Academic Anguish

The Rational Versus the Emotional

Academia has been taking some hits lately. Two college presidents have resigned after being grilled in front of Congress. After a little spike last year, college enrollment is down again, continuing the pattern of a decline. On one hand, this is sad. People with expertise are a valuable resource in society. They are sources of accurate information when a problem needs solving.

On the other hand, colleges [barring schools of engineering] stopped worrying about teaching accurate - or even useful - information some time ago. [What possible productive job can one get with a degree in ‘Women’s Studies?’And for the prices they charge, the job had better be productive.] This means that the indicators we’ve previously used to tell us if information is reliable are dangerous. What good are experts if they won’t give us something true and thoughtful? That makes it hard to make decisions, which raises our overall level of anxiety.

In December, The Atlantic published a piece by Rabbi David Wolpe, a visiting scholar at Harvard Divinity School, a man who is ostensibly an expert in religion. The essay is an extensive critique of current cultural behaviors the Rabbi deplores, on both sides of the political spectrum. Wolpe's essay doesn’t do anything to improve the image of a school that chose a President who plagiarized her Ph.D.

While I happen to agree with Wolpe’s sentiment, the writing is… inaccurate. Wolpe claims that everything he doesn’t like in modern culture is ‘pagan.’ He makes multiple assertions about what followers of the pre-Christian religions thought and the morals they valued. Despite being an educated man he gets everything wrong when it comes to the religious practices of Greece and Rome, not to mention the Nordic practices. [Dear gods, Vikings didn’t wear horned helmets!] There is much to critique in modern Paganism, but none of what the rabbi describes as ‘pagan’ has anything to do with pre-Christian religion, or even modern Paganism.

I won’t bore you with his inaccuracies. But words - writing - matter, especially in our current world where the meaning of language has been weaponized. Wolpe is a Conservative Rabbi in the religious sense. Still, it’s worth noting that American Jews even in the Conservative branch tend to vote Democrat [My husband is Jewish and we are well aware of the political opinions held by American Jews.] While I can't ask him, I suspect the Rabbi is being emotional because he’s feeling a sense of political betrayal from the party to whom he's been loyal [and no, I don't know how the man votes]. Political loyalty is usually emotional rather than rational, so when an internal clash happens, it’s disruptive to the individual. This might be a reason why he wrote and submitted to the Atlantic a piece that is so blatantly full of generalizations and no scholarship.

Being emotional leads to not just bad decisions, but bad writing, and bad communication. While it is true that academic argument can become heated, discussions on fine points of nuclear theory or existential philosophy aren’t going to be of interest to the average person. However, science and philosophy [I think we can fairly say all learning] are processes of discovery. A process that cannot occur unless one can listen deeply to the opposing argument. We must be able to hear differing opinions even if they seem appalling or we can’t know where we might be a little - or a lot - wrong.

Wolpe has already gotten appropriate pushback from academic modern Pagans such as anthropologist Sabina Magliocco, and Holli Emore, Director of Cherry Hill Seminary have tried to address Wolpe’s use of language. He [sort of] apologized as published in the Pagan news blog The Wild Hunt. There’s no evidence that he plans to reconsider his opinion. But then, why would the opinion of a Pagans matter to him?

Wolpe’s not wrong in attempting to critique his culture. What he got wrong was spewing out public complaints without stopping first to think about who he was trying to convince and what arguments might be the most effective. And he offended his audience by mischaracterizing them. There are a lot of Pagans who read the Atlantic and now anything else he says is suspect. [I think my Pagan friends should be suspicious more often.] He’ll never have the chance to convince any Pagan of anything.

Academia has lost the ability that made it special and unique, that made the price one paid for an education worth it: Being able to discuss all things objectively is no longer a skill taught, or valued in the academic world.

That’s tragic. I hope it can be reversed.

For anyone interested, John Beckett gives a Pagan response to Wolpe.

Selina Rifkin, M.S. [Nutrition], LMT, has been to Hades in a handbasket. More than once. This has given her some opinions. Like most of her generation [X] she’s okay with snark. Most days she tries for good writing. But the snark, and side comments do creep in. She lives with her husband, and is Mother of Cats; four boyz and one cranky gurl. Selina has written The Young Woman’s Goodlife Guide: Things I Wish I’d Known When I Was 20. Or… Learn From My Pain, and How to Train Your Cat: Using a Clicker and Leash to Keep Your Indoor Cat Happy and Healthy. She’s currently working on the Goodlife Guide to Nutrition.