George Stigler held that science and ability are inherently elitist, not egalitarian.

Evidence

25 Such diffusion was a disaster, since science was properly an elite activity: “there are at most fourteen really first class men in any field, and more commonly there are about six.” See Stigler, The Intellectual, 37. This followed straightforwardly from his elitist views about human abilities: “there are natural differences in the quality of both men and acres, unlikely to be eliminated under any social system.” See Stigler, Essays, 280. Egalitarianism was a sin against nature, and a sin against science. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 770

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the book’s broader thesis of fracturing the homogeneous ‘Chicago school’ caricature — Stigler’s elitism runs against the democratizing image sometimes attached to market liberalism. — connects to: George Stigler uniquely blended information economics, orthodox economics, and pro-market activism — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 104; Stigler held that science must be governed by an elite, not democratic procedures. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 107; Stigler questioned the very usefulness of intellectuals in a rational world. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 796

Broader Connections

• Stigler questioned the very usefulness of intellectuals in a rational world. #expands (0.75) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 796