The Gospel Coalition

For a long time now I’ve been meaning to read more of Thomas Sowell. His Basic Economics has long been on my list of things to do, as has Economic Fallacies. As it stands, Intellectuals and Societies is only the second of his books I’ve read (after The Housing Boom and Bust). This book is really a broadside against the people who influence our society with their ideas. It is a book that takes aim at intellectuals, and especially those who deliberately avoid accountability for what they believe and what they teach. The “places to which intellectuals tend to gravitate tend to be places where sheer intellect counts for much and where wisdom is by no means necessary, since there are few consequences to face or prices to be paid for promoting ideas that turn out to be disastrous for society at large.”

Of course a book dealing with intellectuals will need to provide a useful definition for this class of person. Here Sowell says simply that an intellectual is a person whose end product is ideas and whose validation process involves only peers. Accountable only to their peers (which is no real accountability at all), intellectuals are free to create outrageous ideas and to influence society with them. And yet they are almost never called to account for these ideas. It is obviously very dangerous to separate ideas from consequences, to allow people to propose and demand whatever they wish but without ever calling those people to account for their influence. And yet this is precisely what happens with intellectuals. Says Sowell, “the ultimate test of a deconstructionist’s ideas is whether other deconstructionists find those ideas interesting, original, persuasive, elegant, or ingenious. There is no external test.”

Through the book, Sowell looks to several areas of society and shows where and how intellectuals have had their influence. He looks to economics, social vision, media, academia, law and war. In each case he shows how intellectuals have influenced society, how their ideas have become part of the cultural engagement and how, almost inevitably, the effects have been negative. He shows that ultimately what intellectuals crave is power and authority, especially moral authority. “In many ways, on a whole range of issues, the revealed preference of intellectuals is to gain moral authority—or, vicariously, political power—or both, over the rest of society. The desires or interests of none of the ostensible beneficiaries of that authority or power—whether the poor, minorities, or criminals in prison—are allowed to outweigh the more fundamental issue of gaining and maintaining the moral hegemony of the anointed.” Those who are unaccountable point to their own intellectual superiority as grounds to express and maintain power over others.

Sowell’s view toward intellectuals in general is exasperation and, at times, ridicule. This ridicule is particularly entertaining in a book that, by virtue of the subject matter and the never-ending examples, is extremely frustrating. Sowell breaks up the frustration with the occasional penetrating and scornful comment: “Intellectuals who have never run any business have been remarkably confident that they know when businesses have been run wrongly or when their owners or managers are overpaid.” Or again, “It is hard to think of any decade within the past century when the intelligentsia were not embarked on some urgent crusade to save the world from some great danger to which ordinary folk were considered to be oblivious.” Or in case any doubt remains as to his position, “While virtually anyone can name a list of medical, scientific, or technological things that have made the lives of today’s generation better in some way than that of people in the past, including people just one generation ago, it would be a challenge for even a highly informed person to name three ways in which our lives today are better as a result of the ideas of sociologists or deconstructionists.”

I guess the irony in all of this is that Sowell himself is an intellectual. Yet he proves himself to be an intellectual with that rarest of all virtues–common sense. He does not allow ideology to cloud his judgment, permitting him to propose the outrageous and the destructive. His conservatism stands him in good stead. Meanwhile, his ability to communicate complex ideas to simple minds, allows him to write a book that though written about intellectuals, is not a book only for intellectuals. Anyone can read this book and benefit from it. And hopefully many will.

As the National Review writes, “Sowell takes aim at the class of people who influence our public debate, institutions, and policy. Few of Sowell’s targets are left standing at the end, and those who are stagger back to their corner, bloody and bruised.” In almost every case they deserve the beating they’ve received.

What strikes me as I read Sowell is the profound difference between intellect and wisdom. A man may be utterly brilliant, well-spoken and highly-regarded, the holder of endless academic credentials and acclaim from his peers. And yet he may be a complete fool. And doesn’t the Bible tell us just this? The book of Proverbs tells us with stark clarity that many who consider themselves wise are, in reality, foolish. The book of James ties wisdom to humility. There is little humility in today’s intellectuals and, sadly, very little wisdom. Sowell expends some effort in differentiating between intelligence and wisdom. “Intelligence minus judgment equals intellect. Wisdom is the rarest quality of all—the ability to combine intellect, knowledge, experience, and judgment in a way to produce a coherent understanding.” The harsh reality is that many intellectuals are bankrupt when it comes to wisdom. Too many intellectuals have never learned to be wise. They are foolish at heart and, inevitably, the ideas that define them are just as foolish. And in this book Sowell illustrates this time and time again. It is, I think, the enduring lesson of Intellectuals and Society.

Verdict: Read it to better understand how intellectuals shape society.