Common sense. We Americans have a history with that phase, going back to Thomas Paine. Cool guy. The thing about the phrase, "common sense," in modern usage is that it has little to do with Paine's approach.
Paine made an argument. At some point in your life, you probably read Common Sense, and it was basically about how monarchs are worthless leeches, freedom and a form of egalitarianism are derived from a state of nature, and rise up and all that cool stuff.
Paine made an argument.
That's not what people do today when they appeal to "common sense." Today, when you hear one side of a political debate appeal to "common sense," they are refusing to make an argument. They are saying, my side is so clearly right that we don't even have to make an argument. Everyone just knows that we are right.
So, how about a little more history? Remember Patrick Henry?
"Give me liberty or give me death!"
That guy. Well, we all get it eventually, so don't worry, Patty-boy! Also, April 15 is sneaking up on us!
Anyway, you know that Constitution thingie? Remember how there is this thing called the "Bill of Rights? Remember how it wasn't originally in the Constitution? Yeah, weird, right? The "Bill of Rights" generally refers to the first ten amendments. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to bear arms but militias or something or... damn that one needed an editor! (Writing as someone who knows he needs an editor...)
Speech! LOVE that fucking amendment! Yup, LOVE that one!
Anywho, you start listing freedoms, and you know who got uncomfortable? A guy who was already opposed to the Constitution-- Patrick Henry. If you start listing freedoms... what if you forget one? Freedom of speech, press, religion, bear arms (militias?), and so on... What happens when some jackass comes along later and says, you didn't say X, so you don't have that freedom!
There were a lot of people nervous about listing rights, prescient about the George Costanza problem. The solution: the 9th Amendment, about which you never hear. "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retain by the people."
Translation: you have rights that aren't listed. That way, no fucking asshole will come along years later and say, "nobody listed that right, so it isn't a right!"
And obviously, nobody has ever used that argument!
Oh, wait...
Anyway, what's the logic here? The logic was that there are basic rights, governed by... remember natural law?... that everybody just knows...
Common sense.
Advocates of 9th amendment reasoning just thought that there was and would be general agreement on the rights that couldn't be violated because they were natural law.
There is religious history here too! Remember what the story of Adam and Eve actually was? It wasn't an apple. It was eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The story was that humanity-- all of us-- we just know. Everyone. Why? Because we are descended from people who ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So, we all just... know. No fancy thinkin' necessary, 'cuz of that forbidden fruit. It's just in our heads, if you buy into this.
Common sense.
And when you hear a side in a political debate say, "it's just common sense," what that side is doing is saying, "it isn't my responsibility to make an argument because we all just know I'm right."
No. You never get to do that. Never. Anti-intellectualism at its worst.
It is, in fact, the definition of populism as anti-intellectualism. I have written before about my problems with the concept of "populism," and I am an unabashed elitist snob. If I didn't believe in the value of education, I wouldn't have spent four years at a highfalutin' college and another six at a highfalutin' university for my doctorate. Reading matters. Thinking matters. Why?
Because you don't just get to say, I know 'cuz I know.
So how about the bullshit that Americans just know? Like... how old is the Earth and how old is humanity? Here's a Gallup poll, from 2014, showing 42% (great number...) of Americans think that god created the Earth and humanity in their present form less than 10,000 years ago.
I hereby state that I don't give a flying fuck what these 42% think about anything else.
Let me now clarify. I am not willing to state that these 42% are wrong about everything else. I am simply stating that whatever these 42% claim to believe, without having to think, does not deserve consideration.
And if you are claiming that you are right because these 42% agree with you without thinking because they just know...
Seriously? Seriously?
And this is just one survey question. I could spend weeks writing posts about the stupid things people believe and barely scratch the surface.
You don't get to say, we all just know. You need to make an argument and show evidence. Always.
This is how I perform my job. My first major line of research was on competitive elections. Years ago, I was at a panel at the American Political Science Association, and Bruce Cain-- one of my advisors-- was talking about the assumptions that we all just make about elections. He mentioned that we all just assumed that competitive elections were good and important for democracy. He asked why? I thought about it. I went back to my hotel room, and started sketching out some mathematical models because... he was right. Nobody ever asked why. We all just assumed.
That bugs me. Whenever everyone makes an assumption... whenever everyone agrees without making an argument... I dissent. So, I started to dissent. I started sketching out some mathematical models, thinking I was just playing the devil's advocate. I found that I had an easier time constructing mathematical models showing problems with competitive elections than showing their benefits.
So, I started publishing about how detrimental competitive elections were, and that's how I got my first real line of research through.
This is what I do. Whenever I see agreement without explanation, that troubles me. There's going to be a problem. Something is being ignored. And I don't trust the intrinsic knowledge of the kind of people who still... today... think that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old.
I occasionally point out the origin of the title of this blog, which is obscure enough that almost nobody knows it, and nobody thinks to look it up. I didn't coin the term, "unmutual," and it isn't a "real" word. It comes from an episode of The Prisoner, called "Change of Mind." The premise of The Prisoner is that Patrick McGoohan plays a spy who tries to resign for mysterious reasons, but isn't allowed to do so. He is, instead, captured, and sent to "The Village." In "Change of Mind," McGoohan is declared "unmutual" because he refuses to integrate into the artificial, bullshit prison society, and just generally doesn't play along The Village's crap. I call bullshit. It's what I do. I even teach a class on it!
Common sense tells you not to stick your hand on a hot stove. Common sense tells you not to drive blindfolded. Common sense is often right! Notice, though, that I can easily construct an argument for why you shouldn't do these things. I don't need to rely on "don't do it 'cuz common sense..."
But, policy is complicated and difficult, and to go back to good, ole' George Carlin, remember his mathematical truism (with my statistical correction): think about how stupid the median person is, and remember that 50% of the population is even dumber. (Sorry, George, but "average" has multiple definitions, so we have to be precise). 42% think that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old.
If you are basing your argument on the premise that those people just intrinsically "know" that you are right...
I call bullshit.
