Joe Carter at First Things drew attention to the same topic twice this week (though he did not connect these as I do here).
First he linked to Michael S. Roth on critical thinking, who notes how often it gets confused with simply being critical. We learn to be debunkers rather than detectors of true meaning. Part of what Roth has to say is,
In the 18th century there were complaints about an Enlightenment culture that prized only skepticism and that was satisfied only with disbelief. Our contemporary version of this trend, though, has become skeptical even about skepticism. We no longer have the courage of our lack of conviction.
Carter’s other related link was to Taylor Mali, who makes the point even more eloquently in his poem, “Totally like whatever, you know?” which includes,
I have nothing personally invested in my own opinions, okay?
I’m just inviting you to join me in my uncertainty?
You must, like, if you want to that is, I mean, it would be okay with me if you read? (or better yet, watched and heard?) the entire poem, like, you know, not only to understand the question marks? but also for the hilariously painful truth it reveals. And for the excellent advice he closes with.
Neither Roth nor Mali was first to say this, by the way.
No automatically-generated related posts found.
Taylor Mali is like, the best poet since, like, that other guy, isn’t he?
I would think in some ways a trend to be “skeptical of our skepticism” might be a good thing. For too long the cynical skepticism of the elite has made belief in traditional thought an object of unthinking ridicule. There was a lack of understanding that the following was true:
“To doubt everything, or, to believe everything, are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.”
-Henri Poincare
If people would look beneath their skepticism they might discover the motivation for their doubts to be as self-serving and unintellectual as they believed the objects of their derision were.