Key Takeaways
1. The Anointed's Vision: A Self-Sealing System
Today, despite free speech and the mass media, the prevailing social vision is dangerously close to sealing itself off from any discordant feedback from reality.
Dogmatic Beliefs. The core danger lies not in the specific errors of the vision, but in its resistance to correction. This resistance stems from a prevailing attitude among the intellectual and political elite, where their assumptions are so ingrained that empirical evidence is often dismissed if it contradicts their vision. This dogmatism prevents necessary adjustments and perpetuates flawed policies.
Moral Superiority. The vision offers a special state of grace to its believers, deeming them morally superior. Those who accept the vision are seen as enlightened, while those who disagree are viewed as benighted, selfish, or even evil. This moral high ground insulates the vision from critical examination and fosters an environment where opposing arguments are dismissed rather than engaged.
Ego Entanglement. The vision becomes intertwined with the egos of its adherents, making it difficult to separate personal identity from the vision's validity. This ego investment further reinforces the resistance to discordant evidence, as questioning the vision becomes tantamount to questioning one's own moral standing.
2. The Four-Stage Pattern of Failed Policies
A very distinct pattern has emerged repeatedly when policies favored by the anointed turn out to fail.
Recurring Cycle. When policies favored by the anointed fail, a predictable pattern emerges, characterized by four stages:
- Crisis: A situation is declared a "crisis," often without empirical evidence of its severity or uniqueness.
- Solution: The anointed advocate policies to end the "crisis," confidently predicting beneficial outcomes.
- Results: The policies are implemented, leading to detrimental results that critics had foreseen.
- Response: The anointed dismiss criticism as "simplistic," attribute the failure to "complexities," and shift the burden of proof to the critics.
Examples of the Pattern. The "War on Poverty," sex education programs, and lenient criminal justice policies all followed this pattern. Despite failing to achieve their stated goals, these policies were defended by redefining success, claiming moral merit, or asserting that things would have been worse without them.
Ignoring Feedback. The pattern highlights a fundamental flaw: the failure to acknowledge and learn from empirical evidence. The vision of the anointed remains sacrosanct, hermetically sealed off from the contaminating influence of facts, perpetuating a cycle of ineffective and often harmful policies.
3. Statistical Gymnastics: "Aha!" Moments and Fallacies
Anyone who looks through enough statistics will eventually find numbers that seem to confirm a given vision.
Selective Use of Data. The "Aha!" approach involves cherry-picking statistics that support a pre-existing vision, while ignoring contradictory data within the same set. This selective use of information creates a distorted picture and reinforces biases.
Common Statistical Fallacies:
- The Residual Fallacy: Attributing unexplained disparities to discrimination after "controlling" for other variables, without acknowledging potential unmeasured factors.
- Changing Assortments: Failing to account for the turnover of individuals within statistical categories, leading to misleading conclusions about "the rich" or "the poor."
- Correlation vs. Causation: Assuming that a correlation between two variables implies a causal relationship, without considering alternative explanations.
Intergroup Disparities. Media and academic comparisons often focus solely on black-white disparities, ignoring data on other groups that would challenge the prevailing narrative of discrimination. This selective focus reinforces pre-existing biases and prevents a more nuanced understanding of social phenomena.
4. The Irrelevance of Evidence: Teflon Prophets and Fictitious History
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence....
Teflon Prophets. Some figures, like John Kenneth Galbraith and Paul Ehrlich, maintain their reputations despite repeated failed predictions. This is due to their alignment with the prevailing vision, which shields them from accountability for factual inaccuracies.
Fictitious History. The anointed often rewrite history to fit their narrative, attributing social problems to convenient scapegoats like "a legacy of slavery" or the policies of the Reagan administration, even when historical evidence contradicts these claims. This manipulation of the past serves to reinforce their vision and justify their policy prescriptions.
Pooh-Pooh History. Concerns about declining standards or rising crime rates are often dismissed by quoting similar concerns from the past, implying that these concerns were unfounded. This tactic ignores the possibility that past warnings may have been valid and effective in averting disaster.
5. The Anointed vs. The Benighted: A Clash of Visions
What is intellectually interesting about visions are their assumptions and their reasoning, but what is socially crucial is the extent to which they are resistant to evidence.
Tragic Vision vs. Anointed Vision. Two contrasting visions shape social and political discourse:
- Tragic Vision: Emphasizes human limitations, inherent constraints, and the inevitability of trade-offs.
- Vision of the Anointed: Assumes human perfectibility, expansive capabilities, and the possibility of "solutions" to social problems.
Differing Assumptions. The two visions differ in their assumptions about human nature, causation, knowledge, power, and justice. These differences lead to fundamentally different approaches to policy-making and social issues.
Coherence of Visions. Individuals tend to hold consistent views across a wide range of issues, reflecting the underlying assumptions of their chosen vision. This coherence creates predictable patterns of agreement and disagreement in political and social debates.
6. The Vocabulary of the Anointed: Shaping the Narrative
Men have an all but incurable propensity to try to prejudge all the great questions which interest them by stamping their prejudices upon their language.
Preemptive Language. The anointed use language to preempt issues, set themselves apart from the benighted, and evade personal responsibility. Words like "crisis," "public service," and "greed" are used to shape the narrative and control the debate.
Disdaining the Benighted. The vocabulary of the anointed often denigrates those who disagree, labeling their beliefs as "emotional," "simplistic," or "false consciousness." This creates a sense of intellectual and moral superiority and justifies dismissing opposing viewpoints.
Evading Responsibility. The anointed often use language to deflect personal responsibility, attributing social problems to "society" or "systemic forces" rather than individual choices and behavior. This allows them to advocate for sweeping social changes without acknowledging the potential consequences.
7. Cosmic Justice vs. the Rule of Law: A Dangerous Trade-off
Law has lost its soul and become jungle.
Erosion of the Rule of Law. The pursuit of cosmic justice, or a more expansive and subjective sense of fairness, has led to the erosion of the rule of law. Judges increasingly prioritize their own social theories over the written law, creating uncertainty and undermining the predictability of the legal system.
Judicial Activism. This trend is manifested in judicial activism, where judges stretch and twist the Constitution to achieve desired social outcomes, often disregarding historical context and established legal principles. This undermines the separation of powers and transfers decision-making authority from elected officials to unelected judges.
Consequences of Judicial Activism. The quest for cosmic justice has led to a legal system that is less reliable, more expensive, and less effective in protecting the public. It has also created a climate of fear and uncertainty, where individuals and organizations are hesitant to engage in legitimate activities for fear of being sued.
8. The Allure and Peril of Optional Reality
. . . ideology. . . is an instrument of power; a defense mechanism against information; a pretext for eluding moral constraints in doing or approving evil with a clean conscience; and finally, a way of banning the criterion of experience, that is, of completely eliminating or indefinitely postponing the pragmatic criteria of success and failure.
The Anointed's Self-Contained World. The greatest danger of the vision of the anointed is its self-sealing nature, which insulates it from empirical evidence and perpetuates flawed policies. This insulation stems from a combination of dogmatism, moral superiority, and ego entanglement.
The Illusion of Control. The vision of the anointed fosters the illusion that reality is optional and that social problems can be solved through the application of superior knowledge and virtue. This leads to a disregard for inherent constraints, unintended consequences, and the wisdom of evolved traditions.
The Need for Humility. To avoid the pitfalls of the vision of the anointed, it is essential to embrace intellectual humility, acknowledge the limitations of human knowledge, and prioritize systemic processes over top-down control. A healthy respect for the tragic vision of the human condition is crucial for navigating the complexities of social life and making prudent policy decisions.
Last updated:
FAQ
What is The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell about?
- Core theme: The book critiques the worldview of intellectual and political elites—termed "the anointed"—who believe they possess superior wisdom and virtue to solve social problems.
- Contrast with reality: Sowell contrasts the anointed’s vision with empirical evidence, showing how their policies often lead to unintended negative consequences.
- Influence on society: The book explores how this vision shapes social policy, law, media, and public discourse, often privileging certain groups while dismissing others.
- Historical context: Sowell traces the roots and dominance of this vision, especially since the 1960s, and its impact on American society.
Why should I read The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell?
- Elite influence revealed: The book exposes how a small group of elites can disproportionately shape public policy and opinion.
- Critical thinking encouraged: Sowell urges readers to question widely accepted assumptions and demand empirical evidence rather than accept dogmatic assertions.
- Insight into policy failures: Through detailed case studies, the book shows how well-intentioned policies often fail or worsen the problems they aim to solve.
- Understanding rhetoric: Readers learn to recognize the rhetorical tactics used by elites to maintain their vision’s dominance and dismiss critics.
What are the key takeaways from The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell?
- Vision vs. reality: The dominant social vision among elites often ignores or dismisses evidence that contradicts it.
- Pattern of policy failure: Policies based on this vision follow a four-stage pattern: crisis declared, solution proposed, detrimental results, and critics dismissed.
- Moral superiority: The anointed see themselves as morally superior, viewing opponents as not just wrong but morally deficient.
- Misuse of statistics: Sowell details how statistics are selectively used to support the vision, while contradictory data are ignored.
What is the "vision of the anointed" as defined by Thomas Sowell?
- Definition: It is a worldview held by intellectual and political elites that assumes their superior knowledge and virtue justify their role in shaping society.
- Moral dichotomy: The vision divides people into the "anointed" (superior) and the "benighted" (ignorant or evil), justifying efforts to impose policies.
- Resistance to evidence: This vision is insulated from contradictory empirical evidence, often dismissing it as irrelevant.
- Focus on intentions: Emphasizes changing intentions and social conditions rather than accepting human limitations or systemic trade-offs.
How does Thomas Sowell describe the pattern of failure in policies based on the vision of the anointed?
- Stage 1 – Crisis declared: A social problem is labeled a crisis, often without evidence that it is worsening.
- Stage 2 – Solution proposed: The anointed advocate policies promising improvement, dismissing critics as simplistic or dishonest.
- Stage 3 – Detrimental results: The policies are implemented but lead to outcomes opposite to those promised.
- Stage 4 – Response to failure: Critics are dismissed, evidence is reinterpreted, goals are redefined, and the original vision remains unchallenged.
What are some examples Thomas Sowell uses to illustrate the failure of the vision of the anointed?
- War on Poverty: Despite massive spending, welfare dependency increased and urban riots escalated during the program’s implementation.
- Sex Education: Expanded sex education and family planning programs coincided with rising teenage pregnancy and venereal disease rates.
- Criminal Justice Reform: Judicial decisions expanding criminals’ rights led to soaring crime rates, contrary to reformers’ promises.
- AIDS policy: Legal protections for AIDS carriers sometimes prioritized their rights over public health and safety.
What is the difference between the "tragic vision" and the "vision of the anointed" in Thomas Sowell's analysis?
- Tragic vision: Assumes inherent human limitations, systemic causation, and the inevitability of trade-offs; emphasizes prudence and incremental change.
- Vision of the anointed: Assumes elites have superior knowledge and virtue, favoring sweeping reforms and intentional causation.
- Role of knowledge: The tragic vision doubts anyone can fully understand or control society, while the anointed vision assumes elites know the solutions.
- View of the public: The tragic vision respects public preferences and systemic processes; the anointed vision disdains the public as benighted.
How does Thomas Sowell explain the misuse of statistics ("Aha!" statistics) in The Vision of the Anointed?
- Selective use: Statistics are cherry-picked to support the prevailing vision, while contradictory data are ignored.
- Residual fallacy: Attempts to prove discrimination or other claims by controlling for some variables but ignoring qualitative differences or unmeasured factors.
- Changing categories: Failure to account for changing populations or transient categories leads to misleading conclusions.
- Correlation vs. causation: Correlations are often interpreted as causation consistent with the vision, ignoring alternative explanations.
What is the "vocabulary of the anointed" and why is it important in Thomas Sowell's analysis?
- Verbal preemption: The anointed use buzzwords like "crisis," "access," and "rights" to preempt debate and frame issues in their favor.
- Disdain for dissent: Their language often dismisses opposing views as emotional, prejudiced, or uninformed.
- Evading responsibility: Terms like "society" and "discrimination" are used to obscure individual choices and shift blame.
- Moralizing issues: The vocabulary is designed to moralize debates and shut down opposition without evidence.
Who are the "mascots" and "targets" in The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell?
- Mascots: Marginalized or disfavored groups (e.g., criminals, AIDS carriers, the homeless) championed by the anointed as victims needing rescue.
- Targets: Respected groups (e.g., businesspeople, families, religious communities) who are often blamed or penalized to compensate mascots.
- Purpose: This dichotomy reinforces the moral superiority of the anointed and justifies policies that favor mascots while restricting targets.
- Policy impact: Laws and policies are often stretched to benefit mascots at the expense of targets.
How does Thomas Sowell critique judicial activism in The Vision of the Anointed?
- Definition: Judicial activism involves judges interpreting laws and the Constitution beyond their original meaning to impose their own social and moral views.
- Power shift: This transfers policymaking power from elected representatives to unelected judges, undermining democracy.
- Consequences: Judicial activism leads to unpredictable legal standards and the imposition of "cosmic justice" over practical law.
- Alignment with the anointed: Such activism often aligns with the vision of the anointed, favoring mascots and overriding traditional values.
What dangers does Thomas Sowell identify in the "optional reality" created by the vision of the anointed?
- Insulation from evidence: The anointed’s vision is self-justifying and immune to empirical refutation, leading to persistent, disconnected policies.
- Divorce from human nature: It ignores inherent human limitations and assumes society can be reshaped entirely by elite wisdom.
- Polarization: The vision fosters cultural wars and undermines shared values and institutions.
- Social disintegration: By dismissing dissent as moral failure, it risks societal breakdown and loss of trust in institutions.
Review Summary
The Vision of the Anointed receives mostly positive reviews, with readers praising Sowell's clear prose and insightful analysis of liberal thinking. Many find the book's arguments against progressive policies compelling and still relevant today. Critics argue that Sowell's portrayal of liberal viewpoints is overly simplistic and biased. Some readers note that while the book offers a strong critique, it lacks concrete solutions. Overall, reviewers appreciate Sowell's examination of how self-congratulatory thinking influences social policy.
Similar Books
Download PDF
Download EPUB
.epub
digital book format is ideal for reading ebooks on phones, tablets, and e-readers.