recommendations!