As coined by comedian Stephen Colbert, the word “truthiness” sheds light on how individuals are using their guts, hearts, and emotions to think, rather than with proper logic. This directly relates to Latour’s “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern” in the sense that there is a war going on within the intellectual community about how critique has lost its touch. A close examination of this text supports the idea that people need to move away from believing what they perceive to be the truth from their ideological bias towards accepting the absolute truth that is supported with legitimate evidence. Ignorant mindsets can hurt the scientific community by diminishing the value of the truth, making the need for the absolute truth immensely important. 

I, like Latour and many others, fear that the lack of authentic criticism is threatening the human race’s survival and ability to distinguish between the scientific truth and the fabricated truth. Latour begins his argument with an excerpt from the New York Times that states scientists are gaining new evidence of the issue of global warming, and how a Republican strategist manipulates people to believe in what he wants them to believe in, not the actual truth. He says, “Yet entire Ph.D. programs are still running to make sure that good American kids are learning the hard way that facts are made up; that there is no such thing as natural, unmediated, unbiased access to truth; that we are always the prisoner of language; that we always speak from one standpoint; et cetera, while dangerous extremists are using the very same argument of 'social construction' to destroy hard-won evidence that could save our life” (Latour 227). It is difficult for many people to accept that global warming is a real, impending threat to civilization because it does not align with their belief system. Many scholars believe that critical thinking and the intellectual community have become seized by the conservatives, causing a great threat to the planet. People are blindly accepting any information they hear, without questioning the source or accuracy. This type of thinking is a direct result of students being taught to neglect traditional critical thinking, making kids accept  the “facts” that are presented to them, rather than challenging. Latour argues that the American education system is training students to believe that everything has two sides and there is no possible way to acquire unbiased truth.  It is important that humanity removes themselves from thinking what they feel to be true, but rather believing in what is actually true. 

Secondly, Latour mentions the upcoming issue of ridiculous conspiracy theories in reaction to the deconstruction of society. Conspiracy theories stem from ideological bias, and conspiracists are dismissing concrete evidence to support these theories every day. People who choose to believe in conspiracy theories are choosing to blatantly ignore the facts, and this ignorant approach is typically fueled by emotions and “thinking” with the heart. He reflects upon the switch in roles between professors/intellectuals and uneducated people. Now, educated people are being looked down upon and out casted due to their belief in scientific certainty and evidence. Over the years, critique has lessened in value as a result of the wild conspiracy theories that are aimlessly being supported. I worry that mankind has lost its ability to critique, causing a “one step forward, two steps back” effect to take place. Instead, the role of the critic should be one who “offers the participants arenas to gather” (Latour 246). Focusing on a new direction for critique is important because an issue cannot be properly fixed without a solution or a step towards a better future. Humans have become lazy when it comes to questioning new ideas and are eager to refute evidence when it does comply with their beliefs. Science and nature should be presented how it is precisely, in its natural occurrence without outside influence.

Overall, I think it is imperative to emphasize the importance of moving away from the wrong path we have begun to travel down: a path where ideological bias is more influential than solid evidence. If the purpose of critique is not changed quickly, this new era of thinking with bias will ruin everything that the science academia has built itself upon. Scientific facts are now being manipulated to align with political or religious ideologies, proving this type of thinking to be selfish and unjustified. Political figures have abused the real meaning of “fact” to deceive their followers. The altering of scientific research to fit in with one’s individual ideology is detrimental to the scientific community as a whole and how we perceive information. It is not a choice to accept whether a scientific certainty is true if there is confirming evidence to support it, and it is wrong for people to “pick and choose” only the facts that align with their beliefs. 

Now that the truth about the downfall of critique has been brought to attention, it is of great significance that the future moves towards a new, positive critique in which new ideas are generated and great minds begin to work together logically and brilliantly. The gap between “objects” and “things” has expanded, and Latour urges people to start looking at the “thing” as a matter of concern, rather than a matter of fact. Latour criticizes himself because he fears that many of his very own critical ideas are being used against science to fit a faction’s agenda. The field of science studies is in desperate need of repair due to the discrepancies and double standards within it and for this reason, it is important that we restore critique before it is too late.
