Academia abhors cleverness—but only the kinds that don’t reproduce its current coinage of acceptable thought. What gets protected is the signalling, not the insight. Language becomes currency; cleverness that fails to replicate the prevailing mintage of disciplinary and political vocabulary is filtered out. It’s not conscious—most of the time, it’s reflex. The institution doesn’t select for intelligence. It selects for recurrence. Cleverness that doesn’t generate more of the same is either ignored or neutralised.
I walked into a university that sold itself on being different. It wasn’t. It extended a hand—once, at the Master’s level, when novelty was still marketable. Then it recoiled when that novelty refused to standardise for the PhD. The very qualities that drew me there—original thinking, structural synthesis, unpredictability—were the ones it set about erasing. And this isn’t rare. It’s the norm. Institutions thrive on churn. People are processed and flushed. There’s no continuity, no shared net of support or culture. Just mechanisms. Just throughput. The system is not broken—it works exactly as intended.
Daedelus Kite 
One reply on “Academia Abhors Cleverness”
Worth pointing out: the kinds of cleverness that don’t reproduce the current status quo are effectively infinite. That’s the unspoken terror institutions are built to suppress. Not just dissent, but the sheer scope of other ways of thinking—entire conceptual architectures that never get oxygen because someone wants to stay where it’s familiar, legible, and rewardable. All those other possibilities—discarded before they even threaten coherence. And for what? A shallow little pool where everyone pretends it’s the ocean.
LikeLike