Of late, I have witnessed a certain disdain towards
“intellectualism” and “activism”, often stemming from individuals who have
prided themselves on putting education and learning first, teaching their
children – books are Gods; knowledge is supreme. What has gone wrong, exactly?
Without going anywhere near the circus that is the 24-hour news channel phenomenon, since that involves a separate discussion on journalistic ethics, this rant is confined to misinformation on social media. Access to social media has fueled this streak, playing a pivotal role in spreading rampant misinformation. Hardly anyone bothers to fact-check; those who are informed of having fallen prey to misinformation will simply ignore the ‘inconvenient truth’ and breezily move on to the next piece of viral falsehood. Because, it is possible. There is no accountability.
Are we happy simply to satiate our senses by feeding on viral click-bait information that is funny or titillating or sensational but BLATANTLY INCORRECT? Why are we allergic to fact-checking?
Because it requires you to expend energy. In the spirit of “intellectualism,” I will go ahead and cite Brandolini’s law on how refuting bullshit takes twice the energy needed to generate it. No one wants to hear the bland truth, do they, when a spicy semi-truth / untruth is readily available for consumption that appeals to more eyes and ears? This is why there are takers for the ‘anti vaccination’ and ‘flat earth’ movements. Calling them out as wrong does not make anyone an intellectual. One need not be an intellectual to be a critical thinker.
As an aside, being an “intellectual” does not mean sitting in an ivory tower and telling others how to live. It does not mean spouting abstract literature or rupi kaur poetry. Do not confuse it with being an ill-informed snob who lives in a bubble. It simply means being well-read, in that one gains a certain understanding of things to achieve a certain end – why we are where we are, why things happened the way they did. An intellectual should be able to logically explain a point of argument using this knowledge, without injecting his/her personal opinion into it, rather than simply vomit the first thought that comes to their mind because that’s how they “felt”. You know who was an intellectual? Bhagat Singh (in case you snorted thinking “who, Nehru?”) Why do you think he was considered dangerous? He espoused exactly the same things that are feverishly sought to be dismissed today. All those who have fought for the rights of women, for the rights of the marginalized, are intellectuals. Babasaheb Ambedkar, Jyotiba and Savitri Bai Phule, Raja Ram Mohan Roy – they’re all intellectuals.
Reading, acquiring knowledge, forming an opinion
with a critical bent of mind, questioning, USING ONE'S INTELLECT is not a bad thing. Our Constitution
literally encourages us to develop a scientific temper. The Bhagavad Gita says
the Lord manifests himself where there is a *rational* debate. Hate
“intellectuals” all you want, but please base your hate on some reason other
than “they fact-check too much” or “they try to argue logically” or “what about
our feelings” or “why can’t I simply have this opinion and have you not
criticise it" or "but this Whatsapp message says otherwise."
If you encourage your children to read and become
knowledgeable, you can’t turn around and look down upon intellectualism and
critical thinking because it happens to go against a certain ideology. Stop
falling for clickbait and propaganda. Wait. Fact-check. Don’t consume and enable spread of
misinformation. Having access to social media doesn't mean your opinion on every single thing in general is golden.
