ARE YOU AN INTELLECTUAL? Why not?

by Terry 102 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  BurnTheShips

  I suggest also that intellectuals are just as adept at self-deception.

  "What the intellectual craves above all else is to be taken seriously, to be treated as a decisive force in shaping history. He is far more at home in a society that weighs his every word and keeps close watch on his attitudes than in a society that cares not what he says or does. He would rather be persecuted than ignored."

  "One of the surprising privileges of intellectuals is that they are free to be scandalously asinine without harming their reputations."

  Eric Hoffer

  This should be required reading for every X-dub:

  http://www.amazon.com/True-Believer-Thoughts-Nature-Movements/dp/0060916125
• 

  Open mind

  Well, Terry, let's have a go at this I guess.

  I could certainly use the debating practice if you'll humor me.

  Terry:

  why wouldn't an Objectivist parent take care of their own child?

  They would. But they can't afford the astronomical costs involved in this particular situation.

  Ayn Rand:

  "If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject."

  One of the biggest problems I have with Objectivism is this: Any sort of social safety net provided by a government, funded by a tax on all of society, is morally wrong. Period. No exceptions. (At least none that I can ever remember reading.)

  On the surface, "Everyone must pull their own weight" sounds good. And I agree with that up to a point. But I don't recall ever reading any sort of limit to this idea in Rand's work. Once again, I invoke the heart-string-pulling example of the disabled child whose parent's CANNOT AFFORD to provide sufficient medical care for the child to reach adulthood.

  If I read Ayn Rand correctly, that's just tough luck for that family. If the parents can't afford it, then the child will die. Society as a whole should not feel obliged to lift a finger to help. The child has a "need" that is most likely larger than he or his parents will ever be able to repay. Therefore, let him die.

  Am I mis-reading Rand here?

  om
• 

  Dagney

  "What the intellectual craves above all else is to be taken seriously, to be treated as a decisive force in shaping history. He is far more at home in a society that weighs his every word and keeps close watch on his attitudes than in a society that cares not what he says or does. He would rather be persecuted than ignored."

  Like this quote. (Thinking "Oh dear, do I need to add another book to my required reading list?")
• 

  Rapunzel

  "It is a bit more accurate to say, 'I exist, therefore I think.' than the other way around.

  Descartes wasn't checking his watch when he made his statement."

  This is confusing Descartes with Sartre. The fundamental premise that existence precedes essence was Sartre's. Descartes' axiom of the cogito resulted from his method of radical doubt. For him, the cogito axiom was the one thing against which he could raise no doubt whatsoever. It was the one thing that he could be absolutely sure of. It was the "cornerstone" upon which he formulated the rest of his philosophy in its entirety.

  It was Sartre who based his philosophy on existence, as opposed to the traditional "essence."
• 

  Terry

  I see you set aside my challenge that it is not only the intellectual that suffers from the Watchtower policies. People who excel in kindness similarly suffer. You are also silent on the matter of the honest intellectual, willing to brutally self-examine. I'll assume you do not protest these.

  You might misunderstand my interest in starting this thread.

  I don't seek to establish a monolithic and arbitrary standard you must adhere to as to what an Intellectual (genuine or not) MUST be. I'm offering my views which stem from the things I've read that I tend to agree with.

  For me, the process of give and take isn't nearly as interesting as whether the ideas presented actually work; the practical aspect.

  I've only encountered two kinds of people I'd call "intellectual" in my 61 years on planet Earth. There may be many other kinds. But, for me, there are those who live a life of the mind because their nature is such they really can't do otherwise.

  Then, there are those who use ideas as weapons of power. They like to argue, bully, power trip and control and use factoids and rhetoric to beat down any other views.

  For me, a genuine intellectual is all about the reality of knowledge and its practical applications that make life much improved.
• 

  Witness 007

  Me big smarts, very brain big...you all dumb dumb....me thinks all time, things. Me go now!
• 

  Witness 007

  The beggining of wisdom is humility.
• 

  Witness 007

  No I'm intellsexsual....
• 

  Terry

  A genuine anything matches its identity to its description.

  But you provided your own definition that, as others have pointed out, does not match those that are generally accepted.

  That's okay with me!

  I am strongly suggesting that an intellectual may follow impractical lines of thought for the sheer pleasure of discovery, and still be genuine. A pure intellectual does not have to be practical, or improve life. I think you are trying to combine two distinct lines of reasoning, that are not interdependent.

  Okay. But, I personally disagree. The image of King Midas comes to mind or a hoarder of any kind. A compulsive sort of gathering process which is an end in itself. For my tastes, everything which is not useful, practical or ultimately part of an unfolding purpose is just masturbation for sensation. To each his own, however.

  I suggest that many Jehovah's Witnesses are caught in a cognitive loop. They are convinced the source is infallible and therefore must be followed without question. To question the "infallible" source causes great discomfort, becuase the implication is that their entire philosophical foundation is flawed. It is much more logical to assume that they are somehow imperfectly following the instructions. So they try harder.

  You've made a very valuable observation here!

  The anti-intellectuality of being a Jehovah's Witness makes obedience the end purpose of existence. The individual is destroyed as to value, worth or standing. You must regard yourself (even as a nominal christian) as a WRETCH!

  Once you devalue humanity the intellect dies. You cannot trust your own cognitive powers!

  I've often said on many threads that the first line of defense is the burglar alarm of rationality and non-contradiction.

  If a religion can disarm your reliance on rationality they can break in to your mind like a virus and take over your life!!

  It all starts with devaluation of your confidence in your own rationality!
• 

  knock knock

  You didn't mean a sexual intellectual did you? Because in the real world that just means a f'n idiot.
  
  Words is words in the words of Keith Richards and unfortunately I took those words to heart ages ago so I put myself at a distinct disadvantage in this world and never really learned much. But it seems to me that a true intellectual tries to better their audience rather than belittle which is what so many do in trying to show their smarts. Too damn much yammerin' about.