The need for critical thinking skills is obvious. What is not obvious is how to nurture a culture which values and rewards excellence in keen analytical reasoning.

Socrates was a notable pioneer in logical thinking. His contributions were not valued by the powers that be.

Jesus was a notable pioneer in moral reasoning. His contributions were not valued by the powers that be.

Galileo was a notable pioneer in scientific reasoning. His contributions were not valued by the powers that be.

Darwin and Freud had to fight uphill battles, as well.

We have not yet arrived at the Age of Enlightenment.

Random Bump

Jon

Andrew Keen seems to now believe that the internet is ideology not technology. This might be an improvement over Cult of the Amateur which although it presents a single good idea, which I use constantly, but lacks any breadth. Keen seems to saying from the limited excerpts I've seen that this struggle is between the Federalist (representative democracy) and Anti-Federalist (direct democracy). In this he underestimates the distance from mainstream political forms that WP has traveled. WP does not vote on matters neither directly nor through representatives. For them the highest form of "decision making" is a unilateral individual act (Be Bold, Ignore All Rules) Hit that edit button and see what sticks. They possess the zealot's faith in this bringing about ever better content. When this fails (which it always does) they turn to something they term "consensus." But their version of consensus bears little similarity with that democratic decision making practice used elsewhere. WP consensus amounts to nothing more than round two of individual decision making, this time played out by members with more buttons enabling them to enforce their will.

An ideology that makes individual acts the basis for all decisions is not democracy, direct nor indirect. It is extreme libertarianism. Anarchy doesn't even describe it. Anarchists might oppose the authority of governments but the believe in the formation of voluntary means of mutual assistance. This require planning and some form of democracy. Wikipedia eschews this kind of planning. In fact planning, like expertise and even democracy are antithetical to the ideology of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is the war of all against all played out one edit at a time.

I think I understand some of what Keen is trying to say, but all in all it's just another brick in the wall balloon in the parade of auto-mystifying rhetoric. Even the word "amateur" is a misnomer. Where I come from amateur hockey players have a lot of respect for professional hockey players and would always be pleased as pucks to pick up any personal tips on performance they can.
So, Wikipunks are lovers of something else entirely.

Speaking of Individual Ideology, I think I already used the term Idiology somewhere …

Jon