Aristodemia: The Answer to Academic Decline

Jun 20, 2022 | Aristophobia, Bigotry

Building upon the work of Hugh Whelchel and the research of David Murray and R.B. Peery, Dr. Paul T. Criss of Belhaven University outlines how Martin Luther’s Reformation affected the European educational system. From this testimony, we can establish an uncanny resemblance to the modern academic decline, in the West. Ultimately, the educational problems caused by the Reformation lead to the academic decline of its time, just as the educational problems caused by the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s has lead to the academic decline of our time. The common theme is that religion is a hindrance to scientific progress.

Impact of the Reformation on Education

Prior to the Reformation, education was reserved for the clergy and wealthy aristocrats – the excellent of European society. Given that Christianity is an aristophobic populist religion that is fundamentally hateful towards the high-born, it upholds the inherent morality of the weak, the sick, the ugly, the poor, the unintelligent, and the criminal. As such, the father of the Reformation, Martin Luther, insisted that education ought to be for everyone. It is a well known consequence of the Reformation that high-born children began to mix with the bourgeoisie in school with disastrous consequences on educational quality.

Before the Reformation, the Nobility provided an aristocratic education to their children. After the Reformation, all practical subjects were subjugated to Christian theology. According to Calvin, “biology was also theology”. As a result, Noble children were forced to learn a curriculum which placed a greater emphasis on Christian indoctrination than on practical subjects. Therefore, it became apparent that these institutions were better able at producing Christians, but not very good at producing competent aristocrats.

With Sola Scriptura (only scripture) being a central theme of the Reformation, it naturally followed that the reformers required teachers to not only teach students to read and understand the so-called “word of god” but it also required them to be religious zealots. Moreover, the reformers insisted that such teachers should be compensated sufficiently so as to provide an education to those whose family had demonstrated the intellectual inability to acquire wealth and pay for their children’s education. As such, the quality of teaching had to adjust to the presence of an ever-declining common denominator, much to the detriment of the Nobility.

The thinking and intellectual development of that period was characterized by a stale incrementalism. It speaks volumes of post-Reformation academic institutions that nearly all scientific advancements were made by a handful of “amateur” geniuses. All “professional” or “gilded” academic research consisted of incrementally adding or updating minute elements of these genius-invented scientific advancements, usually over a theological question of no practical significance. That is, of course, if the scientific discovery was not censored or if the genius in question was not persecuted (e.g. Galileo). Therefore, it should come as no surprise that by the 17th century, universities were in full decline with aspiring students opting to receive alternative education instead, such as on-the-job training and apprenticeships.

Aristocratic attendance in universities gave academic institutions an association with high status. The bourgeoisie, being the pretentious status-obsessed individuals that they are, inevitably followed suit with academic attendance. After the effects of the Reformation took place, aristocratic attendance predictably declined and academic institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge lost their association with high status. Consequently, the bourgeoise was left to pay ridiculously high prices with little to no benefit except for a diploma which merely demonstrated their commitment to the Christian faith.

Impact of the Cultural Revolution on Education

Prior to the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, higher education was reserved for the state-bearing members of society. Given that Freudo-Marxist liberalism is an aristophobic populist religion that is fundamentally hateful towards the elites, it upholds the inherent morality of the weak, the sick, the ugly, the poor, the unintelligent, and the criminal. As such, liberal thinkers insist that higher education ought to be for everyone. It is a well known consequence of the Cultural Revolution that high-born academics now mix with academics of low intellectual backgrounds with disastrous consequences on academic quality.

Before the Cultural Revolution, the elites provided a scientific education to their children. After the Cultural Revolution, all practical subjects are subjugated to liberal theology. According to John Adams, “Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom.” As a result, elite children are forced to learn a curriculum which places a greater emphasis on liberal indoctrination than on practical subjects. Therefore, it has become apparent that these institutions are better able at producing liberals, but not very good at producing competent elites.

With critical theory being a central theme of the Cultural Revolution, it naturally follows that the “culture warriors” require teachers to not only teach students to read and understand the so-called “humanities” but it also requires them to be liberal zealots. Moreover, the culture warriors advocate for a student debt-entrapment program so as to provide an education to those whose family has demonstrated the intellectual inability to acquire wealth and pay for their children’s education. In addition, Western academic institutions are now legally obligated to reject qualified students of certain racial or ethnic backgrounds in favor less qualified students of other racial or ethnic backgrounds. As such, the quality of teaching continues to adjust to the presence of an ever-declining common denominator, much to the detriment of the intellectual elite.

The thinking and intellectual development of our period is characterized by a stale incrementalism. It speaks volumes of our academic institutions that nearly all technological advancements are made by a handful of entrepreneurial geniuses, such as Elon Musk. All “professional” or “gilded” academic research consists of incrementally adding or updating minute elements of these genius-invented technological advancements, usually over a liberal question of no practical value, such as the liberal attempt to hinder the ability of artificial intelligence systems to observe racial patterns and make appropriate predictions. That is, of course, if the scientific discovery is not censored or if the genius in question is not persecuted. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that in the 21st century, universities are beginning to decline.

Before the Cultural Revolution, only the intellectual top 10% of the population had any academic degree; of those who were academically accredited, only a small percentage of them had a doctorate. Today, roughly 50% of the population has an academic degree and since the average IQ is 100, these degrees no longer signal intellectual ability or competence, as they once did. Instead, they merely signal that the graduate is a good liberal. Since corporations can no longer ascertain the competence and intellect of job candidates based on academic degrees, they have adjusted to this reality by either offering on-the-job training or skill certification programs.

Furthermore, the intellectual elites are already looking for educational alternatives. Academia will not fully collapse until after the bourgeoisie realizes that the elites have abandoned academia, in its current state. Even according to Google’s top-rated futurist speaker, Thomas Frey, 50% of colleges will collapse by 2030.

Rejecting All Alternatives

To the bourgeoisie, this is a worrying development as they inherit their sense of identity from accreditation, rather than accomplishment. To the state-bearing members of society, however, this is a welcome development as they truly desire to learn and apply science and don’t attend educational institutions merely for the purpose of status signaling. Nevertheless, these elites are now looking for alternatives to academia.

While academic alternatives are a viable band-aid solution, these are likely to hinder the development of institutionally backed establishments, namely aristodemia – higher-learning institutions for the excellent of society. “Alternative” institutions fundamentally represent an attempt to compete with academia. On the other hand, academia is a failed attempt to reproduce and compete with the scientific advancements of geniuses – the kinds of people that aristodemia upholds and promotes. Therefore, it is aristodemia which keeps academia up at night, not the other way around.

Aristodemia is a return to Corpernicus, Galileo, and Newton. Aristodemia is the proven model of scientific advancement, and ultimately, the main show in scientific literature; it is not an “alternative”, nor does it intend to be one.