How have intellectuals managed to be so wrong, so often? By thinking that because they are knowledgeable— or even expert— within some narrow band out of the vast spectrum of human concerns, that makes them wise guides to the masses and to the rulers of the nation.
But the ignorance of Ph.D.s is still ignorance and high-IQ groupthink is still groupthink, which is the antithesis of real thinking.
I work in a Ph.D.-rich environment at my company. I observe this groupthink every day. They are no doubt brilliant people and they are world-class experts in their chosen fields. But they can be some of the dumbest most helpless fools outside of their narrow field.
How have intellectuals managed to be so wrong, so often? By thinking that because they are knowledgeable— or even expert— within some narrow band out of the vast spectrum of human concerns, that makes them wise guides to the masses and to the rulers of the nation.Compare with my discussion of the "objectivity" of journalism:thinking yourself to be objective is arguably the best possible definition of the word "subjectivity."If you know you are smart, it is easy to blunder through overconfidence when out of your area of expertise. Especially when you are simply nodding in agreement with someone who has nominal credentials in the area in question.Of course, journalists don't have an area of expertise, other than self promotion.
As always, thanks for the ping, jaz.