Do public intellectuals matter?

Public intellectuals can alter the course of events, even after their time

by AC Grayling / April 24, 2013 / Leave a comment
Published in May 2013 issue of Prospect Magazine

Intellectuals offer exactly what the public conversation needs

Who is the winner of our world thinker of 2013 poll? Find out here

If it was once said that the word “intellectual” made despisers of the term reach for their guns, the term “public intellectual” assuredly makes them reach for a bomb. To critics, the term connotes the cheap and easy option of pontification, of commentary without responsibility, rather like the luxury enjoyed by a political party in opposition—the luxury of having to move nothing but your lips.

To those who, on the other hand, see the importance of a lively public conversation about all that presses, it is Ralph Emerson’s idea that recommends itself: the idea of individuals who are acquainted with both history and the history of ideas, who can take from them insights of relevance to the present, and who can effectively communicate new ideas and insights as a result.

It is great to see that you are enjoying the Prospect website.

You have now reached your allowance of 3 free articles in the last 30 days.
Don’t worry—to get another 7 articles absolutely free, just enter your email address in the box below.

You are in complete control of which 7 articles you choose to read. Register now to enjoy more of the finest writing on politics, economics, literature, the arts, philosophy and science.

When you register, we’ll also send you our free Uncertain Times e-book which analyses the big ideas changing our world AND we’ll send you our free weekly newsletter. (If you prefer not to receive the newsletter you can unsubscribe at any time).

Prospect takes your privacy seriously. We promise never to rent or sell your e-mail address to any third party.
You can unsubscribe from the Prospect e-mail newsletter at any time.

DEBUG messsage: regular

Are criminals born or made?

Daniel Dennett / April 24, 2013

New research suggests that some people have a stronger innate tendency towards violence...

Buy tickets for Michael Sandel in conversation with AC Grayling

Prospect / April 17, 2013

An evening of debate on 8th May between two of the world's leading thinkers

Comments

terence patrick hewett
April 27, 2013 at 21:40
Technological and scientific advance is the driver of change: not politicians and certainly not self-proclaimed "intellectuals." But it would be a small help if they found out the difference between mathematics and arithmetic.
Reply
Garreth Byrne
April 29, 2013 at 02:30
A public intellectual becomes one firstly because he/she has achieved distinction in a certain field, whether it be the sciences, literature, linguistics, history or philosophical thought. Their base expertise doesn't make them experts on "the issues of the day", whatever they may be. We know that some of the public intellectuals listed in Grayling's penultimate paragraph got it wrong on some issues of their day, and failed to comment on moral and political problems that embarrassed their ideological side. A big difference between Camus (philosophical and literary writer) and his contemporary Sartre (philosopher and philosophical novelist) is that Sartre used his public prestige to take ideological stances (Soviet foreign and domestic policies; the Maoist frenzy in China) that proved to be illusory, whereas Camus stood aside from public agitation and questioned moral and philosophical blunders (L'Homme révolté) in the motivations of political activists. Camus also got some things wrong and wrote naive articles about the Algerian conflict. We can honour public intellectuals for their base expertise; particularities can be disputed expertly among their peers. Their voluntarily offered commentaries on all other issues can be questioned among the public, including journalists, to which their attention is directed.
Reply
K
April 30, 2013 at 19:52
"Consider this list: Bertrand Russell, Albert Einstein, Edmund Wilson, Lionel Trilling, Stephen Jay Gould, Norman Mailer, Susan Sontag, Noam Chomsky, Richard Dawkins, indeed anyone on Prospect’s list of people who merit or are thought to merit the label. They have very little in common other than intelligence and engagement, and the fact that they speak out. Those three things, accordingly, might be taken to capture the essence." It may also be worth noting that 9 out of the 10 people listed here are white males from middle-to-upper class backgrounds.
Reply

You can log in to post a comment under your subscriber name.