Viswanathan K's Thoughts

Do intellectuals engaging in public life have a positive effect? That’s the topic of Benjamin Aldes Wurgaft’s book Thinking in Public . Do public intellectuals act as “public guardians of truth and justice and opponents of political corruption”? Or do intellectuals, as Jon Baskin wonders , become too prescriptive? Are they so convinced that they have the answers that they dismiss “public opinion as little more than gossip” and devalue the “ability of individuals to make informed political choices”? Are intellectuals willing to hear contradictory ideas, and then to integrate the valid points of their opponents? Or do they act as if they have all the answers, and think in terms of “accomplishment of pre-established tasks, rather than as an ongoing argument involving perennial questions about what we value, and why”? Traditionally, the role of intellectuals has been that of “agitating against unpopular state policy/conduct”, writes MK Raghavendra . But in India, they are now up ...

Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of The Black Swan , wrote this semi-literal, semi-satirical piece titled “The Intellectual Yet Idiot” , IYI for short in the rest of his article (and this blog). So who is an IYI? “(The) class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for.” Sound familiar? IYI’s are theoriticians, with no connection in real life to what they like to preach about. Or as Taleb says, they have no skin in the game. The IYI is smug and arrogant: “The IYI pathologizes others for doing things he doesn’t understand without ever realizing it is  his  understanding that may be limited. He thinks people should act according to their best interests  and  he knows their interests.” And: “What we generally call participation in the political process, he cal...