This is fascinating logic. Seriously fascinating:
On almost every other weighty issue, the professional classes appear to be better informed than the rest of the population. On global warming the reverse seems to be true. The only people I have met over the past few years who haven\’t the faintest idea what man-made climate change is or how it is caused are university graduates. Not long ago, for example, I had to explain to the press officer at the government\’s department for transport what carbon dioxide is. A few weeks ago the writer Mark Lynas found a counter-intuitive revelation buried in the small print of an ICM survey. The number of people in social classes D and E who thought the government should prioritise the environment over the economy was higher (56%) than the proportion in classes A and B (47%). It is counter-intuitive only because a vast and well-funded denial industry has spent years persuading us that environmentalism is a middle-class caprice. Classes A and B are Channel 4\’s core audience.
Quite glorious logic, don\’t you think?
The professional classes are better informed on all matters except when they disagree with George. Then it\’s a conspiracy to mislead them.
That Ockham\’s Razor thing would lead to a slightly different conclusion, don\’t you think? That the professional classes are better informed on this matter too?