4 ms·
The harsh reality of life, for the many who tend to be too deep in their thoughts, is that if intellectuals spent more time on their looks (which, when they are
by borroka 6y ago
The harsh reality of life, for the many who tend to be too deep in their thoughts, is that if intellectuals spent more time on their looks (which, when they are good, are per se charismatic and persuasive), their "so good" ideas will have many more chances to appear "so good" to also those hearing and reading those ideas.
Along the same lines, those who are leading the effort in making Science more popular and attract, for example, underrepresented minorities, should focus on making more visible scientists who are good looking, charismatic, and therefore persuasive. It sounds manipulative, especially to the eyes of intellectuals, but it'd work.
- rwnspace 6y agoBut this comes full circle - the more privileged are more likely to be more charismatic. In the UK, the art of rhetoric doesn't appear in the standard curriculum. I am confident in my ability to predict whether a UK politician has been to private/grammar schools and Oxbridge or not - to distinguish those who have been taught elocution and rubbed shoulders with the rich and powerful from an early age. Not only that, but confidence and certainty are very charismatic, or at least, draw attention. That works fine as a mechanism for liberating people from concerning themselves with the minutiae of every part of life in society. But we all know some variation of that quote about the certain fools and uncertain wise. I'm thinking of those especially confident scientists who have used their platform to trash reflective subjects like Philosophy (not naming any names). I suppose a good summary of my point is that charisma can transform interest into idolatry.