Intellectuals and Society
 

came across these two great articles
********townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2010/01/05/intellectuals_and_society
********townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2010/01/05/intellectuals_and_society?page=2

came across these two great articles
********townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2010/01/05/intellectuals_and_society
********townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2010/01/05/intellectuals_and_society?page=2

The Wright brothers, who fulfilled the centuries-old dream of humanbeings flying, were by no means intellectuals. Nor were those whoconquered the scourge of polio and other diseases, or who created theelectronic marvels that we now take for granted.
All these people produced a tangible product or service andthey were judged by whether those products and services worked. Butintellectuals are people whose end products are intangible ideas, andthey are usually judged by whether those ideas sound good to otherintellectuals or resonate with the public.
Whether their ideas turn out to work-- whether they make life better or worse for others-- is another question entirely.

It may seem strange that so many people of great intellect have saidand done so many things whose consequences ranged fromcounterproductive to catastrophic. Yet it is not so surprising when weconsider whether anybody has ever had the range of knowledge requiredto make the sweeping kinds of decisions that so many intellectuals areprone to make, especially when they pay no price for being wrong.
Intellectuals and their followers have often been overlyimpressed by the fact that intellectuals tend, on average, to have moreknowledge than other individuals in their society. What they haveoverlooked is that intellectuals have far less knowledge than the totalknowledge possessed by the millions of other people whom they disdainand whose decisions they seek to override.
We have had to learn the consequences of elite preemption the hard way-- and many of us have yet to learn that lesson.

What is this obsession of yours with anti-intellectualism? You don't have to answer, I already know.
An intellectual is a person who uses intelligence (thought and reason) and analytical thinking, either in a professional or a personal capacity.
Wilbur Wright finished 4 years of high school, although he never graduated, Orville dropped out after his junior year... Although this may not seem impressive by todays standards, this was quite an achievement in the 19th century, especially since in 1940 only 50% of young adults had earned a high school diploma. Furthermore, Wilbur planned on attending Yale... Both brothers were self-educated engineers.
.
Do you consider Bill Gates an intellectual? He dropped out of college. Is GW an intellectual just because he attended Harvard and Yale? What exactly is an intellectual in your book, and whats so bad about being one?

What exactly is an intellectual in your book,
the minimum qualification would be not being a moonbat..(ch)
and whats so bad about being one?
there is none..the author of the article (and he has a book on the subject too, Thomas Sowell, is an intellectual in my book...the intellectuals that contributed to the betterment of people's lives and I admire the most are probably our Founding Fathers, and their principles they founded are still working..
the intellectuals that I am very suspicious about are the ones on the left..to me many of them are pseudo-intellectuals since they fail to draw the right conclusions from history, analyze their own ideas and their consequences followed..also intellectuals are great when they do what they know best, like Bill Gates and computers..when they start worrying about the rest of humanity, lifting people from poverty, advocating what the rest of us should do..in other words, building own legacy and playing popularism..

they refuse to see that the same ideas they are using never worked..orspending billions of dollars on a study to see if a diaphragm preventsAIDS!!??..I would have told him that for half the price..
here is another good article by the same author
********article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDgzMGYyYmNmN2Y2NDFlMTdjNmI0OWExOGRiZmQ0YWM=#mo re

what a brain-dead article..
by definition intellectuals are those who think and make conclusions, some conclusion will always turn out to be right and others wrong..
making empty, unsubstantiated by facts statements in tune of "In the 1930s, it was the intellectuals who pooh-poohed the dangers from the rise of Hitler and urged Western disarmament"
don't serve any useful purpose.. the article is just a flamebait, same as this topic.

There is a difference between the "Enlightened Progressive Intellectuals" and people with intelligence.

Enlightened Progressive Intellectuals vs Braindead Regressive Pigfuckers? :)
i mean what's the opposite?