{"id":3458,"date":"2011-07-01T15:09:37","date_gmt":"2011-07-01T19:09:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/?p=3458"},"modified":"2011-07-02T12:40:54","modified_gmt":"2011-07-02T16:40:54","slug":"larry-sanger-on-geek-anti-intellectualism-a-kind-of-critique","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/2011\/07\/01\/larry-sanger-on-geek-anti-intellectualism-a-kind-of-critique\/","title":{"rendered":"Larry Sanger on Geek Anti-Intellectualism: A (Kind-Of) Critique"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\"\"<\/a>Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote a wonderful piece on the rise of a new geek anti-intellectualism<\/a>. The essay sparked much discussion and Sanger has done a terrific job responding to comments and even offering a thoughtful follow-up piece<\/a>. However, I would like to write a short critique on a couple of points that have yet to be addressed.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Larry Sanger<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

First, I have to mention that contemporary anti-intellectualism was really my first academic interest, spurred in 2000 when I heard that Al Gore lost debates to George W. Bush because Gore \u201csounded too smart.\u201d Hyper-focused on epistemology (the philosophy of knowledge) at the time, it was learning about the differences between Wikipedia co-founders Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales that first got me interested in technology as a topic of research. Sanger, himself having an epistemology background, wanted Wikipedia to have a component of expertism on the site. When that was rejected he left and started the Citizendium<\/a> project. At war are two epistemologies: one based in populism <\/em>and the other expertism <\/em>(though, this conceptualization is far too simplistic, it will have to do for this short post).<\/p>\n

Today, I focus on theorizing technology and was, of course, quite interested when Larry Sanger took on the rise of a new geek anti-intellectualism, stating that,<\/p>\n

more and more mavens of the Internet are coming out firmly against academic knowledge in all its forms.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Sanger lays out what he means by \u201cgeek anti-intellectualism\u201d in 5 bullet points:<\/p>\n

1. Experts do not deserve any special role in declaring what is known. \u00a0Knowledge is now democratically determined, as it should be. \u00a0(Cf.\u00a0this essay of mine<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

2. Books are an outmoded medium because they involve a single person speaking from authority. \u00a0In the future, information will be developed and propagated collaboratively, something like what we already do with the combination of Twitter, Facebook, blogs, Wikipedia, and various other websites.<\/p>\n

3. The classics, being books, are also outmoded. \u00a0They are outmoded because they are often long and hard to read, so those of us raised around the distractions of technology can\u2019t be bothered to follow them; and besides, they concern foreign worlds, dominated by dead white guys with totally antiquated ideas and attitudes. \u00a0In short, they are boring and irrelevant.<\/p>\n

4. The digitization of information means that we don\u2019t have to memorize nearly as much. \u00a0We can upload our memories to our devices and to Internet communities. \u00a0We can answer most general questions with a quick search.<\/p>\n

5. The paragon of success is a popular website or well-used software, and for that, you just have to be a bright, creative geek. \u00a0You don\u2019t have to go to college, which is overpriced and so reserved to the elite anyway.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

While I largely agree with this analysis, I think it can also be improved a bit conceptually in two important ways.<\/p>\n

I. Geeks May Be Anti-Expert, But Are They Anti-Reason and Unreflectively\u00a0Instrumental? <\/em>
\n\"\"<\/a>While Sanger cites Richard Hofstadter\u2019s Pulitzer-Prize-winning 1963 book, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, <\/em>I think there is much contained in this book that is left untapped by Sanger, and his analysis suffers a bit. Some time should be spent analyzing the concept anti-intellectualism to get a proper definition. Following Hofstader (and Daniel Rigney*), we might say that anti-intellectualism consists of (at least) three dimensions: (1) anti-expertism, the rejection of specialized knowledge and the populist embracing of common-sense and the crowd; (2) anti-reason, which was religious evangelicalism for Hofstadter, and anti-rationalism for Rigney, however, I think it is better labeled anti-reason because it deals with all accounts where knowledge is not situated by reason but instead by some other dogma (which is, usually, but not exclusively, religious); and (3) unreflective instrumentalism, the notion that ideas and knowledge must be put to work rather than being appreciated for their own sake (the so-called \u201clife of the mind\u201d).<\/p>\n

Sanger\u2019s dimensions of geek anti-intellectualism can be similarly systematized. Sanger\u2019s points 1 and 2 above both describe anti-expertism. They deal with a populist democratization of both the production and consumption of knowledge (i.e., \u201cprosumption<\/a>\u201d). This is the populist epistemology where the crowd both produces content that is, then, collaboratively decided to be true or not.<\/p>\n

Sanger\u2019s point 3 reveals three additional aspects of geek anti-intellectualism: that material is more likely to enter our knowledge base if it is short<\/em>, exciting<\/em>, and easy to digest<\/em>. I think these also point to the populism surrounding the \u201canti-expertism\u201d dimension in that these attributes all describe how to make content appeal to many people (populism). Sanger’s point 5 deals with popularity, which most directly points to the populist notion of anti-expertism. (I\u2019ll deal with his point 4 in a moment).<\/p>\n

Thus, Sanger has done much to demonstrate that there is indeed a geek anti-intellectualism because it centers on a populist rejection of expertism. I think looking more closely at Hofstadter better organizes Sanger\u2019s points. However, more work should be done to see if geeks display the other dimensions of anti-intellectualism: are they evangelical\/dogmatic in their knowledge justification (beyond populism)? Do they appreciate knowledge and thinking for its own sake, or does it always have to be put to work towards instrumental purposes? Neither of these points are substantiated by Sanger (yet).<\/p>\n

I would argue that geeks are not dogmatic, but instead typically rely on reason (e.g., they employ reason in their defense of populism and the \u201cwisdom of the crowds\u201d; even if I and many others are unconvinced). Further, geeks indeed do seem to engage in knowledge projects for fun. Part of the success of Wikipedia is that it allows for purposelessly clicking through random entries for no other reason than because learning is fun. However, my task in this essay is to better conceptualize Sanger’s points and not really make the case for a geek intellectualism. I’m only half-convinced myself of these last two points. I’ll leave it to Sanger to describe how geeks are anti-intellectual\u00a0on these other two dimensions of anti-intellectualism. Until then, the story of geek anti-intellectualism remains mixed.<\/p>\n

II.\u00a0Intelligence\u00a0Versus Intellect<\/em>
\n\"\"<\/a>Let\u2019s muddle things further by bringing up perhaps the main reason Sanger should take another look at Hofstadter\u2019s famous book, and it deals with Sanger\u2019s 4th<\/sup> bullet point above (the decline of memorization online). Sanger has conflated intellect and intelligence in his essay<\/strong>. He repeatedly accuses geek culture as being anti-knowledge, which indeed follows from his analysis. However, Sanger\u2019s title refers to anti-intellectualism<\/em>. Hofstadter\u2019s essential distinction<\/a> between intelligence <\/em>and intellect <\/em>(see 1963;24-25) is that the former means having lots of knowledge and facts whereas the latter deals with creative and contemplative thought (the \u201clife of the mind\u201d). A computer has intelligence <\/em>whereas Hofstadter and\u00a0Sanger also have intellect<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The dismissal of memorization online is indeed an attack on knowledge and\u00a0intelligence <\/em>but not necessarily a dismissal of intellect<\/em>. While the geeks argue that focusing less on memorizing facts provides more time for creative and contemplative thought, Sanger\u2019s\u00a0rebuttal\u00a0points \u201conly\u201d to a geek anti-knowledge\/intelligence stance, but not towards a geek anti-intellectualism. The creative and contemplative piece that differentiates intelligence and intellectualism requires little memorization. Some is necessary, sure, but it certainly is not the essence of the difference.<\/p>\n

In sum, I think there is a partial argument to be made that the geeks Sanger describes are anti-intellectual; specifically, in their rejection of experts in favor of the crowd. However, the rest of Sanger\u2019s analysis really points to how these geeks remain intellectual, even if they are anti-intelligence\/anti-knowledge. What is missing in is evidence that these geeks reject the life of the mind<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

To conclude, I am left partially agreeing with Sanger after re-conceptualizing his analysis: (1) the \u201cgeeks\u201d are partly anti-intellectual (their populism); (2) they are perhaps partly intellectual (their seeming appreciation, at times, of the life of the mind; though I bet Sanger can convince me out of this); and (3) the geeks are often anti-knowledge (Sanger\u2019s convincing argument surrounding their attack on memorization). And this final point, that the geeks have been shown to be anti-intelligence, is indeed an important contribution (even if mis-labeled\u00a0by Sanger as anti-intellectualism).<\/p>\n

*Rigney, Daniel.\u00a0 1991.\u00a0 \u201cThree Kinds of Anti-Intellectualism:\u00a0 Rethinking Hofstadter.\u201d\u00a0 Sociological Inquiry. <\/em>61(4):434-451.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote a wonderful piece on the rise of a new geek anti-intellectualism. The essay sparked much discussion and Sanger has done a terrific job responding to comments and even offering a thoughtful follow-up piece. However, I would like to write a short critique on a couple of points that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":559,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[9967,892],"tags":[12044,12043,1624,985,12045,140,267,10829,732,4252,801],"class_list":["post-3458","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary","category-essay","tag-anti-intellectualism","tag-citizendium","tag-epistemology","tag-geeks","tag-hofstadter","tag-internet","tag-knowledge","tag-sanger","tag-social-media","tag-wales","tag-wikipedia"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3458","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/559"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3458"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3458\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3466,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3458\/revisions\/3466"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3458"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3458"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/cyborgology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3458"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}