Dr. Sowell Intellectuals and Society

Tucker Case said:

But Sowell is an intellectual and a professor.

Click to expand...

True, but he's a conservative, and that makes it all okay. :roll:

Tucker Case said:

There are ironic points in this. For example, Sowell says "the fatal misstep of intellectuals is assuming that superior ability within a particular realm can be generalized to superior wisdom or morality overall"

The irony is that Sowell is an economist, but this discussion is about sociology.

:lol::lol:

Click to expand...

Wait a page before you show the hypocrisy of the OP.

Sowell really wasn't going into much sociology or saying that intellectualism is bad. He was just saying that intellectuals should know their limits. Their not Gods.

DrunkenAsparagus said:

Sowell really wasn't going into much sociology or saying that intellectualism is bad. He was just saying that intellectuals should know their limits. Their not Gods.

Click to expand...

Not much chance of their being mistaken for divine--or even given a chance to do much leading, at least in the US. Why does this message even need to be said, except to bolster the prospects of politicians who clearly AREN'T intellectuals (i.e., the vast majority, particularly on the right)?

DrunkenAsparagus said:

Sowell really wasn't going into much sociology or saying that intellectualism is bad. He was just saying that intellectuals should know their limits. Their not Gods.

Click to expand...

Isn't the book called "Intellectuals and Society"? How's that not going into much sociology?

DrunkenAsparagus said:

Sowell really wasn't going into much sociology or saying that intellectualism is bad. He was just saying that intellectuals should know their limits. Their not Gods.

Click to expand...

Actually, I am.

But in seriousness, yes intellectuals aren't well versed in absolutely everything. But many demonstrate proper critical thinking skills necessary to think about a problem, research it, and to come up with practical solutions. I would much rather have the advice of an intellectual than some random drunk barfly without a high school diploma.

Ikari said:

I would much rather have the advice of an intellectual than some random drunk barfly without a high school diploma.

Click to expand...

The best case scenario is to receive advice from an intellectual drunken barfly with a GED.

Tucker Case said:

The best case scenario is to receive advice from an intellectual drunken barfly with a GED.

Click to expand...

Naw, an MBA

What I do not agree with is a poll that has too many possible answers to such a general question. Yes, I agree with Dr. Sowell. Simple and direct. His ideas on progressives is right on target.

Ikari said:

Naw, an MBA

Click to expand...

Only if it's received from an online "university" from The Republic of the Congo. :lol:

Dr. Sowell is arguably the most underrated writer of the past 100 years. If there was any justice in this world, he would have honorary doctorates from every prestigious university on the planet.

I read everything this man writes. I will get this book a little later when the price drops on Amazon.

Honorary doctorates are stupid. Work for it like the rest of us did.

Ikari said:

Honorary doctorates are stupid. Work for it like the rest of us did.

Click to expand...

Whatever one wants to say about the man, his educational background is pretty impressive. (and I'm not usually one who's impressed by such things)


From his wiki page:

...Sowell passed the GED examination and enrolled at Howard University. He transferred to Harvard University, where in 1958 he graduated magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics. He received a Master of Arts in Economics from Columbia University in 1959, and a Doctor of Philosophy in Economics from the University of Chicago.

Click to expand...

He's earned his intellectual stripes.

I found myself in agreement with Dr. Sowell on a variety of points during the eleven minutes I was able to sit still for. I did, however, have a number of complaints about this interview:

1. I didn't need that book waved in my face every 5 seconds, as if I was forgetting that I'm supposed to buy it
2. I didn't need the show producer flashing the Twitter address at me, as if I was forgetting to be another cow and follow their account
3. Most importantly, there's an awful lot Dr. Sowell didn't say, which is ironic seeing as how he functionally accused an awful lot of other people of leaving out salient details

I noticed, for one thing, that he didn't cite a single person like "Dr." Savage or "Dr." Laura, conservative talk hosts who use a title they earned in entirely unrelated work to appear more expert than the listener on the subjects they address. He didn't cite entertainers like Limbaugh or Hannity or Beck, whose primary expertise is entertainment, but who project themselves as being something other than the corporate media whores they are -- bringers of light and truth, broadcasters of ideas that could save the nation, whatever.

He had some great numbers about people who start out low-income (which applies to virtually everyone) and end up high-income (which applies to virtually every American who would commonly be referred to as "successful). They were very encouraging. What he didn't even bother to gloss over, however, are the people who start poor and end up that way in the long run, and the economics behind why that happens. How about the fact that, by and large, money is attracted to money with an almost magnetic force, and it's hard to make a wheel-barrel of it unless you have or borrow or sweet-talk your way into a wheel-barrel of it to begin with? How about this most recent economic downturn, are you going to tell me that his reassuring trend derived from IRS demographics holds true still?

How about the fact that the major parties are sock puppets, and that no matter who is in power the primary beneficiaries of government are always going to be the ones with the best connections, the biggest campaign donations, the largest membership roles? How about the fact that no matter how virulently the parties bicker back and forth, no matter how many scandals break and no matter how many rousing speeches we hear, the flow of power is configured to drain the individual who has little of it to begin with and raise up those who already have too much power?

Why is it that Dr. Sowell is essentially accusing a vaguely described group of smart people of trying to seize some vaguely quantified amount of power for some vague purpose, instead of getting down the nuts and bolts of what's wrong and making some serious accusations?

Finally, what I find most hilarious is that if you look at Dr. Sowell's resume:

Thomas Sowell | Curriculum Vita

You will discover that he is, in fact, himself an intellectual. He kept everything vague and unfocused because to do otherwise would render him guilty of the very thing he is accusing others of doing.

In other words, he wasted my time wagging a finger at intellectuals who step outside their fields of expertise, but couldn't get very specific because otherwise he would be . . . stepping outside his field of expertise.

This video officially rates three putrid farts, two snotty tissues, and a wet dump in a pear tree.

Blarg. :roll:

Tucker Case said:

Whatever one wants to say about the man, his educational background is pretty impressive. (and I'm not usually one who's impressed by such things)


From his wiki page:



He's earned his intellectual stripes.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying he isn't smart or well educated. I was saying that honorary doctorates are stupid and that people should have to work for them like the rest of us.

K-1 said:

Dr. Sowell is arguably the most underrated writer of the past 100 years. If there was any justice in this world, he would have honorary doctorates from every prestigious university on the planet.

I read everything this man writes. I will get this book a little later when the price drops on Amazon.

Click to expand...

Why he isn't a regular on major networks, even by phone is a mystery.

Then again... not.

He would make the libs look like complete and utter idjuts.

Can't have that, can they?

.

An anti-intellectual intellectual? That'd be a silly, self-hating philosophy. Like Black conservatism. Reconciling labor and capital eh, doc? Good luck with that one.

Ikari said:

I'm not saying he isn't smart or well educated. I was saying that honorary doctorates are stupid and that people should have to work for them like the rest of us.

Click to expand...

I agree with that.

TacticalEvilDan said:

I did, however, have a number of complaints about this interview:

1. I didn't need that book waved in my face every 5 seconds, as if I was forgetting that I'm supposed to buy it
2. I didn't need the show producer flashing the Twitter address at me, as if I was forgetting to be another cow and follow their account
3. Most importantly, there's an awful lot Dr. Sowell didn't say, which is ironic seeing as how he functionally accused an awful lot of other people of leaving out salient details

You will discover that he is, in fact, himself an intellectual. He kept everything vague and unfocused because to do otherwise would render him guilty of the very thing he is accusing others of doing.

In other words, he wasted my time wagging a finger at intellectuals who step outside their fields of expertise, but couldn't get very specific because otherwise he would be . . . stepping outside his field of expertise.

This video officially rates three putrid farts, two snotty tissues, and a wet dump in a pear tree.

Blarg. :roll:

Click to expand...

WARNING: DECONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS

Oooooooooooooooooo.

1. You admittedly watched only a small fraction and came to such conclusions?
   
   
2. Try listening only. It's permitted. Nobody is forcing you to watch. Then you can do other things as you listen. Amazing huh?
   
   
3. He does hit on many themes, and he is selling a book; if you can't afford it, you can read all about his positions for free online.
   
   
4. Yes. He is an intellectual, but not cut from the Socialist cloth, like the masses of them infesting our halls of acedemia like roaches in a bad restaurant. Sowell actually admires America. Treasures her. Sees greatness in her. THAT is an enormous difference to the mass of his colleagues.
   
   
5. He illustrated perfectly the fact these people went outside their circle of competence and the only way they got there is because of fame; where they have a modicum of competence and a lot of celebrity.

Perhaps you show some maturity and tolerance and watch it all... then the following, and follow it up with some articles for more detail.

But we know... anything that challenges the Lib's world view is quickly tuned out and shat upon... just as you have done with Dr. Sowell.

FORA.tv - Thomas Sowell: The Housing Boom and Bust
FORA.tv - Uncommon Knowledge: Thomas Sowell
FORA.tv - Uncommon Knowledge: Thomas Sowell

If you get this far a congratulations is in order, considering your admitted inability to stay with intellectual matters for more than a few minutes. Being the lib you are, you might want to rescind your farts (libs believe they add to global warming... as a lib you should be more sensitive to the planet), and take a pooper scooper to pick up your feces; trust a lib to defecate where their food comes from.

.

Tucker Case said:

Isn't the book called "Intellectuals and Society"? How's that not going into much sociology?

Click to expand...

He is an intellectual and has experience with that. Presumably he did quite a bit of research like any proper non-fiction author.

Ikari said:

Actually, I am.

But in seriousness, yes intellectuals aren't well versed in absolutely everything. But many demonstrate proper critical thinking skills necessary to think about a problem, research it, and to come up with practical solutions. I would much rather have the advice of an intellectual than some random drunk barfly without a high school diploma.

Click to expand...

To an extent, but there is a limit. Again, just look at the problems of central planning

DrunkenAsparagus said:

He is an intellectual and has experience with that. Presumably he did quite a bit of research like any proper non-fiction author.

Click to expand...

Regardless of the amount of research done, he's effectively committing the same fatal misstep he accuses other intellectuals of making.

He uses Chomsky as an example. A linguist (which is a social science) who is talking about politics and sociology (which are also social sciences) as though he's an expert in these fields when he's really just an expert linguist. Sowell apparently denounces Chomsky for this.

Let's look at it thoroughly, though.

Sowell is an economist (which is a social science) who is talking about politics and sociology (which are also social sciences) as though he's an expert in these fields when he's really just an expert economist. But apparently it's OK for Sowell to do this in Sowell's way of thinking.

Regardless of whether or not people agree with Sowell, it's obviously hypocritical of him to take such a stance or to even write such a book.

DrunkenAsparagus said:

To an extent, but there is a limit. Again, just look at the problems of central planning

Click to expand...

It's easy to get maybe a bunch of intellectuals whom are all theory and have no real way of relating things to reality. This is true. But on average, you're probably going to be better off with the advice of intellectuals. The solution is to consort with an experimental physicist. Everything we do has to be related back to the real world. Hehehe

Ikari said:

It's easy to get maybe a bunch of intellectuals whom are all theory and have no real way of relating things to reality. This is true. But on average, you're probably going to be better off with the advice of intellectuals. The solution is to consort with an experimental physicist. Everything we do has to be related back to the real world. Hehehe

Click to expand...

And this is why intellectuals aren't bad, Sowell says as much, but he just says that they have a limit that he has seen crossed over and over again