3 ms·

which is trusting their beautiful theories too much I think this mistrust of intellectuals is misplaced. Any kind of person, no matter education level, is susc

by sili 17y ago

which is trusting their beautiful theories too much I think this mistrust of intellectuals is misplaced. Any kind of person, no matter education level, is susceptible this. Any person who is single-mindedly perusing his crazy view of the world and does not care of consequences is dangerous. Historically, intellectuals have had more means and knowledge to pursue their crazy ideas and I guess that is why they are more prominent.

jerf 17y ago
You say you think the mistrust is misplaced, then proceed to (in my opinion) explain why it is not misplaced in your last sentence. It's certainly true that non-intellectual theories of the world can be very destructive if society places too much trust in them. That would be "superstition", I think. But it hasn't been the problem in the 20th or 21st century in most places. Superstition does rack up its own respectable death toll though; a number of the other slaughterings that can't be credited to intellectualism of any kind can be credited to some large degree to superstitions, especially if you're willing to call racism a sort of superstition, which is at least debatable.
- sili 17y ago
  explain why it is not misplaced in your last sentence Good catch. I was trying to give a reason for this misattribution and not justify it. But back to the larger point. It strikes me that intellectuals who have racked up the greatest kill-scores have done so because of their views in humanitarian fields (politics, philosophy, etc.) I am yet to see a genocide in the name of math or art. One exception I see is the misrepresentation of climate data to support global warming (if indeed that is true).
- dhume 17y ago
  You say you think the mistrust is misplaced, then proceed to (in my opinion) explain why it is not misplaced in your last sentence. Except it is still the case that the reason you gave applies to non-intellectuals as well.

by sili 17y ago

jerf 17y ago

You say you think the mistrust is misplaced, then proceed to (in my opinion) explain why it is not misplaced in your last sentence. It's certainly true that non-intellectual theories of the world can be very destructive if society places too much trust in them. That would be "superstition", I think. But it hasn't been the problem in the 20th or 21st century in most places. Superstition does rack up its own respectable death toll though; a number of the other slaughterings that can't be credited to intellectualism of any kind can be credited to some large degree to superstitions, especially if you're willing to call racism a sort of superstition, which is at least debatable.

sili 17y ago
explain why it is not misplaced in your last sentence Good catch. I was trying to give a reason for this misattribution and not justify it. But back to the larger point. It strikes me that intellectuals who have racked up the greatest kill-scores have done so because of their views in humanitarian fields (politics, philosophy, etc.) I am yet to see a genocide in the name of math or art. One exception I see is the misrepresentation of climate data to support global warming (if indeed that is true).
dhume 17y ago
You say you think the mistrust is misplaced, then proceed to (in my opinion) explain why it is not misplaced in your last sentence. Except it is still the case that the reason you gave applies to non-intellectuals as well.