(ThyBlackMan.com) “Whoever disregards discipline comes to poverty and shame, but whoever heeds correction is honored” (Proverbs 13:18)
It is incredibly sad and very amazing at the same time to find out that throughout the ages some of the brightest and most evil people have coexisted in a world where no one would be expected to see that. Repeatedly, history has shown us how brilliant minds going in the wrong direction can be extremely dangerous. Besides being experts in their fields, they become the main influencing factor of social discussion and politics, thus deeply and often brutally changing the face of society. The case of Nobel laureate William Shockley is an example of this phenomenon that is going to teach the same lessons today if we do not take it seriously.
The Shockley Precedent: When Excellence Enables Extremism
The figure of William Bradford Shockley Jr. is almost impossible not to mention when one talks about science’s contradictions. He co-invented the transistor, which was the first step in the electronics revolution and won him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1956. The device that he contributed to become the foundation of all the electronic innovations that followed, from computers to smartphones. Without any doubt, Shockley was a giant in scientific research, and his discoveries and inventions are the driving force behind our daily life improvements.
Nonetheless, the same brilliant intellect became a fervent supporter of racial eugenics. At the start of the 1960s, Shockley had turned away from semiconductors and was advocating science-fiction-like ideas about racial intelligence. His belief was that black people lacked the genes for intelligence, incentive programs were needed to decrease the birth rate of families with low IQ, and the Nobel award was his weapon to gain his side of the debate.
What made Shockley especially frightening was not only his hatred towards a race but also his voice that was heard by numerous supporters. The universities who organized the debates gave him the opportunity to present his ideas. The mass media outlets signaled him as an expert and referred to him frequently. His scientific credentials were misused to support his racial theories. He was not treated as some radical who was talking foolishness but rather as a serious intellectual who had a say in the discussion of human genetics and social policy.
The Shockley case is a prime example of the society’s inability to see a key aspect of their relationship with public figures. We usually tend to believe that someone who is extremely good in one area will be an incredibly wise person in other areas or that being highly intelligent and achieving something in the intellectual field makes one incapable of moral failings. However, the history of such cases is just a long series of repeated falsehoods.
Modern Echoes: The Musk Phenomenon
Today, Elon Musk is a man whose name is often brought up in connection with his popularity and technological achievements. Being the person who led Tesla’s car revolution, SpaceX’s exploration of outer space, and many other things. Musk is recognized as the most influential innovator of our time. His companies have been the main driver in this green transition, decreased the cost of space launches, and have been constantly trying to accomplish the previously impossible.
Nevertheless, the rising political power of Elon Musk also signals to a bad manifestation of his character that is like the one in the Shockley case. Through his public speeches, he often goes into the field of race and culture where undoubtedly, he has no knowledge, but his influence is still so strong and potent.
One point he has always insisted on is that the white South African farmers have suffered systematic persecution at the hands of the locals and the only solution will be to give them special treatment all over the world. Even if we accept the part of violence against farmers in South Africa, it should also be known that this happens to people of all races. Musk through repetition, provides narratives that focus on the white victim without reflecting the situation of the other communities.
However, this unbalanced view of things does not affect only words, but also actions. If Musk advocates for quick and efficient immigrant programs that serve only white South Africans, he is not only talking of human kindness; that would mean that he is supporting racially preferential policies that are no different from those of the past and hence, exclusion is the inevitable consequence.
The Technology of Influence
The comparison of Shockley with Musk is more fitting when their respective means of influence are considered. Shockley was a man who operated in an epoch when academic institutions and traditional media were the primary gatekeepers of public discourse. Although his Nobel Prize gave him access to new audiences, his reach was still limited by the existing institutional structures.
However, Musk performs in an altogether different information environment. By managing X (formerly Twitter), he not only engages in public conversations but also redefines their very nature. His posts come to the millions in an instant, the algorithms amplify his messages, and his platform policies govern what sorts of speech will be there or will disappear in the digital spaces.
The same technological progress makes the new figures like Musk more dangerous compared to their historical counterparts. When Shockley was promoting his racist theories, his influence was still strong, but it was limited by geography and time. However, when Musk signals racially preferential policies, his message is spread all over the world at once and thus, it can be the source of immigration debates, political movements, and changing the public opinion on multiple continents simultaneously.
The Meritocracy Myth
Both cases reflect the persistent myth of the infallible meritocracy. We want to believe that those people who are the best in the sphere of technology, science, or business are the ones who have the best judgment in all domains. This assumption helps us to meet some of our psychological needs—it makes the evaluation of public figures simpler, and it satisfies our desire for clear hierarchies of competence. The new research however shows that the correlation is not that strong as it was assumed. One of the studies gave insightful examples of renowned scientists and tech entrepreneurs who engaged in the non-technical topics beyond their areas of expertise and reached completely wrong conclusions.
Nevertheless, being highly skilled in a narrow technical field cannot be equated with wisdom about complex social, political, or moral issues. A person who is extremely clever in engineering may not have any special insight into immigration policy. An entrepreneur who is successful may not realize the issues of historical injustice or cultural dynamics. It is no different from the people who have technical skills and therefore full of the recognition factor—acknowledging expertise’s limits, however, does not mean losing one’s technical achievements.
The risk occurs when we don’t observe these boundaries and allow technical credibility to go to domains where it does not belong.
Historical Patterns and Contemporary Responsibilities
The Shockley case sets the stage for studying key lessons from the life of current figures such as Musk. First, one of the most important takeaways is that moral character and intellect are separate factors. Second, the medium and the reputation have a greater impact on the propagation of good and bad ideas. Third, society has the duty to differentiate between the areas in which public figures deserve attention and those where they do not.
We certainly can’t stop brilliant people who have some problematic views, but we can reduce the number of platforms they may use to express those views and oppose any attempts to use their scientific credibility to gain political influence.
The Path Forward
The objective here is certainly not to clamp down on those who produce new ideas or to ignore their contributions, but rather to ensure that the influence of these people is within the limits. We can acknowledge Shockley’s scientific accomplishments and at the same time reject his racial theories. In a similar way, we can accept the technological innovations of Musk while we are critically thinking about his political statements and the consequences they may have.
This demands a more complex public conversation—in fact, one that differentiates technical knowledge from ethical leadership, that interrogates rather than blindly accepting the opinions of successful people, and which is aware of the risks that come with unlimited power even if it comes from a good source.
The story of people like Shockley isn’t that all the innovators should be questioned, but it is that the contributions which they make, and their characters should be judged separately. Greatness does not give a person the right to be a bigot, and an accomplishment does not make a person any less harmful. If we keep these differences, we can use the minds of geniuses for our good and at the same time protect ourselves from their indulgences.
Associate Editor; Stanley G. Buford
Feel free to connect with this brother via Twitter; Stanley G. and also facebook; http://www.facebook.com/sgbuford.
Also his email addy is; StanleyG@ThyBlackMan.com.
