Blog post, “George F. Will as a Know-Nothing“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America

Ledewitz, Bruce

English

Duquesne University: Digital Commons

Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Hallowed Secularism The Collective Works of Bruce Ledewitz, Adrian Van Kaam C.S.Sp. Endowed Chair in Scholarly Excellence and Professor of Law 9-6-2010 September 6, 2010: George F. Will as a Know-Nothing Bruce Ledewitz Duquesne University, ledewitz@duq.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/ledewitz-hallowedsecularism  Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Law and Philosophy Commons Repository Citation Ledewitz, B. (2010). September 6, 2010: George F. Will as a Know-Nothing. Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/ledewitz-hallowedsecularism/456 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Collective Works of Bruce Ledewitz, Adrian Van Kaam C.S.Sp. Endowed Chair in Scholarly Excellence and Professor of Law at Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hallowed Secularism by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact beharyr@duq.edu. Title: George F. Will as a Know-NothingDate: 2010-09-06T10:24:00.000-04:00 9/6/2010—It is bad politics as well as unattractive to labelone’s political opponents as know-nothings. It suggests thatopposition is nothing more than ignorance, which is a prettyarrogant position.But what can you do when your opponentsexpressly elevate ignorance to primacy, as George F. Will didtoday in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette? Will’s op-ed arguesthat environmentalists today lack political pull because they“have forgotten their origins as skeptics”. The Americanpeople are skeptical today of all experts, especially thosewho forecast a recovery that has not come, andenvironmentalists think they know better than the people.As ageneral position, skepticism might have a lot to recommendit; but paralysis has nothing to recommend it. Imagineinstead of global warming, scientists discovered that a cometwas heading toward Earth and recommended an expensive effortto block it. Presumably, George F. Will would be out frontarguing against such government spending because “theAmerican people have looked in the sky and have not seenanything.”It’s either getting warmer or it is not. If it isgetting warmer, people are either causing it or they are not.Maybe the vast majority of scientists studying this arewrong. But if they are right, the contrary opinions of even amajority of the people will not change the facts.It isespecially dishonest of Will to point to public opposition totaking action to combat global warming as evidence that thereis something wrong with the science. Combatting globalwarming will not be cheap (though much cheaper than doingnothing). Why shouldn’t the people oppose expensive actionwhen apparently respectable writers like Will loudlyproclaim, without any evidence, that the underlying scienceis wrong?There is a good test of skepticism. Watch wherecorporate money is. Environmentalists were and are skepticsof claims by big business that their products are safe. Butwhen corporate money supports “skepticism”, as big tobaccodid when science reported a link between smoking and cancer,it is time to be distrustful of skepticism. What positiondoes big oil take on global warming today?

September 6, 2010: George F. Will as a Know-Nothing

https://dsc.duq.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1455&context=ledewitz-hallowedsecularism

September 6, 2010: George F. Will as a Know-Nothing

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Duquesne University: Digital Commons