A welcome blow for ineffective intellectuals

Jewish World Review ^ | April 25, 2003 | Jonah Goldberg

[Apollo]

"I wish to deny the effectiveness of intellectual work. And especially, I always wish to counsel people against the decision to go into the academy because they hope to be effective beyond it." That's what Stanley Fish had to say at what was billed as historic "intellectual town meeting" at the University of Chicago on April 11.

Stanley Fish, as you may know, is one of leftist academia's all-stars. If he was an athlete, they'd have retired his number and inducted him to the Hall of Fame already. And so when he says "intellectual work" is ineffective, it means something.

But Fish wasn't the only one to in effect recant the utility of his life's work at what The New York Times described as the "scholarly equivalent of an Afghan-style loya jirga." Sander L. Gilman, a professor of liberal arts and sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, declared, "I would make the argument that most criticism … is a poison pill."

He went on: "I think one must be careful in assuming that intellectuals have some kind of insight. In fact, if the track record of intellectuals is any indication, not only have intellectuals been wrong almost all of the time, but they have been wrong in corrosive and destructive ways."

As an amateur follower of the academic gobbledygook industry, I have to say this is music to my ears. It's almost as if the greatest and most successful plumbers in America, if not the world, got together and one by one declared that pipes, water pressure, gaskets, valves, even the very concept of "plumbing" was not only a fraud but a corrosive and destructive fraud.

Of course, it's not really like that at all, because the plumbers would be wrong. And, there's proof they'd be wrong. I turn the faucet on my sink and water comes out -proof that there's something to plumbing. Meanwhile, it's difficult to disprove the assertion that the forces of post-modernism have been anything but useless at best or corrosive and destructive at worst.

A quick recap may be in order. For those of you who have better things to do, there's this school of "thought" called "postmodernism" which puts quotation marks on "everything."- kind of like the way my dog Cosmo sheds his hair.

The reason so-called "PoMos" do this is because they believe there are no "capital-T" Truths. Rather, everything is mired in "perspective," which in turn is determined by various "interests," "privileges," and other "biases" and "prejudices," etc. All reality -or at least all of the reality we can experience -is "socially constructed," according to the PoMos.

As Stanley Fish explained in The New York Times a couple years ago, "Postmodernism maintains only that there can be no independent standard for determining which of many rival interpretations of an event is the true one."

Obviously, there's a lot more to postmodernism, there's critical theory, deconstructionism, structuralism, post-structuralism, post-Colonial theory, and at least 31 different flavors of Marxist and feminist nonsense. Each one of these fields has disciples willing to write billions of impenetrable words in defense of an argument nobody but the other disciples gives a hoot about.

It's easy to poke fun at this nonsense, but this Gilman guy was right when he said such garbage can be corrosive and destructive. The moral relativism implicit in postmodernism has soaked into the entire culture. The central assumption of post-modernism is that independent moral judgments are impossible and that conviction is a substitute for fact. If my personal truth is true "for me" no one can say otherwise.

On college campuses students are taught that they are the victims of racism, sexism, homophobia etc., solely if they feel like victims. Appeal to facts and evidence are irrelevant.

I once defended myself against the charge of racism from a college student by citing the definition from the dictionary. She responded that "dictionaries are meaningless" all that mattered is how she felt. "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"; "it depends on the meaning of `is'"; "who are you to judge?"; "it's all relative"; "perception is reality"; on and on: These are the barnacles that build up on a society which takes postmodern thought seriously.

When Hillary Clinton ran for the Senate in 2000, she told voters the only question was which candidate is more "concerned" about the issues facing New Yorkers -not which candidate was more qualified or which candidate had better ideas.

If you can't grasp why this is a terrible trend, ask yourself this, When you hire a plumber are you looking for someone who can fix your toilet or are you looking for the person most concerned about fixing your toilet?

The answer explains why we don't hire postmodernists as plumbers, and why we shouldn't hire them as politicians -or professors -either

[f.Christian]

Idealism -- liberalism has no long term prospects --- future ... reality and Truth will prevail !

[pave palestine]

You (that means you) -- need to (must) -- learn to convey (-- that -- means - write) your thoughts (non sequiturs that they are) -- in a way (manner) that is COHERENT.

[Phaedrus]

"I think one must be careful in assuming that intellectuals have some kind of insight. In fact, if the track record of intellectuals is any indication, not only have intellectuals been wrong almost all of the time, but they have been wrong in corrosive and destructive ways."

Amazing -- never thought I would see this admission in writing.

[garyhope]

Jonah is really good,right on and usually funny in the bargain too.

[garyhope]

Jonah is really good,right on and usually funny in the bargain too.

[Knither]

Stanley Fish and all his fellow "postmodernists" are a bunch of idiots who are ruining a lot of universities. People have to watch where they send their kids to college these day so their minds won't be filled with this garbage.

[Sofa King]

I sure am glad that I have a built-in immunity to this kind of "intellectual" BS.

Common sense will always outlast this type of garbage.

[priceofreedom]

After reading this post, I "feel" as if I should be much more "concerned" about the "future" of this nation.

[MattAMiller]

I'm annoyed by the idea that intellectualism equals leftism. Might it be that intellectuals have plenty of influence but that conservative intellectuals won the day?

[jennyp]

But Fish wasn't the only one to in effect recant the utility of his life's work at what The New York Times described as the "scholarly equivalent of an Afghan-style loya jirga." Sander L. Gilman, a professor of liberal arts and sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, declared, "I would make the argument that most criticism … is a poison pill."

He went on: "I think one must be careful in assuming that intellectuals have some kind of insight. In fact, if the track record of intellectuals is any indication, not only have intellectuals been wrong almost all of the time, but they have been wrong in corrosive and destructive ways."

I don't buy it. This has got to be some kind of trap. Or Jonah's trying to write satire. C'mon, which is it really?

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[f.Christian]

cm ...

In college I was more liberal than you can imagine. I went to a state college that was as politically correct as you could get. It was a real eye opener. I met my husband there who was conservative, quite a contrast to me. Basically, I opened my eyes and stopped being a sheep. My whole outlook changed.

It seems like you are inferring that conservativism and Christianity go hand in hand. I don't want to make this assumption if that is not what you meant in your post. Faith does not make you a moral person, and certainly does not decide your political affiliation.


32 posted on 04/25/2003 6:58 AM PDT by Conservative Me (Proof that a conservative Atheist does exist.)

fC ...

one of my favorite lines ...

janut drano flushed gore down the toilet !

[Southack]

No matter how they tried to package it (e.g. deconstruction), post-modernism was never anything more than sophomoric attempts at rationalizing moral relativism.

When the Lefties claim that every event can be interpreted in multiple ways, they really don't care about *our* interpretation (i.e. the truth if we are being honest and insightful), but rather, that their amoral/immoral view was portrayed in the best light in whatever event was under discussion.

But here is where it gets interesting: since a core side effect of rationalizing amoral/immoral behavior is that the same person will eventually argue conflicting points, it has become progressively easier for we Conservatives to hold up the old arguments of Liberals to show where in the past they have disagreed with whatever is their current rant of today.

For example, the Leftists tried to argue that Clinton was a peacemaker and that Bush should follow Bill's lead by bringing in the UN for the Iraq war, yet it was a simple matter for Conservatives to humiliate those same Leftists by pointing out that they were all gung ho about supporting Clinton's non-UN-approved war on Serbia four short years ago (Easter, 1999).

Name an argument that the liberals are blasting Bush about today, and it's a decent guess that they've already argued precisely the opposite while Bill was in office. I mean, how many "peace activists" did you see protesting Bill Clinton's regime change (via U.S. Marines) in Haiti?!

[Conservative Me]

Thank you for sharing this with me. Unfortunately, this mindset isn't present only in colleges, but has been incorporated into our public schools system as well. We can see the change in our children...more violence, lack of respect for parents and teachers, etc. It is high time we become more concerned about our children LEARNING than we are about their FEELINGS, IMHO.

[Sapper26]

In fact, if the track record of intellectuals is any indication, not only have intellectuals been wrong almost all of the time, but they have been wrong in corrosive and destructive ways."


The definitiion of intellectuals: Highly educated people who don't know anything.

[f.Christian]

A smart God // science doesn't -- can't evolve ...

evolution (( Godless )) is inherently stupid --- impossible !