There's nothing wrong with this article; the last line is perhaps the most important. But in terms of the Broader Discourse on this point, a lot of folks seem to have unrealistic expectations of what education & knowledge accomplish. (1/n) washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/0…
The general idea is that fancy Ivy League educations mean that folks like Cruz and Hawley should "know better." Putting aside the elitism involved in accepting that premise, there are a number of ways that it us not consistent with what we know about education & knowledge. (2/n)
Following Converse (1964), we've known for a long time that variables like education and knowledge are associated with a stronger rather than weaker tendencies to hew to an ideological worldview. (3/n) 
Moreover, knowledge -- even fairly domain-specific knowledge -- is often associated with more rather than less motivated reasoning in favor of desired conclusions: (4/n) onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…
Education (and in some cases political knowledge) may also strengthen rather than weaken the influence of group prejudices on policy judgment: (5/n) onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111…
Lastly, education and knowledge appears to strengthen rather than weaken the link between needs for security and certainty and political preferences, rather than uniformly blocking rigid motivations: (6/n) onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…
In other words, there's no reason to believe that knowledge of the law & politics, as imparted in the hallowed halls of Harvard Law and Yale Law, will invariably discipline strong identity-based motivations to reach certain conclusions & pursue parochial goals. (7/7)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
