The rise of the anti-intellectual

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 06/05/2023 (880 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Ever since the 1987 publication of philosopher Allan Bloom’s seminal The Closing of the American Mind, there’s been a steady stream of books critical of higher education, many with comparable descriptors of “the American mind” in their title. By 2019, 59 per cent of Republicans thought universities were bad for America (Pew Research Center).

This is but one measure of the increasingly positive correlation between conservative ideology, populism, and anti-intellectualism.

As a form of anti-establishment politics, populism pits presumably virtuous, united, ordinary folk whose concerns are constantly disregarded against purportedly corrupt, condescending, self-serving elites whose privilege constantly prevails.

Populism thereby presents itself as a product of class struggles. Furthermore, it proposes simplistic and divisive solutions to problems that require complex thinking and increased co-operation.

In his 1964 Pulitzer-Prize winning Anti-intellectualism in American Life, historian Richard Hofstadter described anti-intellectualism as the view that intellectuals “are pretentious, conceited… and snobbish; and very likely immoral, dangerous, and subversive… The plain sense of the common (person) is an altogether adequate substitute for, if not actually much superior to, formal knowledge and expertise.”

Hofstadter argued that anti-intellectualism was a product of the historical “democratization of knowledge.”

Or, as scientist Isaac Asimov put it more curtly, “democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge,” insinuating that all states of mind are equally helpful. Ironically, and problematically, anti-intellectualism then easily reverses into anti-democratic, authoritarian leadership that appeals to emotions instead of knowledge.

In sum, anti-intellectualism is a generalized mistrust of experts and intellectuals, a social attitude that systematically denigrates science-based facts, “ivory tower” academics, and the pursuit of theory and knowledge, whether it be of the character and consequences of capitalism, climate change, or COVID-19.

It clings to fervently held beliefs, despite little or no supporting evidence. Remarkably, social scientific research shows that subjects with high levels of anti-intellectualism actually increase their opposition to expertise when presented with it.

Sociologist Daniel Rigney identified three types of anti-intellectualism. First, unreflective instrumentalism is the belief that pursuing knowledge is unnecessary unless wielded for practical means, such as a lucrative career. Second, religious anti-rationalism is the rejection of reason, logic, and scientific facts in favour of experiences, emotions, morals, and religious absolutes, as documented in Mark Noll’s award-winning The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. And third, populist anti-elitism is the rejection of authoritative institutions as well as persons categorized as the social and/or intellectual elite.

Curiously, populists often view K-12 public education as good and necessary, but post-secondary education as bad and even dangerous, unless it is the commodified credentialling of the professions or business skills provided by universities. They characteristically regard everything else, especially in the humanities and social sciences, as “woke ideology” while being oblivious to their own unawakened ideology. Hence, they “think for themselves” and “do their own research”, regardless of how limited it is, or how relatively (un)able they are to evaluate in an informed way what they find online or in print.

Further survey research conducted by Pew in pre-COVID 2019 showed 74 per cent of Canadians on the political left trusted scientists to do what was best for the public, compared to 35 per cent of Canadians on the right. In America, only 20 per cent on the political right trusted science.

There has by now been a well-documented decades-long loss of trust in all social institutions, from education to politics, media, religion, family, medicine, and more. This loss of trust combined with the expression of unwarranted factual certitude — epistemic hubris — is a major contributor to the intemperance and intransigence that plague our society.

Intellectual humility is imperative for both anti-intellectuals and intellectuals. Indeed, while the uneducated can be duped, the educated can be seduced. But by the very nature of their systematic, publicly accountable pursuit of true knowledge, intellectuals are more likely to be willing and able to turn answers into questions, and acknowledge what they do not know. Sadly, there is some solid evidence that anti-intellectualism has now morphed into anti-rationalism.

Everything I’ve written here can be readily dismissed, because, after all, I’m just another one of those academic elites — yes, a university professor of the social sciences — which apparently for populists can alone discredit me.

Dennis Hiebert teaches in the Department of Sociology and Criminology at the University of Manitoba.