Is an intellectual always intelligent?
Is an intelligent person necessarily an intellectual?
Anyway, many years ago I had a job in a sandblasting company, and I was very good at it. It was a small company, and the staff and leaders were a cool and eclectic mix. Later I got a job at another company, which had a different kind of staff: these were working class not only in name, but also in mind. And there I had a hard time getting along with the others, and I didn't know why.
Fortunately it was explained to me by one of the guys who was aggressively working class in mind, but much more well-read than is typical for workers. He explained to me that the airs I had that I was good was not Okay in a place like that, because it's "like kicking a man when he's down" (somehow that made sense at the time).
He also told me that when I once had called him an intellectual, that was a big insult to him, because his knowledge belonged to everybody, and to him, an intellectual was a self-appointed superior asshole who thought he was better than others, or words to that effect.
Update: it seems I have to spell this out, which surprises me... I don't agree with that definition of "intellectual". To me, an intellectual is simply a person who likes to read and likes to think. And this means by definition anybody who follows this blog, for instance, is an intellectual.
It also means that anybody in history who made an invention or had a thought which advanced technology and thus civilization, is an intellectual. Without intellectuals, we would still be in the middle ages. Or rather, the stone age. Or maybe that's even overdoing it, since even the invention of stone tools would have taken an intellectual for the time.
29 comments:
I think there is no precise generally true definition of the word "intellectual". It depends who says it, where, it is contextual. If there is a problematic issue about it, even more. (what is the meaning of the words : resistant, terrorist, war ?) So it is much more interesting to describe a situation in context, where some words can convey some specific meaning (like the situation you described).
So I guess speculating about the general meaning of a word does not help in understanding a real situation. Trying to understand what it means for a specific person at a certain time, in a certain situation is helpful.
I try to make an analogy, as I see it:
Being "intellectual" is a perversion of being "intelligent".
With "perversion" I mean the situation, where one single instrument of a whole symphony orchestra is playing very loud and without any knowing of the score, regardless of the consequences, selfish. Convinced to be the greatest and trying to convince the others, drowning out them. Ego, without roots in the whole.
There is nothing wrong with that instrument itself, but "intelligence" means, all instruments of the whole orchestra are playing together in a harmonic and loving way, creating a beautiful music which ascends out of silence and dissolves again into it - so, connecting you also with your roots in nothingness, with the universe ...
In the same way, I see being "sophistical" as a perversion of being "wise" (I hope these words have the same meaning as in German).
And in the same way I see "perversion" in the sexual context.
Think about it - a bit sketchy, but its late, and I'm going to sleep now ...
Is an intellectual always intelligent?
Is an intelligent personal necessarily an intellectual?
Duh!
-----
Well said, Neeraj. In my view, there's no single pleasure greater than meeting a truly intelligent person who doesn't know or care about the word "intellectual".
That's speaking of the mind, of course, 'cause sex ain't bad either. ;-)
Really well said, Neeraj ! :-)
Accurate and artistic definition, and it's usually difficult to do both at the same time. Maybe it helps to be tired ?
With all respect, I'm not sure where Neeraj is coming from here. A good definition of intellectual is: "An intellectual (from the adjective meaning "involving thought and reason") is a person who tries to use his or her intelligence and analytical thinking, either in their profession or for the benefit of personal pursuits."
Another one is: "A man who is devoted to literary or scholarly pursuits." Both seems benevolent to me, and not a perversion of intelligence. Just for one thing we wouldn't have any technology without intellectuals.
(I've updated the post.)
:-)
"An intellectual (from the adjective meaning "involving thought and reason") is a person who tries to use his or her intelligence and analytical thinking, either in their profession or for the benefit of personal pursuits."
This is a possible definition, though in my understanding the standard use of the word refers more to somebody professional.
But a word is a container, crystallizing thoughts. Having spent quite a few years of my life in university areas, Neeraj's definition speaks to me. Many teachers and colleagues I had who had power, status and who were deeply identifying themselves with their being intellectuals, were having protuberant egos and were lacking basic capacities of empathy and social communication. They were also cast-like.
Reading Neeraj made me see them using and using too much very few of the chords of the instruments given to them.
(Of course, if we take the definition intellectual = "somebody using his intelligence", then ok, everybody is intellectual if not too stupid. But then there is nothing to say or to blog about it.) :-)
I've not been to university, but you're not alone in saying things like this, so these I'm happy I didn't go.
I think though that painting all intellectuals with that brush is like saying an athlete means a stupid misogynist, just because a few athletes are stupid and misogynistic.
I should defend university. :-) It is an amazing opportunity to do what you want to do, if you have determination. And there are a lot of nice people. But also not nice ones, and those usually present the same kind of "pathology".
I do think there are more social forces that lead professional intellectuals to become arrogant than athletes to be misogynic. Arrogance can help to keep a position, or just to sound more convincing. It is not a random behavior, it can be useful to build a career.
But we all have our own perception of social life, of the meaning of the words, according to our personal experiences and history. A wide correlation study could show if there is a higher intellectual/arrogance correlation than athlete/misogyny. I would guess there is, but I have no proof... :-)
I searched the word "intellectual" in the Spanish dictionary (allow me this little license) and it is an adjective (not a noun) defined as "preferably dedicated to cultivate science and language". It doesn't even include arts or philosophy, so I don't like that definition. :-)
To me an intellectual is someone who has a desire and a curiosity to learn and understand, and follows that desire/curiosity, so the intellectual has probably acumulated some knoweledge by now.
And I think "intellectual" does not equal "intelligent" nor "snob".
'Tis a though discussion, and perhaps we would have been wise to follow Aniko's initial advice and leave it at that.
In English, connotations often take precedence over the dictionary, and I think that's the source of the disagreement here.
Surely so.
But I'm not one to let go.
I think that the fact (vaguely remembered) that Mao The Dong murdered 30,000 of them, means intellectuals are good people.
By the way, I didn't post this to get an accurate definition, I could dig that up myself. I posted it just to get a discussion like this.
By the way, I didn't post this to get an accurate definition, I could dig that up myself. I posted it just to get a discussion like this.
Well, if it's a fight you lookin' for, ya've got one!
No, seriously, you have to expect an epidermic reaction from many people if you insist on using the word "intellectual" in a context like that of your original question.
Sure, if you ask me if I'm one of the sports type or the intellectual type, I'll go for the latter.
But, just like Aniko, I too have met too many imbeciles who confuse their pedantism for intellectuality and have thus perverted the use of the word into something I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with.
captcha: reform (no shit!)
Well, I guess you better reform then.
Well, I've been pretty disassociated from university circles, so I didn't know.
(By the way, "epidermic"? Relating to skin?)
I was just inspired because one luminary had called _A Course In Miracles_ "spirituality for intellectuals", and another one had called it "spirituality for very intelligent people", and I briefly wondered about the difference, and then thought that it would probably gather some interesting comments, and it did. I'm so smart.
The expression "epidermic reaction" sounded right in the context.
Outside a medical context, it usually refers to an immediate, impulsive, uncontrollable reaction to an idea, a comment, etc. The mental equivalent of how your skin shrivels when you find yourself facing something horrible or disgusting. The kind of reaction I know I would have had if Dubya had found a way to stick around for a third term.
"In English, connotations often take precedence over the dictionary, and I think that's the source of the disagreement here."
In any language, dictionaries are always late. A language is something alive and evolving. Dictionaries get updated from time to time to catch up.
Dictionaries are really useful to learn a language, to look up an unknown word. But for things that matter, one should not rely blindly on them. They are like word museums.
I like the "museum of words" image. Yet, I still believe that strong connotations, and even entire conversations built on double-entendres, are much more central to the English culture than any other I've come in contact with.
Aniko: gawd, you're smart, girl. Don't marry anybody but me, OK? (I'm only half joking.)
I was just inspired because one luminary had called _A Course In Miracles_ "spirituality for intellectuals", and another one had called it "spirituality for very intelligent people",
That's an...interesting point of view.
In any language, dictionaries are always late.
Really? I think the OED is updated freqently. They have a policy of never removing any words, though, so they might be a bit cautious sometimes about what they add.
But for things that matter, one should not rely blindly on them.
Like the Guinness Book of Records they're useful for settling arguments because they have more precise definitions than most people could come up with on their own. (Look how much work went into Johnson's dictionary.) If we rely instead on any Joe Sixpack's definition, and believe it to be superior for no justified reason, we're in real trouble. Democracy run amok has led to the idea that no man's opinion is superior or inferior to anyone else's, and the expert is distrusted and ridiculed.
The word verification I got this time is "commi." I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Communist Party!
gawd, you're smart, girl.
It's funny how this kind of judgement, about anyone, is usually dependant on whether the person making it is in agreement with the person about whom the judgement is made. If you don't buckle under and conform and follow the Code of the School Yard and spout the opinions established by the consensus of the group - you'll never get anyone saying this about you.
That's possibly true. Normally.
For me I don't say it often. I say it when somebody gives me insights I wouldn't have come up with by myself, and that really doesn't happen every day. And Aniko may be doing it more often than any one of the rest of you blighters. :-)
Oh, well - I didn't expect, that this issue provokes so many postings ... seems a challenging one.
BTW thanks for some compliments.
@Aniko: Yes, sometimes it helps to be tired (of course not too much) in order to "release the tiller" and to come into some alignment with the flow of the universe ... but mostly I prefer to meditate or to play my guitar as a better way;-)
Not to be misunderstood: I like my intellect very much, taking care of it, refining it, exercising it ... and at the same time looking at it from some outside point of view, wondering and exploring how it works (beside other realms of my life I'm a scientist). Its a great tool, a gift from existence, and I try to make as good use of it as far as I can understand.
But it is a TOOL, and you may use it good or bad. Like a sharp knife, which you may use for some surgery in order to heal, or you may kill someone else or yourself. And if you use it too much, maybe as the only tool, then something is essentially wrong ... for example, the legs are tools for walking, but if you sit or lie down, and your legs are still doing walking movements, then you are simply mad. The same with the intellect - there are many situations in life, where the intellect must not be the boss because of lacking competence. At least thats my view.
Intellect is a tool to solve a certain kind of problems, but:
"Life is not a problem to be solved,
Life is a mystery to be lived."
(Osho)
As Paracelsus expresses it: "Dosis facit venenum" (dose makes poison). Overdosing means poisoning your life. I see it very often.
Or remember the saying: "If a hammer is the only tool you have, then every problem in your life will take the shape of a nail for you..." (quoted as I remember)
And yes, in German the word "intellectual" has gained more or less the connotation of "overdosing the intellect", at least as far as I have come to know it ... I'm reminded on a song from Reinhard Mey in the seventies:
"Annabelle, ach Annabelle,
du bist so herrlich intellektuell ..."
describing an "intellectual woman" ironically, but also in a loving way, with a wink of the eye.
Okay, again its a bit late - even if I could go on and on ... Good Night everybody ...
P.S.: Captcha "masteri" - WTF?
So nice to come here at half past one in the morning, and to see compliments for me, and discussion about it... Really nice... !!! :-)
I am fighting with a text I have to write (yes, I am an intellectual), trying to convince myself that it will be smart enough, but not really succeeding in convincing myself... And I get just the right compliment. Thank you so much !
Joe, I can feel some jealousy :
"If you don't buckle under and conform and follow the Code of the School Yard and spout the opinions established by the consensus of the group - you'll never get anyone saying this about you."
Actually your jealousy makes you think I was agreeing with Eolake. If you read back, I really wasn't. From the beginning I was stating that a general question is not really relevant. And then disagreement went on... :-)
Makes me wonder: did you have any matrimonial plans with Eolake? :-)
Actually the "word museum" is also a new insight for me, and I really like it too! It came at the end of the paragraph, as I was looking for an image to make my idea clear. Without all this conversation, I would never have though of it in these terms. So it could be considered as partly collective creation. Thank you all ! :-)
Neeraj, I too find that I most easily "release the tiller" when I'm in bed half asleep.
----
Aniko, I did suspect that you yourself came up with Word Museum. For me it's almost up there with Mike Johnston's coined expression "safely edgy", for what galleries are doing.
"Word Museum" is pushing the issue a little, but it's a nice antidote to the idea that dictionaries is the real force of language. They may be an authority and rightly so, but like you say, they come *after* language is developed by the people, and they keep changing after language changes.
For Bert:
"I like the "museum of words" image. Yet, I still believe that strong connotations, and even entire conversations built on double-entendres, are much more central to the English culture than any other I've come in contact with."
Interesting! What cultures and languages are you familiar with?
Bert :"I too have met too many imbeciles who confuse their pedantism for intellectuality and have thus perverted the use of the word into something I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with.
captcha: reform (no shit!)"
eolake said...
Well, I guess you better reform then."
I agree! It is time to reform human nature!
Take a needle to treat the overinflated ego !!! :-)
And the ego screams:
Helpfffffffffff.... ;-)
:-)
I too have met too many imbeciles who confuse their pedantism for intellectuality and have thus perverted the use of the word
Naturally no one thinks of himself as being in the category of the unintelligent pedant. It's always other people who fall into that category! ;-)
Post a Comment