On the Professionalization of the Intellectuals

SYMPOSIUM ON PROFESSIONALIZATION 451 Ross, George. 1987. 'The Decline of the Left Intellectual in Modern France,' in Intellectuals in Liberal Democracies: Political Influence and Social Involvement, ed Alain G. Gagnon. New York: Praeger, 43-66 Underhill, Frank H., 1959. 'The University and Politics.' Queen's Quarterly (66), 217-25 Whyte, Donald R., 1984-5. 'Sociology and the Nationalist Challenge in Canada.' Journal of Canadian Studies (19:4), 106-2 9 Young, Walter, 1980-1. 'Last Word on the CCF.' Canadian Forum (DecemberJanuary ), 38-9 BARRY COOPER On the Professionalization of the Intellectuals Two separate questions are contained by the topic indicated in the title: Who is a professional? Who are the intellectuals? Regarding the first, there can surely be no doubt that, however understood, professors are professionals. Though they are usually no longer professed, in the sense of having taken solemn religious vows, they do themselves profess, that is, openly teach and declare aloud. But they do it nowadays in universities, and universities are to a degree cut off from the society and productive economy that nourishes them. The separation of professors from society may account for their oft-deplored isolation. Not all professionals are so separated or isolated from society. Consider doctors or lawyers, for example. Accordingly, separation from society may be seen as a peculiar attribute, among professionals, of professors. Sometimes it is argued that isolation from society is the special virtue of universities and so of professors. The best argument in favour of separation was given by de Tocqueville. The most prominent danger to the intellectual life of extended democracies, he said, inheres in their most prominent virtue, that everyone can decide for himself. Democrats are liberated from the tutelage of authority, religion, and tradition in the name of reason. Reason is encouraged by democratic regimes, but its meaning is confined more or less to the calculation of selfinterest . In the absence of tradition, religion, and authority, most people will rely on commonly held beliefs to shape their views. Reliance upon public opinion, de Tocqueville argued, is both the result of democratic independence of mind and a threat to it. Enslavement to public opinion does not persecute minority opinion but establishes the agenda of legitimacy. The tyranny of the majority triumphs not because it intimidates but because it is all there is, and because it seems to be just. UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO QUARTERLY, VOLUME 58, NUMBER 4, SUMMER 1989 452 BARRY COOPER In this context, the independence of universities and of professors is a safeguard to the continuance of democracy. If they are isolated to a degree from the pressures of public opinion, they are then at liberty to explore fundamental or important alternatives to common opinion. Such persons in such places are encouraged to use their reason playfully or for its own sake and not just ca1culatively or instrumentally. They are allowed to converse without a chairman, they are allowed to doubt, and they are under no compulsion to be useful. Yet they are useful because they preserve what democrats tend to forget. They are, in effect, aristocratic, but they are usually without the view of aristocrats, excessive contempt for the people. De Tocqueville's reasons are the highest reasons. They are occasionally invoked to justify 'academic freedom.' But we also know of baser reasons. We know, for instance, that academic freedom is often indistinguishable from job security. Likewise we know that university professors often cut themselves off from society because they have captive audiences, namely students. The significance of a captive audience is that it shields professors from external analysis and opens them to the twin temptations of irresponsibility and immoderation. More specifically, they are tempted to profess immoderate remarks regarding the world beyond the university. Immoderate remarks about what is popularly called the real world do not diminish the gap between professors and non-professors. In his Memorabilia, Xenophon indicated that Socrates followed the example of the wily Odysseus by starting from generally accepted opinions in order to lead his hearers to the truth (Mem, IV, vi, 15). Socratic rhetoric was politic in that it spoke in a way that an audience could understand. It served, moreover, to elevate rather than debase in so...