Scott examines the concept of 'priesthoods' (like medicine and academia) as epistemic communities that maintain high standards through isolation from the public, showing both their strengths and their vulnerability to ideological capture. Longer summary

Scott analyzes how professional 'priesthoods' like medicine and academia function as epistemic communities, maintaining their effectiveness through deliberate isolation from the public and strict internal standards. He explains how their key features - separation from the public, resistance to capitalism, and formal communication norms - help them maintain quality but also make them vulnerable to ideological capture. The post explores how these institutions were particularly susceptible to political capture in recent years, while arguing that despite their flaws, they still serve an important function that would be difficult to replicate. The discussion concludes by questioning how to deal with priesthoods' current state of partial corruption. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines the tension between adopting voter-friendly strategies and maintaining intellectual rigor in political discourse, warning against sacrificing competent governance for electoral success. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the debate surrounding Hillary Clinton's campaign mistakes and potential changes for the Democratic Party. He argues that while certain approaches may be effective for winning elections, they might not be conducive to good governance. The post explores the tension between adopting strategies that appeal to voters and maintaining an epistemic culture that allows for competent leadership. Scott warns against political parties and media outlets fully embracing emotional appeals and simplistic messaging at the expense of factual, nuanced discourse. He suggests that most of the audience for online content and publications are not the general public, so these platforms should maintain higher standards of intellectual discourse. Shorter summary