pull down to refresh
The thing many don't talk about is that often intellectuals already have a selection bias built-in. Those who get to that level have already established a significant amount of tolerance for monotony and compliance with the in-group. Also, many who would or could be intellectuals filter themselves out because they favor less bureaucratic systems or they find it limiting to live at the whims of the state.
I remember a discussion a while back (on econ twitter or possibly Econtalk podcast) where a student asked how one could become an economist focused on the Austrian school, given that top U.S. universities don’t teach it and there are effectively no research advisors for it in the mainstream. The practical advice was to go through the traditional economics track, earn the PhD, secure tenure, and only then(!!!) shift to the research you actually care about. The implicit warning, though, was how difficult it is not to grow complacent and lose your original spark over that long journey of navigating the system’s monotony, incentives, and required conformity. It seems to filter for exactly the tolerance and compliance you describe... Those who make it through are the ones who can endure the institutional expectations long enough to gain the credentials and platform, and by then many have internalized enough of the prevailing worldview that the “switch” either never fully happens or ends up heavily diluted. Those less willing to play the game simply self-select out earlier, which leaves the intellectual class even more skewed toward the status quo...
the amount of brainwashing and busywork in school is almost 100%. no creativity. just obedience and do what you are told by this deadline. if anyone had a spark it is dead by graduation. not even in college. or you get labeled a problem and diagnosed with some executive function thing or autism or adhd. my case. kids still have the spark and the imagination and they work hard to kill it. college already gets mostly braindead. the filter starts way before the phd.
The thing many don't talk about is that often intellectuals already have a selection bias built-in. Those who get to that level have already established a significant amount of tolerance for monotony and compliance with the in-group. Also, many who would or could be intellectuals filter themselves out because they favor less bureaucratic systems or they find it limiting to live at the whims of the state.
The concept is talked about extensively in Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky (yes he's a commie and a pedophile, but he's right on this).
This is why it's so important to learn revisionist history that challenges these narratives (some revisionists having a more valuable perspective than others, of course). The Civil War, WWII, and the Civil Rights Act are the most important to learn revisions of. Even if you're not US based honestly. The US is the global hedgemon and exports the consequences of those abroad.
Sounds like a sunk cost to me. In for a penny, in for a pound. Who is transgressing against me again?
There's also something very Abrahamic about that. "Nobody is perfect". "Remove the plank from your eye before removing the splinter from his".
If I remember correctly nationalism was actually originally an aggregator of regionalism which was the prevailing status quo before. That's why I am directionally nationalist (Global gov is even more progressive than nations), but in reality I'm a localist.
https://stasher.news/uploads/960
This is actually only a fallacy if you subscribe to the blank slate fallacy. I still agree with the sentiment, but because of how actually difficult and complex the ecosystem of human action is and how hard it is to measure with many variables. I also fundamentally disagree with the formalized top down scientific management of society.
Sounds like exploiting an Abrahamic epistemology. Especially relevant for the follow on examples he provided.
They didn't do the trick to get the treat. The master's approval was the treat. The donut was just a bonus.
Also, that's how these people think about that kind of stuff in general.
"I agree with the institutions and status quo and if you think that's wrong than provide me 12 dissertations, 12 peer reviewed studies, and a multi-decade body of evidence. Also, if those things contain bad people or perspectives I don't like I'll ignore the evidence."
Great Book! I enjoyed it. It's length was greatly appreciated too.