In this post I start with an observation: public intellectuals seem to have a shelf life of about seven years or so.pic.twitter.com/FbOWMNp1xd
U tweetove putem weba ili aplikacija drugih proizvođača možete dodati podatke o lokaciji, kao što su grad ili točna lokacija. Povijest lokacija tweetova uvijek možete izbrisati. Saznajte više
In this post I start with an observation: public intellectuals seem to have a shelf life of about seven years or so.pic.twitter.com/FbOWMNp1xd
The question is.... why? I offer two hypothesis for why none of you can stand to read big names from twelve years back.
You will notice I evoke Thomas Friedman in the last example--he is actually the key node to the entire piece. We forget how fresh and original Thomas Friedman seemed in 2000; that they seem so tired now is partially due to their success.
But that leads to the question: why was Friedman capable of generating new ideas in 1998 but not 2018? That is the puzzle. Read the full post to see how I deal with it: https://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2020/01/why-public-intellectuals-have-short.html …
Extremely thought-provoking. Having just finished reading it, I now feel like I need to read it again! I especially like the analogy of “refilling the well”. One initial Q - u briefly mention at end, but what did you think Fukuyama did well in terms of switching role?
Retreated from public eye for a few years, did real research, created two best selling massive tomes that everybody respects even if they disagree with. Good come back for “end of history” guy
Interesting take that I (mostly) agree with. It also lends credence to my greatest fear that (at 43) my best work is behind me. ;) Only quibble is that you spelled my name wrong!
will fix wheni Get home tonight!
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.