Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post
Selil wrote;



While I endorse Sam's argument, I think the problem with academics like McKenna is that they like to borrow the prestige accrued from their disciplinary "silo" and apply it unearned to their political opinions, which may or may not be any better informed than those that can be heard in any local bar, circa 3 am.

They skip over the hard thinking part in order to get to the intended result they "know" is right. A bad methodology. If you are "right" then your reasoning will withstand fair scrutiny. Or even a lot of unfair scrutiny.
I also agree with Sam on the culture that has developed over the years regarding academia and it's (for lack of a better term) presentation to those outside of it's esteemed halls.

I was asking someone the other day about tthis sort of thing and truthfully I find it curious how the concept of self preservation may dwell at the base if the issues much as with any other group in society.

How often is it that the relevance of one's particular studies or acollades actually coincides with a been there done that in order to truly validate their knowledge base.

Example : (among the hallowed halls how many of those whose expertise or specialty truly comes with as much experience as it does education) There must be balance but if one where to look at war for instance, there are relatively few opportunities to be both a battle hardened and PHD educated individual when you look at it in the grander scheme of things.

I say all this to say, does it really seem all so unlikely that there might be somewhat of a discomfort between those who are the educated SME of what military's do and those who actually have done it and are also coming into their academic silos?