"Every Time I See It, I Kinda Cringe": Reconsidering "Public Intellectualism" in the Post-Truth Era

• In Event: Creating Space for Academics Through the Project of Public Intellectualism as Public Engagement

Abstract

Objectives: Recently, many media reports mourn the loss of the so-called “public intellectual” (Herman, 2017; Mishra & Gregory, 2015; Mitchell, 2017; Sessions, 2017).
These reports harken back to a (perhaps never-existing) time when the United States relied on a class of “public intellectuals” to offer a deeper understanding of complex issues. Nostalgically pining for a golden age of public intellectualism, which perhaps never existed in this country in the first place, continues to grow in frequency in the wake of the 2016 election, and many, it seems, long for some lost element of intellectualism amidst the post-truth turn.

Nevertheless, this paper argues that “public intellectualism” has not disappeared, but rather has shifted to accommodate ever-changing aspects of the post-truth era such as globalization and technology. To do this, the authors conducted interviews with four individuals they identify as scholar-activists or “academics with impact” (J. Gee, personal communication, February 13, 2018). As the following sections outline, we present practices the participants shared and how they understand their work as academics engaging with their communities.

Perspectives: While scholars have debated the purpose, attributes, and efficacy of “public intellectualism” (see: Dawes, 2011, Foucault & Deleuze, 1977; Said, 1996), we rely on Gramsci (1989) to ground our query. He writes:
Every ‘essential’ social group which emerges into history out of the preceding economic structure, and as an expression of the development of this structure has found (at least in all of the history up to the present) categories of intellectuals already in existence and which seemed indeed to represent an historical continuity uninterrupted even by the most complicated and radical changes in political and social forms. (p. 114)

Thus, our inquiry presumes that current embodiments of public intellectualism are in relation with corresponding social phenomena. In so doing, we consider intellectuals (public or not) not as a separate intellectual class ideologically and socially removed from the larger social world, but embedded within subsets of that social world.

Methods and Data Sources: Data for this project comprise interviews with four academics who are active in their communities and/or have a wide readership outside academia. The authors conducted a thematic analysis of the interviews that revealed the following.

Conclusions and Significance: The data analysis unearthed the following themes regarding the ways in which participants engage with the public.
1. Approach each event as a teacher.
2. Create relationships and foster approachability.
3. Form collaborations.
The presentation will expand on these and discuss how they are operationalized in the participants’ work.

As we continue to navigate a post-truth world and educational scholarship risks becoming more and more siloed, “public intellectuals” must reconsider the ways they attempt to foster influence in the world. This is particularly so given the current anti-intellectual tenor within the United States. Given this context, it becomes increasingly important for academics to grow their work outside the academy and engage their community in what we are calling “the project of public intellectualism.”

Authors

• Taylor M Kessner, Arizona State University

• Joseph D. Sweet, University of North Carolina - Pembroke