Intellectual: Largely Social Critique

Intellectual: Largely Social Critique

All thought is saturated with egocentric and sociocentric presuppositions. That is, all thought contains highly motivating bias centered in the self or in ideologies such as political, religious, and economic theories. Some individuals are conscious of these internal forces but most people are not.

Those individuals who are conscious of these biases within their thinking can try to rid their judgments of that influence. Those who are not conscious, or little conscious of such bias, are bound to display a significant degree of irrational tendencies in their judgments.

“Can the intellectual, who is supposed to have a special and perhaps professional concern with truth, escape from or rise above the partiality and distortions of ideology?”

Our culture has tended to channel intellectuals, or perhaps more properly those who function as intellectuals, into academic professions. Gramsci makes the accurate distinction that all men and women “are intellectuals…but all do not have the function of intellectuals in society”.

An intellectual might be properly defined as those who are primarily or professionally concerned with matters of the mind and the imagination but who are socially non-attached. “The intellectual is thought of not as someone who displays great mental or imaginative ability but as someone who applies those abilities in more general areas such as religion, philosophy and social and political issues. It is the involvement in general and controversy outside of a specialization that is considered as the hallmark of an intellectual; it is a matter of choice of self definition, choice is supreme here.”

Even anti-ideological is ideological. If partisanship can be defended servility cannot; many have allowed themselves to become the tools of others.

We have moved into an age when the university is no longer an ivory tower and knowledge is king but knowledge has become a commodity and educators have become instruments of power; the university has become a privately owned think-tank.

“A profound change in the intellectual community itself is inherent in this development. The largely humanist-oriented, occasionally ideological minded intellectual dissenter , who saw his role largely in terms of proffering social critiques, is rapidly being displaced either by experts and specialist, who become involved in special government undertakings, or by generalist-integrators, who become house-ideologues for those in power, providing overall intellectual integration for disparate actions.”

The subordination to power is not just at the individual level but also at the institutional level. Government funds are made available to universities and colleges not for use as they deem fit but for specific government needs. Private industry plays even a larger role in providing funds for educational institutions to perform management and business study. Private industry is not inclined ‘to waste’ money on activities that do not contribute to the bottom line. ‘He who pays the piper calls the tune.’

Each intellectual is spouting a different ideology, how does the individual choose what ideology? Trotsky once said “only a participant can be a profound spectator”. Is detachment then a virtue? To suggest that intellectuals rise above ideology is impractical. Explicit commitment is preferable to bogus neutrality. But truth is an indispensable touchstone.

I think that the proper role for the intellectual is commitment plus detachment. Do you think many of our present day intellectuals qualify as committed and detached?

Quotes and ideas from “Knowledge and Belief in Politics” Bhikhu Parekh

Well, I have solved the problem about comprehending so many “intellectuals” altogether.

I simply ask one question, one question that will tell me if they are even capable of thinking in truth.

Why can one or more words be predicated of another?

Sounds simple, but when you go up on the net you will find a lot of thoeries written by experts in the field of grammar who, it seems cannot agree on an answer. They are still trying to figure out the simple sentence.

Well, the answer is so simple, but until it it is answered, is there hope of knowing how words can and cannot be added together to produce thought that is true to reality? I don’t think so.

So, I would say, that finding an intellectual might not be as easy as you imagine.

Kind of reminds you of a man who goes out and buys a very nice motor home for a trip, and wonders why it wont move. Anybody add gas?–never enters his mind. But he has gotten into the habit of sitting behind the wheel thinking he is indeed moving. Wonder state of affairs.

When it comes to reasoning, then man is truly green, he just don’t see the light.

It seems to me that one thinks that intellectuals are somehow not responsible for the condition the world is in. What a strange hypothesis.

intellectuals are supposed to create change, shape ideas, within a society, how can you change a society while being detached from it?

neutrality doesn’t create change.

philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it. - karl marx

In the many thousand years of our species what exactly has changed?

The suffering, conflict and animosity towards ourselves looks the same as it did in our ancient past.

what has changed?

social conditions?

science revolution?

industrial revolution?

all the thanks to intellectuals…

better guns

-Imp

I see what your saying, and there is truth if looked at through that angle of looking at it. But i agree with equilibrium, All those things you mentioned are really like a mask to whats been cycling underneath, suffering arises from attachment to these things, sure the social conditions have changed, when we were cavemen they would fight other tribes for territory and food, fight each other for social rank and position. Its the same now, just evolved, we could still say the majority, but not all, house fear, suffer daily, are selfish, foster hatred. Lets imagine that a individual thinks that the science revolution really could improve the qaulity of his/her life. So begins studying all the science thats around, at first they may be filled with vigor and excitement, feeling re-newed in there newest outlook, slowly though nothing brings them “a constant state of well being” they still experince the ups and downs of life, no matter what new knowledge they obtain, they still suffer. Times may change, themes may change, but the undercurrent has always been very simmilar. If you dont see that, maybe you havent looked sincerely enough, or havent had a reason to look in that direction yet?

“There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come.”
– Victor Hugo