The Dangerous Rise of Anti-Intellectualism
Summary
TLDRアイザック・アシモフとカール・セーガンの引用を用いて、米国における反知性主義の歴史とその現代における影響を論じています。特に、科学と知識に対する敵意がどのようにして政治的および文化的な力に利用されるかを強調しています。また、トランプ政権やプロジェクト2025の危険性についても触れ、歴史的な例としてスターリン時代のリセンコを挙げています。最後に、反知性主義が科学の進歩を妨げ、社会に深刻な影響を及ぼすことを警告しています。
Takeaways
- 📚 アシモフの引用: 「無知のカルトがアメリカに存在し、常に存在してきた。」
- 🤔 サイエンスの否定は、政治と文化における一貫したテーマであり、民主主義の誤解がその根底にある。
- 📉 サイエンスリテラシーの欠如は、現代社会の大きな問題となっている。
- 🚫 反科学的な風潮は操作されやすい社会を作り出し、偽情報が広まる原因となる。
- ⚖️ 過去の例として、スターリン時代の遺伝学者の迫害が挙げられる。
- 🏛️ トランプ政権の再選が反科学的な政策をさらに強化する可能性がある。
- 💡 反知識主義の根本には、宗教的な反理性主義、ポピュリズム的な反エリート主義、そして実用主義がある。
- 🏫 高等教育の費用が反感を助長しているが、それは知識の重要性を軽視する理由にはならない。
- 🌐 気候変動否定は、エネルギー企業や宗教団体などの利害関係者によって推進されている。
- 📢 社会全体に広がる反知識主義は、ナショナリズムや警察国家化を助長し、科学的知識の普及を妨げる。
Q & A
アシモフの引用の主旨は何ですか?
-アシモフの引用は、アメリカにおける反知性主義の存在と、それが民主主義の誤った理解によって助長されていることを指摘しています。
カール・セーガンはどのような点でアシモフと共鳴していますか?
-セーガンは、現代の人々が日常的に使用する技術を理解できず、自分たちのアジェンダを設定したり適切な質問をする能力がないと指摘し、無知の称賛が広まっていると述べています。
21世紀の反知性主義はどのように進化しましたか?
-21世紀には、地球の形状や基本的な算数の有効性を疑問視する人々が増え、反科学的な熱狂が広がり、メディアや立法を通じて国家が承認する偽科学が広まるという事態に至っています。
スターリンの下での科学者の迫害の結果は何でしたか?
-遺伝学を否定したトロフィム・リセンコが科学の高位に昇進し、偽科学的な農業手法を推進した結果、作物の失敗によって何百万人もの人々が飢え死にしました。
反知性主義が現代のアメリカ政治に及ぼす影響は何ですか?
-反知性主義は、トランプのような人物が権力を拡大し、科学者を迫害するリセンコのような人物を政権に迎え入れるリスクを高め、共和党による科学否定とキリスト教神権政治への移行を推進する一助となっています。
反知性主義が推進される理由は何ですか?
-反知性主義は、共和党系のシンクタンクやエネルギー生産者、キリスト教神権主義者などの利益を守るために推進され、科学に対する敵意を育てることが有利となるためです。
反知性主義がどのように社会に広がるのですか?
-反知性主義は、教育機関や科学に対する敵意を煽り、科学に基づく知識を否定することで、政治的および宗教的な利益を守るために広がります。
反知性主義が宗教とどのように関連しているのですか?
-反知性主義は、特に科学の進歩が宗教的な物語を脅かすと感じる宗教団体によって推進され、恐怖と部族主義による反発を引き起こします。
反知性主義が教育に与える影響は何ですか?
-反知性主義は、教育機関が悪とされ、知識を獲得しないことが奨励されることで、科学に対する敵意を育て、大学が権力に対抗する場として悪魔化されます。
反知性主義が政治的にどのように利用されているのですか?
-反知性主義は、非党派的な問題を政治的に極端化し、科学的な基本認識を認めるだけで排斥されるような状況を作り出し、ナショナリズムや盲目的な忠誠を育てます。
Outlines
📚 科学への不信感の広がり
この段落では、Isaac AsimovとCarl Saganの言葉から始まり、21世紀における科学不信感の高まりを示唆しています。人々が地球の形状や基本的な算術を疑問視するようになり、反科学的な情熱が私たちを操作しやすくしていると指摘しています。また、過去の歴史を振り返り、スターリン政権下の科学者への迫害やLysenkoの登場を例に、科学的でない政治的立場がどれほど危険かを警告しています。さらに、現在のアメリカ政治におけるTrumpの勝利やChristian theocracyへの道を示す「プロジェクト2025」についても触れています。
🤔 反知的主义の3つの原則
第2段落では、反知的主义の核心となる3つの原則について語られています。それは、宗教的な非合理主義、知的インスティテューションへのポピュリズム的拒絶、そして知識の追求が利益にのみ利用されるというインストルメンタリズムです。これらの原則が権力と特権を持つグループの利益を守るために新しい知識の獲得を妨げ、権力者が有利な誤情報を広めることになる様子を描いています。また、教育コストの高騰が学問への轻视を生み出していると指摘しつつも、知識の中心としての大学を擁護するべきだと述べています。最後に、反知的主义が国民主義や社会分断につながり、ソーシャルメディアを通じてデマを広める政治者やデマグラフを批判しています。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡反知性主義
💡偽科学
💡民主主義の誤解
💡リセンコ主義
💡気候変動否定
💡クリスチャン神権政治
💡メディア操作
💡大学の悪魔化
💡科学リテラシー
💡国家主義
Highlights
Isaac Asimov highlighted a persistent anti-intellectualism in U.S. culture, where democracy is misconstrued to equate ignorance with knowledge.
Carl Sagan warned in 1995 about the public's inability to understand technology, leading to a celebration of ignorance.
The current anti-science fervor is seen as dangerous, making the public easily manipulated by contrarian messages, regardless of their source.
There is a concern about the rise of a multimodal anti-science empire, which uses mass media and legislation to promote pseudoscience.
Historical examples like the persecution of scientists under Stalin and the promotion of pseudoscience by Lysenko are cited as cautionary tales.
The possibility of political figures in the U.S. emulating such anti-science persecution is considered a real threat.
The document mentions Project 2025, which is portrayed as a plan to move the U.S. towards a Christian theocracy.
The rise of anti-science sentiment is linked to discomfort with the complexity of modern science and deliberate promotion by vested interests.
Denial of climate change and evolutionary biology is connected to the interests of energy producers and Christian theocrats.
The demonization of universities is seen as part of the anti-science campaign, aimed at preventing organized resistance.
Anti-intellectualism is driven by religious anti-rationalism, populist anti-elitism, and instrumentalism, undermining the acquisition of new knowledge.
The educational sphere is partly blamed for the rise of anti-intellectualism due to the high cost of education.
Corporations benefit from a science-illiterate public, as it prevents challenges to their interests.
Politicians and religious institutions use anti-intellectualism to polarize issues like climate change, creating division and promoting nationalism.
The anti-science mentality is seen as the greatest threat to mankind, with public perception being manipulated by pundits and demagogues.
Transcripts
To start, I had hoped to work in this quote from Isaac Asimov. “There is a cult of ignorance in
the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a
constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by
the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’”
This quote is from 1980, and it’s been echoed by other great thinkers like Carl Sagan,
who spoke about the public being unable to grasp the technology we all use every day,
and having no ability to set their own agenda or ask the right questions, culminating in a
celebration of ignorance. He said that in 1995. Even these two could not have foreseen how bad
this has gotten in the 21st century, with people now questioning the shape of the Earth and the
validity of basic arithmetic. This anti-science fervor makes us easy to manipulate, because any
contrarian message is bought en masse, no matter who is telling it or what their motives are. We
are witnessing a multimodal anti-science empire operating through mass media and legislation,
moving towards state-sanctioned pseudoscience. And we don’t have to speculate as to how
harmful this can be. We have history to reflect upon. Persecution of scientists
under Stalin was widespread. Lysenko was a non-scientist who was promoted to a high
scientific position under Stalin’s regime, and who convinced Stalin that genetics and
relativity were evil. He denied the existence of genes. To address agricultural problems,
he promoted a pseudoscientific practice called vernalization, and millions died of starvation as
a result of crop failures. Scientists who refused to renounce genetics were left destitute or even
executed. Are we at risk of repeating such events? Absolutely. Let’s face reality, Trump is going to
win the election. Could he bring a Lysenko-like figure into his cabinet and begin persecuting
real scientists? Absolutely. Will he try to expand executive power and abuse his position
to the point of authoritarianism? Probably. And there are plenty of wealthy people who will help
him try to do that. I won’t go into detail about Project 2025, but it’s not a conspiracy. It’s a
real plan to move America into the first stages of Christian theocracy, and it’s already under way.
This is the evil upon our doorstep, and while it should receive far more attention than people like
Terrence Howard, we should recognize that it’s all different shades of the same phenomenon.
Anti-science sentiment does not arise out of thin air. Science is becoming increasingly
more complicated and therefore difficult for the public to understand, and some people lash
out due to the discomfort this produces. But more importantly, there are vested interests in
promoting this mentality stemming from Republican funded think tanks, the deliberate sculpting of a
populace that is not only science illiterate but actively hostile toward science. Denial of climate
change is in the interest of energy producers. Denial of basic evolutionary biology is in the
interest of Christian theocrats. These efforts go all the way up the ladder to figures like
the Koch brothers. I’m not saying Terry is funded by the Koch brothers, but he rides this prevalent
attitude of reality denial and hostility toward any form of expertise to this bizarre prominence
that now has people questioning 2nd grade math. To wield an agenda that is in opposition with
science, one must popularize the notion that science is wrong and evil. Universities,
the places where you gain knowledge, are evil. Don’t go there and learn things so that you
figure out how to resist our brainwashing, and also how to organize and topple our political
structures. Universities are famously places that stand up against the powers that be,
so they must be demonized. It is a successful campaign because many people are happy to
have a reason to not learn anything and cling to primitive beliefs without basis or self-scrutiny.
It goes without saying that religion is a primary driver of anti-science mentality
because scientific progress, particularly as of late, has challenged many religious narratives,
such as immaculate divine creation. This triggers fear of mortality, as their narrative is eroded,
and they lash out in precisely the same way as one would defend themselves against
physical violence, with hostility and tribalism. At the same time this is not purely a religious
issue, it has at this point completely permeated secular politics. I myself am
not a Democrat and I no longer vote Democrat out of total disillusionment with the party,
as it does not have the best interests of the American people in mind. But the Republican
party is cartoonishly apocalyptic in comparison. Know-nothing, proudly stupid, in denial of truly
all science, actively pushing us back into the dark ages in terms of both ignorance and
authoritarian control by the church. In the wake of this, to pretend that idiots like Terry should
be given a voice is preposterous. He is not the culprit but he exacerbates larger trends already
in place. He does not deserve a platform. He is not part of any legitimate conversation. And most
of the figures with any kind of expertise that shoe-horn their way into the conversation have
ulterior motives as well, and only serve to further confuse the public. Like Eric.
So let’s get down to brass tacks. What is anti-intellectualism at its core?
It boils down to three principles. 1) Religious anti-rationalism. Essentially emotions over facts.
2) Populist anti-elitism, or the rejection of intellectual institutions. And 3) Instrumentalism,
the belief that pursuit of knowledge only serves practical means, namely profit. This
movement intends to halt the acquisition of new knowledge that would undermine groups with power
and privilege. Misinformation that benefits those in power is perpetuated, and those
who speak truth to that power are preemptively character assassinated. The educational sphere
is not completely blameless, admittedly. Part of the disdain towards academia is fostered by the
increasingly high cost of education. But this is not in itself a justification for abandoning the
sanctity of centers of knowledge. Corporations do not have their financial interests challenged
when the public can not even identify the issues that they are harmed by,
thus perpetuating their own subjugation. We can historically blame the fossil fuel industry,
the tobacco industry, and so forth, but we do not extend this to scientific knowledge itself.
Politicians, corporations, and religious institutions stand to benefit the most from
promoting anti-intellectualism. They enact the politicization of non-partisan issues, polarizing
things like climate change so severely that simply acknowledging basic science gets one ostracized.
This spills over into the social realm just as easily. Anti-intellectualism breeds nationalism,
or the same blind allegiance to a governing body that is actively sowing the seeds of division.
This is the reason for equating Black Lives Matter or any other kind of social justice with
“fascism”, and the justification for this always involves inventing violent intent out of thin air.
This in turn is used to justify a militarized police force under the guise of protection.
And lastly, anti-intellectualism promotes being skeptical towards perceived authority
while demanding that people blindly follow demagogues who are amplified by social media.
People who fall into this way of thinking will place an unreasonable level of skepticism on
the body of knowledge produced by tens of thousands of scientists operating all over
the world under every type of government and in both the public and private sector,
yet they place absolutely zero scrutiny on the figures who confidently feed them the narratives
they enjoy, which are riddled with distortion and fabrication almost without exception. These people
find comfort in the strength and confidence such figures convey in an appeal to shared
beliefs. That’s why Trump famously stated that he could shoot someone in the middle of fifth avenue
and he wouldn’t lose any voters. Because their idolization of him is emotional, not logical.
In the end, and here comes Dave the broken record, anti-science mentality and reality denial is the
single greatest threat facing mankind. Take a movie like “Don’t Look Up”. Though
obviously satirical, the manner in which the general public in this modern era would react to
any existential threat was depicted magnificently. There is no issue that could be more non-partisan
than a comet coming to kill us all. And yet, the comet was hyperpoliticized, people were
brainwashed into believing the comet didn’t exist, and a megalomaniacal tech oligarch fucked us all.
In my estimation that is roughly what would happen if there were another far deadlier pandemic or
some other such situation. And the culprit is not the scientific community. It’s the pundits
and demagogues who abuse the power of the internet to warp public perception of reality. People like
Rogan are not the main culprits but they also are not blameless, and deserve their share of
criticism for amplifying the chaos for monetary gain. And sadly, other than directly neutralizing
sources of disinformation and promoting general science literacy, I don’t have a meaningful
solution to this doomsday recipe. I don’t know how to fundamentally change human nature to
be either less corrupt and manipulative, or less blindly credulous. I will admit,
my youthful optimism has been diminished as I enter middle age. But I’m not giving up just yet.
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)