Intellectual

An intellectual is a person who uses his or her intellect to study, reflect, or speculate on a variety of different ideas. == Men of letters== The expression ''man of letters'' stood in many cultures for what we might take to be the contemporary intellectual; the distinction not having great weight when literacy was not fairly universal (and, incidentally, not assumed of a woman). ''Men of letters'' are also termed ''literati'' (from the Latin), as a group; ''literatus'', in the singular, is rarely used in English language. == The clerisy and the intelligentsia == Samuel Taylor Coleridge speculated early in the nineteenth century on the concept of the ''clerisy'', a class rather than a type of individual, and a secular equivalent of the (Anglican) clergy, with a duty of upholding (national) culture. The idea of the intelligentsia, in comparison, dates from roughly the same time, and is based more concretely on the status class of 'mental' or white-collar workers. == Modes of 'intellectual class' == From that time onwards, in Europe and elsewhere, some variants of the idea of an intellectual class have been important (not least to intellectuals, self-styled). The degrees of actual involvement in art, or politics, journalism and education, of nationalist or internationalism (politics) or ethnic sentiment, constituting the 'vocation' of an intellectual, have never become fixed. Some intellectuals have been vehemently anti-academic; at times universities and their faculties have been synonymous with intellectualism, but in other periods and some places the centre of gravity of intellectual life has been elsewhere. One can notice a sharpening of terms, in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Just as the coinage scientist would come to mean a professional, the ''man of letters'' would more often be assumed to be a professional writer, perhaps having the breadth of a journalist or essayist, but not necessarily with the ''engagement'' of the intellectual. The Dreyfus affair in France at the end of the nineteenth century is often indicated as the time of full emergence of the ''intellectual in public life''; particularly as concerns the role of �mile Zola in speaking directly on the matter. In fact the term ''intellectual'' as we now have it became better known, from that time (and the derogatory implication sometimes attached). The use of the term as a noun in French language has been attributed to Georges Clemenceau in 1898. == Intellectualism == Strictly a doctrine about the possibility of deriving knowledge from reason alone, ''intellectualism'' can stand for a general approach emphasising the importance of learning and logical thinking. Criticism of this attitude, sometimes summed up as ''Left Bank'', caricatures intellectualism's faith in the mind and puts it in opposition to emotion, instinct, and primitivist values in general. == Academics and public intellectuals == In some contexts, especially journalism, ''intellectual'' refers to academics, generally in the humanities, especially philosophy, who speak about various issues of social or political import. These are so-called ''public intellectuals'' — in effect communicators. The term masks an assumption or several, in particular on academia, for example that intellectual work goes on generally in private, and there is a gap to society that requires bridging. The German poet Stefan George is an example of an intellectual who rejected and despised both the academic and too public roles for an artist, and yet was highly influential. == Outside the West == In ancient China ''literati'' referred to the government officials who formed the ruling class in China for over two thousand years. They were a status group of educated laymen, not ordained priests. They were not a hereditary group as their position depended on their knowledge of writing and literature. After 200 B.C. the system of selection of candidates was influenced by Confucianism and established its ethic among the literati. The Hundred Flowers Campaign in China was largely based on the government's wish for a mobilisation of intellectuals; with very sour consequences later. This is perhaps typical of a state's instrumental approach to an intellectual class. == Related articles == *Academia *Academic *Anti-intellectualism *Hundred Schools of Thought *Independent scholar *La trahison des clercs *Philistinism *School of Literati == See also == *Intellectual history *Intellectual honesty *Intellectual property *Intellectual rigor *Intellectual virtues == References == * de Huszar, George B., ed. ''The Intellectuals: A Controversial Portrait''. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1960. (Anthology with many contributors.) *Paul M. Johnson, ''Intellectuals''. Perennial, 1990, ISBN 0060916575. A highly ideological onslaught discussing Rousseau, Shelley, Marx, Ibsen, Tolstoy, Hemingway, Bertrand Russell, Brecht, Sartre, Edmund Wilson, Victor Gollancz, Lillian Hellman, Cyril Connolly, Norman Mailer, James Baldwin (writer), Kenneth Tynan, Noam Chomsky, and others == External links == *[http://www.religiousbook.net/Books/Online_books/Jt/Jesus_Teaching_13.html Intellectual Self-Perfection] - spiritual view Academia

Intellectual

I feel lists of intellectuals are arbitary and should not be included. :The list is of ''public'' intellectuals; it is rather easier to judge who belongs on a list such as that, at least for recent times. Of course the current list could easily be improved. Should ''no'' examples of intellectuals be mentioned? User:Charles Matthews 14:11, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC) On this issue: someone wrote :''The following list is extremely biased to the far-left''. Well, it might be biased to the left. Do we need to 'balance' the list? To add a discussion of why self-identified intellectuals have often been on the left? To amplify the discussion as to why 'intellectual' was (in the wake of the Dreyfus affair) a derogatory term applied to the left from the right? To give up on listing intellectuals in this way? To start identifying conservative intellectuals who would agree to the term? User:Charles Matthews 09:54, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC) The list has gone - and the article is better for that. User:Charles Matthews 21:59, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Anti-intellectualism == This explanation of intellectualism committed the common fallacy that the use of the mind is naturally antagonistic to the use of the heart. In fact, intellectualism is not the same as attempting to be a robot-- the term merely refers a lifestyle dedicated to knowledge, learning and critical thinking.

See other meanings of words starting from letter:

I