Two Cheers for David Brooks

Heather:

I must say, I think you were a bit unkind to David Brooks there. I speak as someone with mixed feelings about Brooks, who, when he departs from what he’s really good at — observational sociology — usually fails to impress. See me on Brooks here, for example.

I think Brooks has grasped that what’s going on in the human sciences is hugely important, probably revolutionary, and he wants to write and talk about it; but he doesn’t want to step over any of the bright lines drawn around these topics by the politically correct intellectual establishment. He doesn’t want to be Larry Summersed or James Watsoned. In my opinion, the straddle he’s attempting is impossible & his venture into the human sciences will end with a wipe-out, but we’ll see.

In any case I’m glad to have a prominent general-interest columnist talking about human nature studies. Who knows? — perhaps he’ll find some way to bring the topic of human biodiversity into the domain of respectable discourse. That would be a step towards sane policies on, for example, immigration and education. But this is probably too much to hope for.

It’s nice that he’s discovered David Hume, though. (The original one, not our own learned list member.)