There was a period when coherence itself felt scarce. In much of the twentieth century, access to knowledge was limited by geography, institutions, language, and cost. Information existed, but it was fragmented. For many readers, especially those outside elite academic circles, the world felt too large and complex to hold together.
In that context, large panoramic books played a special role. They did not simply inform. They reassured. They offered the feeling that history, culture, and human behavior could be arranged into an intelligible order. Reading such works created a sense of orientation in a rapidly changing world.
This desire was not naive. It reflected real historical conditions. When synthesis was rare, those capable of providing it appeared exceptional. What people sought was not only facts, but meaning and continuity. Intellectual coherence functioned almost like infrastructure, invisible when present, unsettling when absent.
The Rise of Intellectual Celebrity
Out of this need emerged a recognizable figure, the encyclopedic public intellectual. These were not narrow specialists but synthesizers who moved across centuries, disciplines, and cultures. Their authority came less from methodological rigor and more from narrative reach.
Figures such as Jared Diamond, Alvin Toffler, Emmanuel Todd, and later Yuval Noah Harari became widely known beyond academic settings. Their books were treated as cultural events. Media platforms amplified their voices, and publishers invested heavily in presenting them as interpreters of the world.
For readers, engaging with these works carried an implicit social meaning. Completing such books felt like joining a community of seriousness. It signaled effort, curiosity, and a willingness to think broadly. The books were not only read, they were inhabited.
Knowledge as Theater
Over time, admiration subtly transformed into reverence. Intellectual giants came to be seen as figures who had somehow absorbed the totality of human knowledge. Their minds appeared qualitatively different, almost superhuman.
This perception created a form of intellectual theater. Distance mattered. Authority was reinforced by separation. The reader stood below, grateful for mediation. Complexity was filtered through a single voice, and that voice felt trustworthy precisely because it was elevated.
Markets reinforced this structure. Media ecosystems favor recognizable authorities. It is easier to promote a small number of towering figures than to sustain many distributed voices. Intellectual authority and commercial visibility gradually merged, not through conspiracy, but through alignment of incentives.
Cracks in the Grand Narrative
This structure was never permanent. Postmodern thought questioned the legitimacy of grand narratives. Large explanatory stories began to feel too smooth, too confident. Critics highlighted what was excluded or flattened.
Digital networks accelerated this shift. Readers gained the ability to compare perspectives instantly and encounter disagreement with ease. Wikipedia became an early signal of this change. Knowledge appeared collective, provisional, and constantly revised.
Coherence did not disappear, but its meaning changed. It could no longer be delivered unquestioned from above. The idea that one person could narrate civilization definitively became harder to sustain. Intellectual authority began to feel situated rather than universal.
Harari at the Threshold
Yuval Noah Harari stands at this historical threshold. He is a gifted synthesizer and a compelling storyteller. His work helped many readers reconnect with long term thinking and broad historical perspective.
At the same time, his stance toward AI reflects the tension of this moment. His warnings about information systems and mass delusion closely resemble the concerns of mainstream media institutions. They echo anxieties rooted in the loss of narrative mediation.
This does not imply bad faith. It reflects position. AI threatens not knowledge itself, but the scarcity that once sustained certain roles. When synthesis becomes abundant, the synthesizer’s authority feels less stable. Civilizational warnings can also function as institutional reflexes.
For some readers, this explains why such arguments now feel familiar rather than surprising. They fit comfortably within existing media narratives. The voice once perceived as disruptive begins to sound protective.
When Genius Moves from Explanation to Creation
As the authority of encyclopedic intellectuals in the human and social sciences weakens, admiration does not vanish. It migrates. Increasingly, it attaches itself to scientists, engineers, and technologists.
Today, algorithm designers, AI researchers, startup founders, and technology CEOs occupy the space once held by grand narrators. They are admired not for explaining the world, but for building new ones. Code runs. Systems scale. Products ship. Creation feels undeniable.
This shift is understandable. In an age where narratives are contested, functioning systems provide a different kind of certainty. Technical creativity feels closer to genius. It restores the aura of exceptional capability, now grounded in visible results.
At the same time, this admiration carries risk. Technology was meant to democratize access and capability. When builders are elevated beyond critique, authority reconcentrates. Pragmatic success can begin to substitute for ethical reflection. Creation becomes its own justification.
The Deep Desire to Admire the Exceptional
Beneath these shifts lies a persistent human impulse. Across eras, people have longed to believe that someone stands above ordinary limits. Prophets, philosophers, intellectual giants, and now technologists all occupy this symbolic role.
Institutions such as prestigious prizes, media profiles, and heroic narratives formalize this longing. They offer faces where systems are hard to see. They provide emotional clarity in place of complexity.
AI quietly exposes this pattern. It reveals how extraordinary outcomes emerge from networks, inheritance, and collective effort. Yet emotionally, humans continue to prefer heroes to processes. This tension is not a flaw. It is a human trait that requires awareness.
The End of Scarcity, Not the End of Study
None of this diminishes the importance of foundations. Series such as Iwanami Bunko, Penguin Classics, Gallimard Folio, or Reclam Universal Bibliothek remain precious. They challenged readers through difficulty and resistance.
These books formed patience, taste, and inner dialogue. They taught readers how to stay with complexity. That formative struggle cannot be automated or skipped.
AI does not replace this process. It amplifies what already exists. Without grounding, engagement remains shallow. With grounding, new possibilities open.
AI as a Mirror of Intent
AI responds to posture. Casual questions invite casual answers. Serious inquiry invites depth and friction. In this sense, AI mirrors intent rather than erasing effort.
The temptation of ease is real. Accessibility can be mistaken for understanding. Speed can be confused with insight. Abundance invites superficiality when discipline is absent.
Yet AI can also sustain depth. It can hold long conversations, recall threads, surface contradictions, and connect traditions across languages. Used carefully, it slows thinking rather than accelerates it.
From Prophets to Partners
The decline of intellectual theater does not signal emptiness. It signals a change in relationship. Knowledge no longer needs prophets who deliver meaning. It needs partners who accompany inquiry.
AI fits naturally into this role. Not as an oracle, but as a companion librarian, translator, and interlocutor. It supports memory, continuity, and exploration without claiming authority.
Judgment, taste, and responsibility remain human. Partnership does not diminish agency. It clarifies it.
Relearning Motivation After the Myth
One question remains. What motivates effort when hero worship fades.
The answer may be craft. Learning becomes less about elevation and more about participation. Foundations are pursued not for status, but for clarity and conversation.
This motivation is quieter, but durable. It encourages return rather than completion. Knowledge becomes a lifelong practice rather than a monument.
Walking the Roadless Paths Together
We may be entering an age without intellectual giants towering above the landscape. Instead, many walk within it, supported by tools that extend memory and connection.
This is not decline. It is redistribution. The classics remain challenging. Effort remains necessary. Formation remains essential.
What changes is posture. Less reverence. More presence. Less prophecy. More companionship. Not giants above us. But partners beside us.
Image: Stockcake
Tom’s Blog 