Tom Atwood '08 wrote last week of our fair College as a place "where intellectualism is dead" ("In Search of Intellectualism," April 12). I think Atwood has a point, but I do not believe intellectualism at Dartmouth is dead. I simply think it is misguided. The problem is not, as Atwood states, that "students on campus don't have a lot to talk about." I would argue that for the most part, they might even have too much.
There is a perception that there is no campus intellectualism because there is no public intellectual debate. I do not believe that is because Dartmouth students are inherently intellectually shallow, but because of a growing trend of polarization and overreaction in our society. Polarization has taught us that introspection is the way of the past, and the louder we yell at our opposition, or respond to a point by sensationalizing it and not dealing with its complexities, the more likely we are to get our point across. There is no dialectic, and as such, there can be no real discussion.
One of the rarest qualities to find in a person is the capacity to listen to what you have to say, think it over and acknowledge the merit and freshness of the argument. I have certainly been guilty of failing in this regard from time to time, though I consider it a work in progress. But in our search for some semblance of truth, we must understand that the most important tool is not one's own argument, but the argument of others.
Debate at Dartmouth generally leads to raised voices, where neither side is trying to listen, but just making its point with increasing volume and fortitude. People talk at, rather than talking with, others. When there becomes a point of contention, both sides eventually retreat to their corners, very content in their self-righteousness. Intellectualism is not the statement of a position, but grappling with the unfamiliar and the uncomfortable, stepping outside the box so that you can understand what is within it.
Atwood wrote, "I don't think Dartmouth students are particularly creative or innovative with their thinking.... It's not that Dartmouth students aren't capable of thinking creatively - it's that there is an overwhelming culture of conformity." In my opinion, the problem lies not in conformity, but in intellectual certainty. It is not that we are scared to take risks, but that we refuse to acknowledge our mistakes and concede the merits of each other's arguments.
A perfect example of this type of knee-jerk reaction came a couple of weeks ago, when Kalie Jackson '07 wrote a letter to the editor ("Keep bias out of sportswriting," April 5). Jackson's letter accuses The Dartmouth of putting a negative spin on many campus athletic teams, and particularly takes The D to task about "negative headlines." As a sports columnist, I understand that often, my opinions will be wrong, and I do my best to limit explicit criticism of Dartmouth sports teams (after all, these are the same people I may run into the next day). However, one of the things I have learned since joining The D is that not all criticism is wrong (it seems obvious, but when you are the one being criticized, sometimes it is not), and that you learn your own biases and weaknesses from others poking holes in your argument.
Intellectualism is still around at Dartmouth, but it hides under a guise of certitude. Most of us have just about two decades of life, but we remain certain: certain that we understand the world better than our leaders, certain that we understand Dartmouth better than each other, and certain that because it is our view, it is correct. This is a bastardized form of intellectualism, because intellectualism is truly not the argument, but the dialectic. Atwood is right in that many conversations at Dartmouth do not move past superficialities. However, I do not think it is because of a group mentality, but because we have become scared of real debate, of give and take, and opening ourselves up for criticism.
It would be foolish of me to stake any sort of claim on the truth, as my guess is that I am probably wrong more than most people. But rather than taking criticism as a personal attack, each of us needs to look introspectively and decide whether or not the criticism is valid. Perhaps it isn't, but if our initial reaction is merely to fight back, then intellectualism really is dead.
