Reddit reviews The Conscience of a Liberal

Oh good god. You don't think academics argue for the moral value of alleviating poverty, improving education, guiding social policy, protecting the environment, safeguarding public health, uncovering our past, interpreting works of literature, preserving our collective knowledge, or understanding the human condition?


Academics aren't unthinking collectors of dry facts; they take moral stances and make moral arguments in the course of their work all the time. Have you not heard of Richard Dawkins? Peter Singer? Henry Louis Gates Jr.? Bell Hooks? Paul Krugman? Have you ever even listened to a TED talk?!

Honestly, I'm not in the mood to argue with the level of ignorance you're displaying here. You clearly have no real understanding of what academia really is, how it works, or what it's for. I've been sitting here drafting a response but the task of explaining all the ways that you're wrong (such confusing morality with religion, or equating academia with science) is just too overwhelming. I mean seriously, one of the world's most famous academics literally wrote a book advancing a moral argument for social welfare! The word "conscience" is even in the title!

But I will ask you this - if Anita has lost her academic credibility by taking a moral stance, why does she keep getting invited to speak at universities?