May 23, 2004
Why We Need A Philosopher's State
Scott Sherman outlines how the New York Review of Books became one of the lone voices of sanity and dissent in post 9/11 America. Worth reading.
So, what does the title of your post have to do with that?
And yes, I am just prodding you into a discussion of meritocracies and philosopher kings.
Well, since the New York Review of Books is a publication aimed at intellectuals, then.....
My title is a joke, of course. But on the issue of meritocracies, IMO it would be nice if more Americans had more respect for expert opinion and superior intellect, rather than the resentful attitude towards elites that seems so widespread in today's media (one example might be Sullivan's moronic "Sontag awards", in addition to red-baiting in general)
It's not so much that people ought to be deferential to intellectual authority, but rather that people should admire such power and seek to reproduce it within themselves.
Yes. I actually think the ideal government would be one lead by a philosopher king. Of course, ideals don't work very well in practice, so democracy is a far superior choice. It'd just be nice if the general populace were made up of philosophers—that is, people who are generally well-educated and trained to think critically. I think then we'd see less anti-intellectualism and a higher quality of discourse leading to a generally better government.