The death of a public intellectual

Post by mistermann » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 1:27 PM UTC

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #67

RagnarD wrote: post #41

"You’re basis for truth often relies on authority of your source." No. This is such a common logical error that it has an old name: Argumentum ad Verecundiam (often shortened to Verecundiam, or Appeal to Authority in English.) Saying "I know this because authority X said so" - you don't know it at all. It has the epistemological status of outright faith. What counts is the connection of statements to reality and thei…

This was one of my complaints in college. You're taught a ton of things from a position of authority, but you never get a full explanation of how those things were discovered of how you could prove them yourself. I think it would be cool if we taught kids how things work along with how they can prove it for themselves. Currently the only field which encourages you to prove things for yourself is maths, and proofs are…

Post by pjc50 » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 1:32 PM UTC

hnreport wrote: post #167

pjc50 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely I think a lot of these people would be better off if they got into k-pop or something rather than geopolitics.

Bro, so what u saying, u saying millions of us are effectively Rogan simps in a parasocial relationship? These relationships are on both sides (e.g AOC on the left).

Post by pjc50 » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

scruple wrote: post #131

formerly_proven wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the last couple years there was more than ample opportunity to see how badly this approach fails, you have droves of these "public intellectuals" as TFA calls them for every crisis (COVID, energy crisis, russian wars, gaza etc.) and almost all of them are just Average Joes dishing out their BBQ-level hot takes in public. Remember all the math and physics PhDs in 2020 suddenly being genius experts on disease modell…

Yes. This was prominent when Russia invaded Ukraine. It was as if millions of people woke and decided, "I'm tired of being an infectious disease expert. Starting today, I'm a military intelligence expert!"

Post by hfgjbcgjbvg » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 1:42 PM UTC

kibwen wrote: post #147

mypastself wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I don’t use social media, nor am I prone to personality obsession like the author, there’s definitely something to be said about following an “authority” on Twitter and the like. Whether they’re an artist whose work you enjoy, a top expert in a field you’re interested in, or simply a person whose writing on some topic you appreciate, surely there’s an individual whose insight you’d find valuable enough to “foll…

> surely there’s an individual whose insight you’d find valuable enough to “follow”? Not me. What I would like to follow is a topic that interests me, with discourse predominantly populated by subject matter experts. "User-based" follow systems like Twitter only make sense insamuch as the user sticks to their expertise, and as soon as they start veering away into new topics their comments are just as likely to be noi…

Post by hfgjbcgjbvg » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 1:45 PM UTC

boringg wrote: post #168

nonrandomstring wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a neighbouring thread we're talking about "conviviality" (Ivan Illich's "Tools for..." It's an odd word. What I found is that almost every random bore at the pub has a wealth of interesting stuff to say. You just have to tease it out. You have to work at conversations. It's a bit of a lost art imho. The first step is always to get the topic off the mainstream (stop exchanging platitudes) by showing an interest in…

So I'm with in theory. People are interesting for the most part. However the amount of work to reward you are describing is tantamount to pulling up hedgerows in zelda for coins. Your not likely to find anything amazing but maybe once in awhile interesting. Again probably depends on the establishment