In this episode of Reading the World | قراءة العالم, Ali Alhajji sits down with Dr. Sheldon Greaves to treat the “guerrilla scholar” as a figure of knowledge production—a way of thinking about what counts as knowledge, who gets to authorize it, and what changes when serious intellectual work happens outside formal academic structures.

We begin with a thesis-level prompt—define “guerrilla scholar” in one sentence—and then follow the question where it leads: legitimacy, rigor without institutional supervision, reading as a method of judgment (not just information), and the practical infrastructures that make independent learning possible.

On-record note: This conversation was recorded in both audio and video; the episode is released primarily as audio, with short video clips occasionally shared.

In this conversation, we explore:

• What the term “guerrilla scholar” is actually naming in how knowledge is organized and legitimized
• What makes intellectual work “count” outside universities—and who gets to decide
• What replaces peer review: feedback, rigor, correction, and the social life of legitimacy
• Reading as method: slow reading, interpretation, and why the core issue is judgment
• Community as infrastructure (without romanticizing isolation)
• Limits and tradeoffs: sustainability, credibility barriers, mentorship gaps, and the risk of romanticizing precarity
• A closing question designed to unsettle one assumption about learning and knowledge

Guest

Dr. Sheldon Greaves is the author of The Guerrilla Scholar’s Handbook. He earned a Ph.D. from UC Berkeley while living and working in Silicon Valley during the dot-com boom, developing an approach to intellectual life shaped by constraints, independence, and a long career doing serious work outside academia.

Reading the World | قراءة العالم — one question at a time.

Send us a text

Reading the World | قراءة العالم
A bilingual podcast (English and Arabic) exploring world literature, culture, and higher education as ways of understanding how meaning is produced, circulated, and contested.

Each episode takes one question at a time—carefully, clearly, and without oversimplification.

Follow the podcast to continue the conversation.