So I was washing the dishes, and then switched to Anderson Cooper 360. Within 30 seconds, I heard the famous epidemiologist Andrew Sullivan think that we should “let Covid tear apart” the crowd in order to achieve herd immunity so that we can go back “Life.”

what is that? Isn’t Andrew Sullivan the epidemiologist you are talking about? He is just a man with many opinions, many of which are tragic and historical mistakes? (For example, the Iraq War.)

Sometimes, I marvel at the guts that people like Sullivan seem to have, not only to jump in to express opinions on every subject under the sun, but to do so with such certainty. To some extent, Sullivan must know that he has no real expertise on these topics. Sullivan can imitate expertise—when talking to Cooper, he urged us to check infection and death data on Delta variants in other countries—but he really doesn’t know more about this topic than ordinary people.

However, he appeared on my TV because it was contrary to the sad howling about being “cancelled” when he left New York As his own Substack newsletter, Sullivan was highly praised and respected by Anderson Cooper and the Good Morning Joe team, and New York TimesAs it turns out, he is very willing to feature him when Sullivan promotes his new collection of essays.

A series of events made me think about my own lane—a space where you can claim real expertise and authority—when can you deviate from this lane, what conditions should be met to do so with confidence, and what a person can get out of his lane. Time owed to the audience.

Obviously, Sullivan must meet any conditions, no matter what, other than becoming himself deviated from his lane. There are many other Substack figures who have similar behaviors, such as Matthew Yglesias, who often expresses opinions on my topic (education) Obviously know nothing about it.

Caitlin Flanagan Recent axe work The decision to oppose the University of California’s abandonment of standardized tests in admissions failed completely when scrutinized by someone who really knew what they were talking about, leading to A series of corrections Nevertheless, this did not weaken Flanagan’s certainty of his correctness. Not only was she convinced that the University of California’s policy was wrong, she somehow inferred the motivation behind this decision, double arrogance.

This may happen because Flanagan has determined that her lane is a self-styled resistance against unbridled social justice, and she has great competition for this position.

Erik Levitz, in New York Magazine, Feel ready Criticizing Ibram X. Kendi’s work on anti-racism Although I admit that I have not read the basic work of Kendi Scholarship. In which universe does this make sense?

The well-respected linguist Steven Pinker believes that publishing a book on the Enlightenment may be a good thing. Real enlightenment scholars find ridiculously wrong booksOf course, Pinker’s book sales may have surpassed all other books on the Enlightenment in the year it was published.

I often think about these things because although I am a few levels below others, I still get paid to develop and share my views and analysis. I know very well what I think is my lane, and try my best to stay within the range of knowing what I’m talking about.

There is no doubt that the lines may be blurry. In last week’s post, I put forward some hypotheses about what impact the coronavirus might have on campus this semester. Like Andrew Sullivan, I’m just someone who reads other people’s articles about viruses. I don’t have anyone’s expertise or knowledge that should be concerned about the pandemic itself. This is why before turning to areas where I do have some expertise, course design, and delivery, I tried to express my analysis with general information that seems to be bad things (a safe bet).

I don’t think we must strictly abide by our own rules and never exceed our existing professional knowledge or experience.One of my favorite reading pastimes is watching Tressie McMillan Cottom expand her lane, as she did recently A cover story Vanity Fair Contributions about Sean “Daddy” Combs and the recent announcement that she will be an opinion writer New York TimesThe difference between Cottom’s venture into a new (for her) form and Flanagan’s venture into an unfamiliar subject or Levitz’s criticism of Kendi is that Cottom actually did her homework.

I hope we are all aware that it is not accidental that Tressie McMillan Cottom must carefully prepare and create excellence, and Andrew Sullivan can work hard for them to achieve a similar level.

Unfortunately, there are too many motives for “possessive” people to deviate from their lanes, or rather, to deny the existence of such things as lanes. Individuals are responsible for overseeing the limitations of their own knowledge and certainty, but this careful analysis is much less than letting it tear apart the people who already love you.

‘S response Atlantic Organization Flanagan’s arrest also shows that when particularly popular figures cross these boundaries, we don’t necessarily expect institutions and publications to oversee these boundaries.

Many people criticized Anderson Cooper for letting Andrew Sullivan comment on the pandemic when CNN is flooded with real medical experts, but I believe this has little effect on the channel’s editor choices.

But maybe I was wrong, because in fact, I was just a person who observed the world and tried my best to figure out what happened, no different from other people.

Don’t believe me.[1]

[1] Unless it is about writing pedagogy or the structure of tertiary education institutions. I am very reliable about those things.

Source link