From personal experience, the “Chicago Econ” style does indeed do a great job at screening for competence. However, I think it’s not nearly as good at selecting for true *ideas*. When institutional and personal prestige are in conflict with the truth, the smartest people will prioritize reputation. And they’ll defeat the slightly less intelligent or aggressive person who is correct. I’ve seen it many times in academic seminars.
I agree with Roko on Feminism but I think it is also important to have 2 other conceptual groups within Feminism: Normal Women and Activists. The Activists tend to pursue what is good for them (the Activists) and not just what is good for Normal Women.
The ugly smart type that Roko describes lines up pretty well with the Activist group. And similar to his Bio-Leninism generality of his grouping the Activist grouping ties into the general state of elite theory (an organized minority winning over an unorganized majority)
From personal experience, the “Chicago Econ” style does indeed do a great job at screening for competence. However, I think it’s not nearly as good at selecting for true *ideas*. When institutional and personal prestige are in conflict with the truth, the smartest people will prioritize reputation. And they’ll defeat the slightly less intelligent or aggressive person who is correct. I’ve seen it many times in academic seminars.
I agree with Roko on Feminism but I think it is also important to have 2 other conceptual groups within Feminism: Normal Women and Activists. The Activists tend to pursue what is good for them (the Activists) and not just what is good for Normal Women.
The ugly smart type that Roko describes lines up pretty well with the Activist group. And similar to his Bio-Leninism generality of his grouping the Activist grouping ties into the general state of elite theory (an organized minority winning over an unorganized majority)