Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Timothy Burke's avatar

Maybe this is not a fall from grace but a return to form.

I don't recall growing up that I was well-regarded by anybody BUT teachers and my own parents for being a heavy reader who retained most of the information I read. I don't recall that being knowledgeable and invested in being educated in the 1960s and 1970s seemed to actually be a requirement for financial or social success except in a narrow handful of professions.

Eggheads, intellectuals, scientists, brainiacs, nerds, etc. were treated with contempt and pity in most comfortably middle-class social settings. In most corporate workplaces, the guys getting the promotions were often not the smartest or most insightful or most knowledgeable but instead the affable glad-handers, yes-men, etc.

Meritocracy has always been something of a myth--a post-facto ideology cited by people who'd climbed the hierarchies to prettify their mediocrity.

In the early days, this is what the first wave of tech entrepreneurs exposed, up to the late 1990s or so--they recognized how recumbent and establishment-driven big companies like Xerox and IBM were, and most of them were impatient to just get on with it and make cool things and experiment with technology. A fair number of the early guys were like Wozniak--misfits who were scorned by the normal corporate world but who just kept doing "smart" things because they felt like it.

In this reading, Trumpism is the revenge of mediocrity against the brief ascension of a professionalized world that had higher demands and requirements for technical skills and intellectual creativity in the labor markets of the 1970s and 1980s, and the "normification" of nerdery. America is not getting dumber, it is just exalting being dumber, because that's how a fairly significant portion of the population has felt about education and knowledge all along.

That's one way to think about it. A more positive way might be to question whether the specific kind of meritocratic myth that was in ascension in the 1970s-1990s overvalued knowledge and intelligence by making it an imagined requirement across the board. Maybe affability is more important for most human endeavors, maybe emotional intelligence and political cunning are more productive. Maybe our sense of what education is for got sidelined by high-stakes mandatory testing, the particular requirements of STEM research, etc. and we lost a vaguer but more generative relationship between knowledge about life and communication and sociality obtained by reading literature, talking philosophy, studying religion, considering history, etc.

Paul Coyne's avatar

I care but my influence is limited. I enjoyed your slightly depressing article.

6 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?