Eyes of the World

The idea of a “public intellectual” is open to wide interpretation. Generally considered the highest authority in their respective field, the public intellectual also faces the stigma of being regarded, often scornfully, as self-importantly elite. Throughout history, public intellectuals of sorts have existed and have often been criticized by society. In more tyrannical times, intellectuals such as Socrates or Galileo have been persecuted for their strong belief in their ideas. Today, public intellectuals have unprecedented access to means by which research and promote their ideas.

Yet the public intellectual walks a fine line between proliferating their discoveries and theories, and self-promotion. Additionally, many have addressed the issue of the “decline of the public intellectual” in recent times. In his essay entitled, “The ‘Decline’ of Public Intellectual?” Stephen Mack critiques self-proclaimed public intellectual Richard Posner’s article about the demise of the public intellectual. Mack uses Posner as a “quintessential example,” of a modern public intellectual, “hyperventilat[ing] about class purity, or the ‘appalling decline’ in quality of most other public intellectuals.”

I agree with Mack that the quality of the public intellectual is not in decline. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, there arises an array of issues that affect a greater number of people. In the past, public intellectuals were likely to analyze issues which affected only their local society or domain. Yet with the technological revolution that has occurred since the creation of the internet and the personal computer, diverse and complex issues that affect the global society have surfaced.

Issues such as climate change and nuclear proliferation have the potential to have devastating impacts on our entire planet and have paved the way for a new generation of public intellectuals to study their potential impacts and courses of action that the global community can take to avoid future calamities.

One such public intellectual is Graham Allison. A lifelong Harvard scholar, professor, and one-time dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Allison is one of the foremost scholars on the topic of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism. In addition to his work at Harvard, Allison has also served on the Council of Foreign Relations and contributed to Foreign Affairs magazine.

But while Allison has published his fair share of work on the topics of foreign policy and nuclear proliferation, he has gone beyond the realm of academia and has served as an analyst for the United States government. Recognizing that the threat of nuclear proliferation to rogue states or terrorist organizations is one of the gravest dangers facing Americans and the global community, Allison has served as an adviser to the Pentagon since the 1960s. He has recently served on the Congressional Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, and is the only person to ever have been twice awarded the Department of Defense's highest civilian award, the Distinguished Public Service Medal.

In all of these ways, Allison is truly a public intellectual. It is difficult then, with such examples, to deny that the public intellectual community still very much exists.

I believe there is in no way a decline of the public intellectual, but a hyper-increase in information in the world. In my previous post, “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” I cited the issue of an information overload from the internet and social media as the damaging factor in the public’s interest in the political process. I would argue that the same problem exists with regard to the public intellectual.

The quality of the public intellectual has not decreased. What has declined is the public’s interest. In the same way that political apathy has grown, interest in academic matters, even ones that will eventually affect the entire world, is equally sluggish. While I agree with Mack on the fact that the public intellectual is not in decline, I would disagree with his quote, “The measure of public intellectual work is not whether the people are listening, but whether they’re hearing things worth talking about.”

In his most recent Foreign Affairs article, Allison says that the odds of a successful nuclear or biological terrorist attack in the next five years are greater than ever. He goes on to describe how Pakistan likely poses the greatest danger in the proliferation of nuclear materials to terrorist groups. Yet the American public, a majority of which are most likely unable to find Pakistan on a map (even though we’re fighting a war next door), doesn’t seem to know and doesn’t seem to care.

But although the public intellectual may no longer be the public’s intellectual, individuals like Graham Allison are proof that such a profession still exists.