The Science of Intellectual Tribalism

[Valin]

National Review:

When the Left says ‘anti-intellectual,’ what they mean is ‘not a liberal.’

Jonah Goldberg

January 20, 2017

 

‘David Gelernter, fiercely anti-intellectual computer scientist, is being eyed for Trump’s science adviser.” — Washington Post, January 18

 

Um. Well, huh.

 

(Snip)

 

 

So what on earth could the Washington Post mean with that headline?

 

Science reporter Sarah Kaplan gives a few clues. First, Gelernter is a fierce detractor of Barack Obama and has “made a name for himself as a vehement critic of modern academia.” True enough, I guess. Also, he has “expressed doubt about the reality of man-made climate change.” The evidence provided for this assertion is a bit tendentious, but we’ll let it pass because I don’t think this is primarily about climate change.

 

It has to do more with two things: liberal tribalism and the guild mentality of a certain subset of the scientific community. There’s a long progressive tradition in America to think that intellectuals must be liberal, and therefore intellectualism equals liberalism.

 

Indeed, Kaplan seems a bit bedeviled by this point. The headline of her story says Gelernter is anti-intellectual. The first sentence notes that Gelernter has “decried the influence of liberal intellectuals on college campuses.” A few paragraphs later, Kaplan suddenly informs us that his “anti-intellectualism makes him an outlier among scientists.”

 

(Snip)

 

 

______________________________________________________________________________

 

Gosh What A Stupid Poppy Head