19 Oct 2012, 11:08 pm
Oodain
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,
20 Oct 2012, 3:31 am
20 Oct 2012, 8:18 am
20 Oct 2012, 8:59 am
20 Oct 2012, 12:37 pm
20 Oct 2012, 2:31 pm
20 Oct 2012, 3:08 pm
Fnord wrote:
Intellectual is to intellect what emotional is to emotion.
Saying that being intellectual means depending on emotions is like saying that being European means depending on Americans.
The two are just not the same.
Saying that being intellectual means depending on emotions is like saying that being European means depending on Americans.
The two are just not the same.
Nobody said they are. I just don't think they are opposite dipoles like you seem to think. Emotion is not the opposite of intellect. Stupid is the opposite of intellect.
20 Oct 2012, 3:31 pm
20 Oct 2012, 3:34 pm
marshall wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Intellectual is to intellect what emotional is to emotion.
Saying that being intellectual means depending on emotions is like saying that being European means depending on Americans.
The two are just not the same.
Saying that being intellectual means depending on emotions is like saying that being European means depending on Americans.
The two are just not the same.
Nobody said they are. I just don't think they are opposite dipoles like you seem to think. Emotion is not the opposite of intellect. Stupid is the opposite of intellect.
More lies? I have no reason to trust anything you say, unless it is back by someone else presenting valid and relevant factual evidence.
20 Oct 2012, 4:43 pm
20 Oct 2012, 4:54 pm
Fnord wrote:
marshall wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Intellectual is to intellect what emotional is to emotion.
Saying that being intellectual means depending on emotions is like saying that being European means depending on Americans.
The two are just not the same.
Saying that being intellectual means depending on emotions is like saying that being European means depending on Americans.
The two are just not the same.
Nobody said they are. I just don't think they are opposite dipoles like you seem to think. Emotion is not the opposite of intellect. Stupid is the opposite of intellect.
More lies? I have no reason to trust anything you say, unless it is back by someone else presenting valid and relevant factual evidence.
He could the say the same to you.
20 Oct 2012, 6:45 pm
20 Oct 2012, 7:38 pm
20 Oct 2012, 9:16 pm
Quote:
History is not just memorizing events, or even understanding historic processes. A degree in History does not reward only pure knowledge of the past. It's most learning a method to find out what the past is by using various types of sources.
I would add that the study of history yields a greater understanding of human nature, world cultures, and economic and political systems. By studying the past, one is better able to understand the present, and even to make educated guesses about the future. History is the story of our species, and those who pursue a greater understanding of it must surely be counted among the highest order of intellectuals.
20 Oct 2012, 10:53 pm
marshall wrote:
enrico_dandolo wrote:
"Intellectuals", as a group, are generally more opposed to "manual worker" than to "emotional people".
A poet is an intellectual.
A poet is an intellectual.
An "intellectual" is a theorist as opposed to a pragmatist. The two groups tend to have mutual contempt for each other. The former are called useless while the latter are called dull. Think pure mathematicians and philosophers vs. doctors and lawyers.
I don't know if I would say doctors are intellectuals. Very probably yes. However, lawyers certainly are, in my opinion.
Anyway. This debate is pointless. It is a battle of definitions.
YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
History is not just memorizing events, or even understanding historic processes. A degree in History does not reward only pure knowledge of the past. It's most learning a method to find out what the past is by using various types of sources.
I would add that the study of history yields a greater understanding of human nature, world cultures, and economic and political systems. By studying the past, one is better able to understand the present, and even to make educated guesses about the future. History is the story of our species, and those who pursue a greater understanding of it must surely be counted among the highest order of intellectuals.
As a history student more involved than many in the activities of my university's History department, and thus in moderately frequent contact with profesionnal historians outside the classroom, I can say that we leave most of the "greater understanding of huamn nature" to some of our dearest collegues, i.e. anthropologists, and leave the guesses about the future to the delusional. Of course, there is a certain amount of perspective to be gained out of a global knowledge of the past, and this is rather useful and appreciable intellectually speaking. However, I was talking about job perspectives, and pointing out an aspect I find important: History is not only a knowledge, it is a method.
21 Oct 2012, 10:18 am
