Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    University Transformation
Sign In
Clune photo
Sebastien Thibault

The Hypocrisy of Experts

The eschewal of judgment is arrogant and irresponsible.

Judgment Daze: A Debate
By Michael W. Clune September 19, 2019

A number of readers of my recent Chronicle Review essay,“The Humanities’ Fear of Judgment,”doubted the existence of literature professors so enchanted by the pseudo-equality of consumer culture as to reject literary judgment. Therefore I’m grateful that

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

A number of readers of my recent Chronicle Review essay,“The Humanities’ Fear of Judgment,”doubted the existence of literature professors so enchanted by the pseudo-equality of consumer culture as to reject literary judgment. Therefore I’m grateful that G. Gabrielle Starr and Kevin Dettmar are so explicit on this point. When I suggest that teaching a great writer like Gwendolyn Brooks to resistant students is worthwhile, they retort: “When Silicon Valley types say they want to hire humanities majors, it’s not because they want coders who know Gwendolyn Brooks poems.”

Starr and Dettmar reject the “authority” by which a literature professor presumes to show students works worth reading. Who are we, they argue, to tell students that James Baldwin, Shakespeare, or Gwendolyn Brooks are good? As a first-generation college student, I learned to be wary of professors loudly forswearing their authority, approaching students as buddies, just wanting to have a friendly conversation. Such a stance typically concealed a far more thoroughgoing play at authority. And of course Starr and Dettmar immediately reveal their suspicion of authority to be hypocritical. These literature professors modestly disavow any expertise in literary judgment in order to claim expertise in empathy, morality, and “metacognitive skills.” Such expertise, they tell us, will “prepare our students to contend with some degree of success in the marketplace of ideas.”

But what exactly qualifies a literature Ph.D. as an empathy expert? Why should students attending Pomona College — one of the wealthiest institutions on the planet — go into debt to learn how to be moral from the authors of scholarly books on 18th-century literature and Bob Dylan?

By pretending to sacrifice literary judgment, the English professor gains the right to moral and “metacognitive” judgment. Nice work if you can get it.

Starr and Dettmar compliment my phrase, “the pathologies of expertise,” and graciously proceed to illustrate one of the worst such pathologies — bootstrapping from a delimited sphere of professional authority to self-appointed arbiter of broad swaths of students’ experience. By pretending to sacrifice literary judgment, the Pomona English professor gains the right to moral and “metacognitive” judgment. Nice work if you can get it.

Their bargain looks even better once we realize that they aren’t actually giving up literary judgment for a moment. Starr and Dettmar argue that they don’t “force” students to understand the value of James Baldwin or Shakespeare. Whatever the students like is good enough for them. But then what’s on these professors’ syllabi, and how does it get there? Perhaps they have taken a page out of the Silicon Valley playbook and used algorithms to construct syllabi based on the empirical preferences of their students — gleaned from their Amazon or Google accounts. But more likely they’re putting works on their syllabi they think the students will benefit from engaging. And that’s literary judgment.

Starr and Dettmar claim they teach “difference.” Doesn’t this imply that they are showing students something they don’t already like? If so, they’re practicing judgment. They’re saying that certain works make available certain kinds of valuable insights and experiences. If not — if Céline Dion or The Apprentice are just as good at illustrating difference as Gwendolyn Brooks or Bashō — then what reason do they give to the student who reasonably inquires: Why do I have to read what’s on your syllabus?

A similar question arises with respect to empathy. Is every work equally good at inculcating empathy? If not, then Starr and Dettmar are practicing judgment. If so, then they are claiming a truly extraordinary authority. It doesn’t matter what works we teach; the professor’s total mastery of empathy, morality, and “metacognitive skills” itself is sufficient to enable Pomona students to thrive in the marketplace. Like all varieties of market egalitarianism, surface equality here conceals deeper inequalities. The more Starr and Dettmar tell the students how equal they are, the more they celebrate the equality of all consumer choice, the greater their own authority grows. Yet this comes at a cost. Pomona’s English majors are at historic lows. These professors are finding fewer and fewer subjects for their moral authority.

There are many serious questions about the expertise associated with literary judgment, and the kinds of checks necessary to counter prejudice and authoritarianism. But none of these arguments are necessary to demonstrate the emptiness of Starr’s and Dettmar’s position. They protest my authoritarianism, but they claim a professorial authority far greater, and far less grounded, than any I imagine. They pretend they don’t tell students what works they should value, and then claim they are showing students works that transmit the values of difference and empathy. The obvious contradictions of their response to my essay are dispelled by their identification of Silicon Valley as the destination of their pedagogy. Its combination of an egalitarian approach to consumer preference with a hostility to any value not assimilable to the market finds two faithful advocates in Starr and Dettmar. The power of this ideology renders them blind to its incoherence as an educational program.

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Teaching & Learning
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
About the Author
Michael W. Clune
Michael Clune is a professor of English at Case Western Reserve University. His most recent book, A Defense of Judgment, was published by the University of Chicago Press.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Illustration of a magnifying glass highlighting the phrase "including the requirements set forth in Presidential Executive Order 14168 titled Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government."
Policy 'Whiplash'
Research Grants Increasingly Require Compliance With Trump’s Orders. Here’s How Colleges Are Responding.
Photo illustration showing internal email text snippets over a photo of a University of Iowa campus quad
Red-state reticence
Facing Research Cuts, Officials at U. of Iowa Spoke of a ‘Limited Ability to Publicly Fight This’
Photo illustration showing Santa Ono seated, places small in the corner of a dark space
'Unrelentingly Sad'
Santa Ono Wanted a Presidency. He Became a Pariah.
Illustration of a rushing crowd carrying HSI letters
Seeking precedent
Funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions Is Discriminatory and Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Argues

From The Review

Illustration showing a graduate's hand holding a college diploma and another hand but a vote into a ballot box
The Review | Essay
Civics Education Is Back. It Shouldn’t Belong to Conservatives.
By Timothy Messer-Kruse
Photo-based illustration of a hedges shaped like dollar signs in various degrees of having been over-trimmed by a shadowed Donald Trump figure carrying hedge trimmers.
The Review | Essay
What Will Be Left of Higher Ed in Four Years?
By Brendan Cantwell
Football game between UCLA and Colorado University, at Folsom Field in Boulder, Colo., Sept. 24, 2022.
The Review | Opinion
My University Values Football More Than Education
By Sigman Byrd

Upcoming Events

Plain_Acuity_DurableSkills_VF.png
Why Employers Value ‘Durable’ Skills
Warwick_Leadership_Javi.png
University Transformation: A Global Leadership Perspective
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin