Wikipedia: Academic elitism

Difference (from prior major revision) (minor diff)

Changed: 3c3,10

In fields that have no non-academic counterpart, academic elitism is common because it actually is the case that there aren't very many people with anything worthwhile to say on the topic, other than the academics. But in more practical fields (math, computer science, business), it is more common to find that innovations appear much more readily from outside the hallowed walls of academia, and therefore harder to delude oneself into thinking non-academics are all or mostly cranks.

In fields that have no non-academic counterpart, academic elitism is common because it actually is the case that there aren't very many people with anything worthwhile to say on the topic, other than the academics. The problem starts when scholarship blurs with the application of scholarship, such as in business or mathematics, or with technology in the case of physics and engineering. In such cases academic elitism arises when those in pursuit of scholarly knowledge deride the pursuit of application.

Academic elitism is closely related to anti-intellectualism?, the belief that
"ivory tower" academics are too far removed from reality to have anything
possibly useful to say about practical matters. Circle squaring and angle trisecting remain perennially favorite activities with this crowd.

One danger for academics is academic elitism, which is (roughly) the view that only someone who has engaged in [serious scholarship]? has anything worthwhile to say on any given topic, while all others are cranks. It is possible to value serious scholarship without being an academic elitist, of course.

Academic elitism is closely related to anti-intellectualism?, the belief that "ivory tower" academics are too far removed from reality to have anything possibly useful to say about practical matters. Circle squaring and angle trisecting remain perennially favorite activities with this crowd.