Not what I meant by "example": I meant it more in the Orwellian sense of Gore simultaneously being labeled both "intellectual" & "anti-intellectual" as being an example of the nature of the current American "political" discourse that makes communication with Americans very difficult: "liberal" is "left," "conservative" is "middle," Obama is simultaneously a "socialist," a "communist," a "liberal" and a "fascist," etc. (vs. "war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength").
Having just come back from a cycling trip along the Danube (lots of Baroque & Rococo churches, monasteries, cathedrals, etc.), I would also question whether "redistribution of wealth" was ever a "function of religion," nor how that relates to global warming. As I understand it, the "religion" label is being used as a form of revenge by those were angered by the rejection of "intelligent design" from school curricula because it was deemed "religion" instead of "science." So this also seems like an example of anti-intellectualism, but not in the sense that you seem to intend.
But to try to steer this back to questions of professionalism before Anita loses patience with us, why does it generally seem acceptable for amateur bottle-collectors & grave-robbers to go around looting stuff & denigrate "professional archaeologists" & other members of the elite (hey: the so-called "scientists" don't know anything about evolution and/or global-warming, they're just out-of-touch members of some intellectual elite trying to indoctrinate us all with their sick secular socialist fantasies), while no one ever seems to suggest that hobbyists could start flying 747s, or do some brain surgery in their spare time?
-----Original Message-----
I used Gore as an example. He is intellectual enough to understand that in general, society is anti-intellectual and easily steered. He's a politician...not an expert on global warming. And, the function of religion (if I remember correctly) is to establish social mores or control, explain the unexplainable, and redistribute wealth. Within this context, global warming as religion fits nicely in an anti-intellectual society. Global warming could just as easily have been championed by Madonna or Bono, or Hannah Montana for that matter. At this point, if anyone could scientifically prove global warming as natural they would probably be ostracized. He has an advantage because he will probably be dead and gone before the next Ice Age:)
|