5 ms·
The article reminded me of the two cultures lecture by CP Snow, from 1959. Where Snow argued Western intellectual culture was sharply divided between the humani
by j9461701 9y ago
The article reminded me of the two cultures lecture by CP Snow, from 1959. Where Snow argued Western intellectual culture was sharply divided between the humanities and the sciences, and great harm was being done by each trying to poison and undermine the other to claim greater cultural cachet.
I wonder if this played some role in Kaczynski's strange tragedy. As the article describes, he seemed to have adopted parts of each approach -the moral nihilism and dualism of the sciences, coupled with the anti-technology and anti-empiricism of the humanities. Almost as if he absorbed only those things each camp said to damage the other as true. Of course he ultimately did end up murdering scientists and engineers, so it's clear which side his sympathies fell toward in the end.
- smallnamespace 9y agoAs an immigrant (from a non-Western society) who also spent youth steeped in Western literature, arts, and music, every development after WWI just seems so sad. There's the moral self-loathing (veering towards self-flagellation) of the 'social justice' class, the academic anti-truth of the relativists and the post-modernists, the equally poisonous know-nothingism of parts of the right. Western civilization still lives in the long shadow cast by Europe tearing itself apart not just once, but twice in the span of a generation.
- tomcam 9y agoGive me an example of no-nothingism on the right.
- CalChris 9y agoBesides Trump?
- smallnamespace 9y agoWell, I do think that honest people can disagree in good faith over complicated topics, like how to run the economy, or how much of a problem global warming is, or what to do about illegal immigration. So how about some simple, unambiguous fact that should submit to easy verification? As of late last year, about 42% of Republicans polled disagreed with the assertion that Obama was born in the US, while only 27% of Republicans agreed [1]. Plus the fact that our current sitting president was instrumental in formulating and then popularizing this lie. I submit this to you as a good example of 'know-nothingism' -- if there's some piece of information that challenges your world view, then you will do your damned best to know nothing about it. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-persistent-partisan-divide-over-birther-question-n627446 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-persiste...
- tomcam 9y agoOuch. That is an excellent example.
- taejo 9y ago"People in this country have had enough of experts" -- Michael Gove, in 2016, then Secretary of Justice in the Conservative Party government of the UK
- k-mcgrady 9y agoI believe this was said while he was campaigning for Brexit. And it worked. There's a fascinating article in the FT today where people who voted leave are asked what they think of the current status. It is astonishing how uninformed the vast majority were and are. One person, for example, thought that we'd be out of Europe a week after the vote. Another - 6 months. Nobody understands why there should be a transition, negotiation, or the reasoning for the poorly named 'divorce bill'. Unfortunately, people listened to Michael Gove instead of the experts. They didn't even pay a cursory glance to expert opinion and now we're in a situation where even the people who 'won' the vote are unhappy. All of this could have been avoided by listening to the experts instead of an ex-journalist.
- Houshalter 9y agoYour comment implies people who voted the other way were more informed, which I really doubt. This happens every election. Someone does a survey and finds out the majority of voters know nothing about the candidates or issues. The majority of people don't even know who their representatives are. Democracy is terrible.
- k-mcgrady 9y agoThat wasn't what I was trying to imply at all. My point was - maybe we should listen to the experts instead of self-serving politicians.
- damnfine 9y agoBut which 'experts'? If the public doesnt already know, anyone well spoken can be propped up as an 'expert' for either side. With the lack of critical media, the public are left to decide with woefully incomplete information, and an untrue sense of 'what the experts think'. I honestly dont see how to solve it as everyone will just look back to 'older trusted experts' even more entrenched in the power for power system. Edit: runon and typo
- triangleman 9y agoJust a little history of the term FYI because it seems to be thrown around a lot here without knowing the background. "Know-nothingism" derives from the Know Nothing party of the late 19th century that was known for its anti-immigration views. The Know Nothings originally held secret meetings and would tell people "I know nothing" when asked about it. So it was not originally a derisive term. Then starting in the 20th century, nativist political sentiments (and this includes the "America First" mentality espoused by our current president) was called "know-nothingism" by liberal commentators. So now it has morphed into a term of derision, however it still maintains its attachment to nativism, although anti-intellectualism is obviously a big part of the stereotype. This is all to say that yes, know-nothingism is sort of a shorthand for Trumpism as far as I can see it, so it's kind of a truism to say that know-nothingism is prevalent on the right. As far as whether it's poisonous, or equally as poisonous as the cultural relativism of the left, I will demur.
- ucontrol 9y agoThis is such a wonderful comment. It reminded me of the link between the World Wars and subsequent philosophical developments in the West (which culminated with postmodernism), a topic that I've always found fascinating. It's easy to underestimate just how profoundly WWI and WWII shook Western civilization and changed the course of history, and that they weren't just another group of conflicts notable solely for their sheer scale.