Why Would Academics Have Problems With Mormons and Evangelicals?
I seriously doubt Ilya Somin when he says that academic disapproval of Mormonism and Evangelical Christianity is merely a function of academics being generally liberal and Mormons and Evangelicals being generally conservative:
The study Todd cites shows that 53% of academics have an “unfavorable” view of Evangelical Christians and 33% say the same of Mormons. By contrast, only 13% have an unfavorable view of Catholics and 3% towards Jews. As Todd points out, Evangelical Christians and and Mormons are generally seen as politically conservative, while Jews tend to be liberal, and Catholics somewhere in between. Todd may well be right that academics’ views of Evangelicals and Mormons are based on stereotypes rather than personal experience. However, the stereotype that these groups tend to be politically conservative is actually correct. For example, a recent survey found that 47% of evangelicals describe themselves as “conservative,” while only 14% call themselves “liberal.” A Pew survey found that 72% of white Evangelicals voted for the Republicans in the 2006 congressional elections. The numbers for Mormons are similar (majority-Mormon Utah is perhaps the most reliably Republican state in the country).
This strikes me as obviously wrongheaded. Sean Carroll points out that Evangelicals and Mormons are, generally, some of the most agressive anti-intellectuals out there. Both have, at the heart of their creed, certain propositions that very few intellectuals or academics could ever agree with. The story of Joseph Smith, though no less credible than other founding-faith stories, only happened in the 19th century, meaning that there is written documentation of him being totally full of it. Also, Mormons steadfastly believe silliness like Native Americans being the lost tribes of Israel and a whole host of simple empirical facts that are just wrong. Evangelicals, on the other hand, have been incredibly hostile towards academia, and have viewed it with contempt for the entirety of the 20th century, so it makes sense that academics have returned the favor.
Catholicism and Judaism, which academics don’t disapprove of (or do in very low numbers), have incredibly illustrious intellectual traditions, and even though they too have some basic problems with empiricism, those problems are an order of magnitude less glaring than those afflicting Evangelicals and Mormons.
Also, Catholics and Jews are perhaps the two most intellectually minded religious groups in the history of the Western world. I hardly have to list off famous institutions of higher learning or intellectuals to prove this point, but suffice to say, Georgetown beats out BYU and Oral Roberts, de Chardin is better than Kurt Wise, and that Heschel, Maimonides, Arendt and Berlin could beat out anyone that Evangelicals and Mormons have to offer.
Well, hmm…As a former Mormon, who attacks the faith as often as possible, with enough bitterness to destroy the planet, I find myself strangely bothered by the idea that Catholics and Jews are somehow higher minded than Mormons…
Couldn’t it have something to do with the fact that Mormons have been around a much shorter time and since there are fewer of them than those of the other faiths, there would also be fewer of them in academia? Given these facts, it’s hard to expect there would be a legendary academic like Arendt going to bat for Mormons. But just FYI, there are actually a lot of Mormon academics I do respect. And of course Georgetown beats out BYU. Do you know how old BYU is? Founded in 1875. Georgetown is almost 100 years older, and it’s located in the center of early U.S. civilization. And BYU was founded in a sparsely populated desert. A desert that until 100 years ago was very difficult to reach, because it is surrounded by some of the most strenuous mountains on earth. Not exactly a big draw for the world’s intellectuals. Mormons are also incredibly open to scientific exploration and scientific explanation for phenomena they still consider divine, like evolution, much more so than Catholics for certain.
Now, obviously I think the fact that Joseph Smith was a documented con man and that the “world history” he presents in the BoM can be disproved by even the most amateur of anthropologists is a problem for academics. But the truth is, for anyone who has religious faith, there is a level of acceptance of the irrational. The fact that this is perhaps more irrational than other religions could certainly be a factor in disapproval of it, but I think to say Mormons are less educated or less “high minded” because BYU isn’t Georgetown is probably playing fast and loose with history…
I think you’d have to visit Utah to understand just how much conservative ideology plays a role in their religion. While I’m no academic, I will say that the sexism, racism, and homophobia of the religion turned me off to it long before the fact that it was a lie did…Somin might be more correct than you think.
Haley
June 22, 2008 at 11:23 am