Prediction: Demands will escalate that amateurs abstain from independent analysis and defer to credentialed experts.
The better the analysis, the more strident the denunciations will be.
The reason is that credentials are increasingly a filter for ideology, not competence. 1/7
The better the analysis, the more strident the denunciations will be.
The reason is that credentials are increasingly a filter for ideology, not competence. 1/7
Within many academic & professional domains, a key purpose of gatekeepers (credentialers, journals, etc) is to enforce ideological discipline—to ensure that an analysis is not just correct, but also advances dominant ideological priorities. 2/7
The real threat is not error (which can be refuted) but accurate analysis that transgresses ideological norms. This will rarely come from inside experts; they have already been filtered for conformity and would face professional repercussions.
The risk is from amateurs. 3/7
The risk is from amateurs. 3/7
It's not enough that a domain outsider understand an inside expert's analysis, or competently critique errors or question assumptions.
An uncatechized outsider will not respect every ideological norm of the discipline—and thus must be silenced. 4/7
An uncatechized outsider will not respect every ideological norm of the discipline—and thus must be silenced. 4/7
Such amateurs threaten not only to raise ideologically objectionable arguments, but to undermine the discipline’s entire artifice of authority, which is rooted in claims of specialized expertise and scientific objectivity without transparency on how ideology slants this. 5/7
Why this matters: expert-controlled disciplines can be crucial power centers for a not-yet-hegemenous ideology.
Like priests in a gnostic religion, their anointed "experts" enforce the ideology internally and leverage the prestige of “expertise” to promulgate it externally. 6/7
Like priests in a gnostic religion, their anointed "experts" enforce the ideology internally and leverage the prestige of “expertise” to promulgate it externally. 6/7
Since outsiders can most effectively challenge the claim to exclusive expertise, it will be most zealously guarded—both by domain insiders who want to protect their power, and by their ideological allies who recognize the power of such "experts" in pushing ideological goals. 7/7
Related: CS Lewis recognized in his essay ‘Is Progress Possible?’ that science could be a particularly effective tool for imposing power in our age:
“On just the same ground I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come in. ...
“On just the same ground I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come in. ...
... In every age the men who want us under their thumb, if they have any sense, will put forward the particular pretension which the hopes and fears of that age render most potent. They ‘cash in’. It has been magic, it has been Christianity. Now it will certainly be science.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
