Another way to look at this is as a function of efficiency. Humanity works “best” by taking advantage of an acceptable level of ignorance.
In the end, a society of intellectuals will not be able to change a light bulb…
… but would bathe in light …
Why not? I’m an intellectual and have changed dozens of light bulbs. Happy the bayonet bulb seems to have gone out of fashion though.
But what is light, does it have mass, do we need it to “see” - the answer will eventually be 42 and no one will remember where the light bubs are stored…
Calling someone “ignorant” because one disagrees with them is the standard fare of elitists who would like the rest of us to accede to their particular vision of utopia.
Do you disagree with Asimov? Do you think that there is no tradition of anti intellectualism in the States?
I do agree with him. It’s just that the intellectuals are also ignorant and just don’t realize it. I’ll give examples if pressed, but I’m going to the store now.
How about this @Bekloppt? Is Clarence Thomas an intellectual?
I’d imagine you have to be, in order to get to his position.
I don’t agree with every intellectual in the world and nor do you. It’s preferable if their opinions are based on an intelligent appraisal of the facts of a case, rather than a knee jerk reaction based on prejudice, wouldn’t you agree?
I agree with it. Where I disagree is that only an “intellectual” or said another way, someone possessing formal education, can reasonably assess information. For me Asimov’s quote is elitist (and what he really means is anti-liberal). Marx the same way. If we could just get the masses to abandon religion, we could control them another way. I’m paraphrasing. He discounts the value of religion (and more broadly spirituality) in people’s lives.
On the intellectual aspect, it’s a fair point to exercise caution as to what we consider intellectual. There are clever people who see the world from both a left and right wing perspective, politically. Sometimes the left can come across as elitist, and when it happens, e.g. a few years ago when Hillary made her deplorable comment, political opponents will jump all over it.
Still, as a Brit living here for 14 years now, I do see a strange sort of pride in the USA that eschews intellectualism.
Let’s take covid as an example.
America has some of the best medical facilities in the world, doctors, nurses, hospitals, infrastructure, scientists, research, manufacturing capability, etc.
If ever there was a country that was well placed to rally and combat covid, it was the USA.
But what did we see?
The worlds largest pile of dead bodies.
It was tragic, unnecessary, and… anti-intellectual, at least in part.
I like your thoughtful posts, but this bears a little more research. If you look throughout the industrialized Western world, which generally keeps similar types of medical statistics, reported deaths from COVID to date range around .2% to .4% of the population. Within the United States the stats are similar. Florida reported closer to the .4% while California reported closer to the .2%. Before we get into how the statistics were kept, it’s pretty clear that in societies similar to ours, COVID did what it was always going to do. We disrupted millions of lives and spunked trillions of currency for very little impact. Even Australia and New Zealand, who have much less dense populations and exerted far more draconian restrictions than the US and UK, still had about .1% of their population die from COVID. Now, one might say that the US lost 4X the per capita population to the disease than did Australia, but that would still obscure the fact that the disease was not very mortal relative to the disruption we allowed it to cause.
How many biologists know how a plasma tv works or how many rocket scientists know how cells divide - the point being a level of ignorance is accepted and accommodated to be efficient. Have certain?“developed” societies gone too far - probably…
The issue is not with the idea represented by Asimov’s quote, but in who you put forward as your “intellectual.” Modern society has promoted being willing to speak over being willing to think. It has also left little room for placing your uncertainties on the table for all to see, something that is a hallmark of real intellectualism.
It seems more about the which “fraction” of ignorance in a society, and by narrowing - the individual, can an entity leverage.
People like Trump, Modi, even Kim, are a crystallisation of process rather than being genuine game-changers. There is nothing new to see.
Maybe our push to be better faster is part of the problem. I see endless numbers of parents pushing kids through entrance exams - only for the kid to be a dentist… these parents seem to be espousing intellectualism but in reality are contributing to a broader corrosive process that looks to minimise “well rounded’ness” (for want of a better phrase) and which leads to an outlook with less compassion.
simply put, when the popularity of Kim Kardashian surpassed that of Neil Tyson Degrasse you know that society has gone to shit.
Any relation to Neil deGrasse Tyson?
Some people are cleverer than others.
Saying that we should value the opinion of those with more intelligence is simply common sense.
Calling it elitist is unhelpful.
I was once asked… Is the person who can build a castle, cleverer than the person who can afford to buy it…!
Every bit of knowledge has a value to those whom possess it eh