Does Lamenting Society's Evils Make the World Better?

Come join us for an informal philosophical discussion. No prior knowledge or research is required, but an open mind is.

• In his famous Apology, Socrates compares himself to a gadfly sent (by the gods!) to sting a large but sluggish horse so that it would rouse from its slumber. He believed that by questioning the citizens of Athens and exposing their pretensions, he was performing a public service. Athenians weren't convinced and executed him nonetheless.
• Society likely does need people who loudly identify its injustices, hypocrisies, and collective delusions. Before a problem can become the object of political action, someone must describe it and persuade others that it matters. However, social criticism has always attracted suspicion. Critics are often accused of acting in bad faith: perhaps they do not really want improvement, but simply enjoy sneering at their neighbors, displaying their own moral superiority, or belonging to the enlightened minority.
• Even the most sincere criticism may become counterproductive. Public denunciation can create an illusion of action: everyone argues, condemns, and feels morally engaged, while nothing changes in practice. All the steam goes into the whistle. Even worse, the loudest framing of a problem may divide people who could otherwise cooperate on practical solutions.
• Then how should we distinguish a necessary gadfly from an unproductive scold?

Optional Discussion Questions:

• Is criticism still valuable when it proposes no solution?
• How can we tell moral courage from moral vanity?
• What are some problems that are discussed too much and acted upon too little?
• Does a public critic have an obligation to practice what he preaches? And what does it even mean to "practice what you preach" when we are talking about the injustices and inefficiencies of society?
• Would Socrates have deserved even more admiration if, in addition to his intellectual achievements, he had also been politically effective?