Malcolm Gladwell Doth Metastasize

I can't get away from this self-proclaimed pundit, Malcolm Gladwell. He recently had a column in the NY Times vainly attacking Chris Anderson's take on the free economy and then he has a piece in the New Yorker saying the current depression is mostly about psychology, not necessarily about unregulated markets, scammers, and profiteers. 

Whatever he writes about -- the tipping point, the outliers, and other catchy sounding phenomena -- Gladwell manages to start out with a false analogy, comparing one event to a completely unrelated event that did exactly what he uses to describe what the event he is discussing, like the depression, is doing. I can't even recall the analogy with the current decession because it was so far fetched; perhaps it was something that happened in the Middle Ages. It doesn't really matter what it was, because Gladwell is so skillful at manipulating an argument, he could have compared the current decession with the First Crusade into Jerusalem and made it seem that they were both all about faith.

I will admit that sometimes it takes a verbal manipulator to recognize another one. During my brief high school years, a friend (and later a client of mine, the inventor of the chip for the Microsoft "smart" watch which I let him call "rather stupid" on a TechTV talk show with Leo Laporte) and I debated other teams throughout the state on whether "red" China should be admitted to the U.N. We never knew which side of the argument we'd have to take before each debate, so we were prepared to argue either way. We won almost all our debates because we knew how to draw perfectly ridiculous but convincing analogies, a la Gladwell. 

Just because someone knows how to argue well (think Christopher Hitchens) and sound convincing even if they are dead wrong or just plain silly, should we treat them like philosophers? I wondered what true philosophers think and why we haven't heard back from them. Perhaps they wish they were as popular as the great metastasizer.

Comments

[Zo]

I suppose it's a business now; he's a personality, a star, he rather *has* to keep churning them out. When basically, had he not but the one thing to say? Back when?

Life as a brand. Just loathe it.

[JV]

Oh dear. Malcolm is a Ferengie. He is just reminding everyone of Rule # 11 "Even if it's free, you can always buy it cheaper."

Shhhh, don't tell anyone - information is not free. Never has been, never will be. Rule #37: "If it's free, take it and worry about the hidden costs later."

I do wonder if Mr. Anderson writes his books for free?

Happily the Newspapers and Books people are starting to follow RIAA and lawsuits over using their information are soon to follow. Even fools wake up at some point when they have to eat or die. Rule 106: "There is no honor in poverty."

And don't forget Rule 109: "Dignity and an empty sack is worth the sack." Maybe information suppliers are waking up to that while people like Mr. Anderson steal everything they create. Wonder if Mr Gladwell is trying to say that?