Seed Media Group

The Island of Doubt

An irregular exploration of the struggle between the power of rational discourse and the scientific method on one hand, and the forces of superstition and dogma on the other.

Search this blog

Profile

me-fergus.jpg James Hrynyshyn is a freelance science journalist based in western North Carolina, where he tries to put degrees in marine biology and journalism to good use.

Recent Posts

   xml.gifrss.gif


Recent Comments

award1-blog.gif
for 9 July 2007

Archives

Other Doubtful Blogs

Inspiration

The Demon-Haunted World:
Science as a Candle
in the Dark, by Carl Sagan
(A review)

The Doubter's Companion:
by John Ralston Saul (Excerpts)

Skeptic Magazine: www.skeptic.com

Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal: www.csicop.org

A poem by Yehuda Amichai:
The Place
Where We Are Right


The Meaning of the
Island of Doubt


Author's site: cyamid.net


Add to Technorati Favorites! Penetrating so many secrets, we cease to believe in the unknowable. But there it sits nevertheless, calmly licking its chops.
--- H. L. Mencken

By doubting we come to inquiry; and through inquiry we perceive truth.
--- Peter Abelard

Undisguised clarity is easily mistaken for arrogance.
-- Richard Dawkins

As for evolution, it happened. Deal with it.
-- Michael Shermer.

More blogs about island of doubt.

« 50,000 physicists can't be wrong! (Who said they were?) | Main | No, no, no, no, no no! »

Experts and intellectuals

Category: philosophy
Posted on: July 22, 2008 12:54 PM, by James Hrynyshyn

I doubt whoever chose today's "quote of day" as it appears on my RSS-fed personalized Google homepage, was thinking about the recent climate-denying nonsense at the American Physical Society. But the timing was impeccable. First, the quote:

My definition of an expert in any field is a person who knows enough about what's really going on to be scared. - PJ Plauger
When it comes to the climate crisis, that's bang on. Of course, there is always room for dissent on scientific issues, but the key to making sense of any resulting debate is to know who is qualified to weigh in and who isn't.

The APS fiasco, in which a journalist with no scientific credentials, Christopher Monkton, was allowed to participate in a society debate about climate, is an excellent example. He's not scared of global warming. But he's not an expert. Not even a scientist. Just a hack journalist.

Another inescapable fact is no one has enough time to evaluate all the arguments of everyone who has something to say on a subject, so we have to apply expertise filters. And when we do, we discover that very few of those who aren't at least somewhat concerned about the consequences of business as usual on the climate front are climatologists.

On a related note, I'd like to draw everyone's attention to something Christopher Hitchens wrote a few weeks back on the subject of what constitutes an intellectual, and how that relates to popularity.

One might do worse than to say that an intellectual is someone who does not attempt to soar on the thermals of public opinion. There ought to be a word for those men and women who do their own thinking; who are willing to stand the accusation of "elitism" (or at least to prefer it to the idea of populism); who care for language above all and guess its subtle relationship to truth; and who are willing and able to nail a lie. If such a person should also have a sense of irony and a feeling for history, then, as the French say, tant mieux. An intellectual need not be one who, in a well-known but essentially meaningless phrase, "speaks truth to power." (Chomsky has dryly reminded us that power often knows the truth well enough.) However, the attitude towards authority should probably be sceptical, as should the attitude towards utopia, let alone to heaven or hell. Other aims should include the ability to survey the present through the optic of a historian, the past with the perspective of the living, and the culture and language of others with the equipment of an internationalist. In other words, the higher one comes in any "approval" rating of this calling, the more uneasily one must doubt one's claim to the title in the first place.

Comments

One interesting thing about Christopher Hitchens' quote:

Other aims should include the ability to survey the present through the optic of a historian, the past with the perspective of the living, and the culture and language of others with the equipment of an internationalist.

There isn't any mention of how an intellectual should survey science. I don't have a good answer, but I wish I did.

Posted by: Kim | July 22, 2008 3:10 PM

There isn't any mention of how an intellectual should survey science. I don't have a good answer, but I wish I did.

With cautious optimism and healthy skepticism.

Posted by: Tobias | July 22, 2008 8:09 PM

Hitchens might or might not know anything about intellectuals, but he wrote the book on pompous ass.

Posted by: Mark P | July 23, 2008 8:29 AM

"...that very few of those who aren't at least somewhat concerned about the consequences of business as usual on the climate front are climatologists."

If I read this correctly, it means, "Most of those who are at least somewhat concerned about climate change are not climatologists."

True, but begs the question of *why* are they concerned? Where do they get their information and how do they decide to trust the source?

Posted by: Spike | July 23, 2008 2:50 PM

I think a better reading is, among those who are not concerned, there are few climatologists. I also had to tease out the syntax.

Posted by: Chris | August 7, 2008 4:30 PM

In other words, it means almost the opposite of your reading.

Posted by: Chris | August 7, 2008 4:31 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. Comments are moderated for spam, your comment may not appear immediately. Thanks for waiting.)





Having problems commenting? (UPDATED)

Blogs in the Network

Advertisement

Top Five: Most German

Search All Blogs