It’s not even an unwillingness to admit ignorance: it’s the lack of awareness that there’s already a conversation.
This is the take-home point. They aren’t unaware there’s already a conversation. Their hubris compels them to believe they can answer these questions better than whatever the liberal establishment has come up with.
Yup. I also liked this, but I’m trying hard not to just quote the whole thing back, because it’s all good.
Their wealth insulates them from friction so effectively there’s no incentive or pressure for them to develop an imagination, or diversify their knowledge to the point where an imagination might emerge on its own. I can’t think of a better argument for a humanities requirement than a billionaire being asked “how do we know what is real?” and responding with “cryptographic signatures.”
This is the take-home point. They aren’t unaware there’s already a conversation. Their hubris compels them to believe they can answer these questions better than whatever the liberal establishment has come up with.
Yup. I also liked this, but I’m trying hard not to just quote the whole thing back, because it’s all good.