Category: Student Posts

It is important to consider intellectuals in an analytic lens that is not their own. Studying intellectuals in the way they study other subjects will help to eliminate potential bias. This is beneficial as what they consider to be “true” and the reality of what is true can be discovered. If intellectuals were only considered in a lens that is their own, we would only learn what they believe and want us to know. Approaching intellectuals with an outside perspective can allow for a critical examination. In this lens, asking questions and disagreeing with opinions creates discussion. Furthermore, taking this position allows us to gain a deeper understanding of intellectuals and the community they build. Posing questions also heightens curiosity. Additionally a benefit of studying intellectuals in the same way they study other subjects is that there are now multiple facets in which to study. If viewing them within the same lens, only that intellectual’s way of thinking and devoting to finding the truth would be studied. It will be difficult to determine what is “truth” vs what is opinion if we did not consider intellectuals in a lens that was not their own. Studying intellectuals in a traditional way of studying allows us to learn about the truth in a way that is diverse.

I am fascinated by the content of this course because the material is unlike any other subject that I have studied. I do not tend to critically analyze “Truth” in people. The majority of my classes are STEM based, therefore I am analyzing data sets based on validity from prior knowledge. I am excited to learn more about how to come about finding the “Truth” in an approach that is similar to the way I learn about other subjects, but with material that is out of my comfort zone. This course will challenge the way I think, which is important to grow and learn. Thinking critically about intellectuals will also make me think critically about myself. I will reflect upon what I hold to be “true” and what are just strongly held beliefs based on what I value. I think too often, we do not stop to challenge the truth because now there is so much information readily available, that one can find a source to support their truth. Therefore, I am excited to learn about how to devote your life to finding the “sacred object” of “Truth” and how it will shape my learning about the world around me. 

This week we are starting to learn about intellectuals as a social class. Mainly, we are defining intellectuals as people who “produce decontextualized ideas.” So everyone can produce ideas. In fact, people probably produce their own ideas all the time. But what separates the layman from the intellectuals is that the intellectuals produce ideas that are decontextualized – ideas that are ought to hold true in various contexts. A contextualized idea might be “I am feeling hungry” or “I am tired because of the amount of work I have.” But a decontextualized idea can be “humans feel hungry when they need to eat food and intake energy” or “people often feel more tired and stressed when they have workload that exceeds what they are used to, thus leading to lower productivity,” like what we see in psychology research. So a mathematician can be an intellectual; scientists can be intellectuals. But we should also note that musicians and artists can also be intellectuals, as the work they produce can also be said to be decontextualized. Moreover, we can also categorize people like philosophers or people who seek to influence the society by producing decontextualized ideas as intellectuals.

As intellectuals, knowledge and ideas are like sacred objects to them, similar to religious systems. Prof. Riley also mentioned at class how excited he and his friends were to see Pierre Bourdieu. To them, Bourdieu is like both a sacred object and a saint in their field.

In Collin’s Coalitions in the Mind, we see how the interactions between intellectuals fall under Goffman’s Interaction Rituals, since intellectuals often interact with each other in such a way that they are seriously discussing topics of interest and engaged with each other deeply. Thus, for each “group” of intellectuals, they would also have their own sacred object.    In Gouldner’s The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class, we learned about how the intellectuals started to rise as a new class in the 20th century. First, intellectuals started to become secularized, so they are more involved in the general populations’ lives, instead of what historically had been a church-centered society. Inside this new class, it is split between humanitarian intellectuals and technocrat intelligentsia.

After reading the introductory readings to this course and learning how the intellectual class came into existence it is clear that they do occupy a certain niche in our society different from any other. This in itself is important for close consideration and research into what makes them tick. As Collins, indicates “truth” is the sacred object to the intellectual class as “art” is for artistic communities. “Truth” is a commonly used word thrown around in our society as of recently and can be analogous to other words often used in the media, such as “facts” or “legitimacy”. Today with new viruses, scientific discoveries and political uncertainty/corruption constantly in the media is difficult to decipher what is true and what is false; what in information is being skewed to deceive the public and which is not. It is especially important to put intellectuals under a critical lens to learn the inner workings of their society. What in particular drives them and what do they hold valuable. This is no different than studying different religions or different political parties, they all have certain characteristics, rituals and customs that define them and differentiate them from other classes.

I hope that in this course we delve deep into the meaning of truth and what kind of truth the intellectuals hold so captive. Truth can be relative and can be clouded when influenced by peers or society as a whole. As Professor Riley brought up in class the French writer/philosopher that denied that Gulags existed is a prime example of the relativity of truth, although this individual knew he was telling a lie he convinced himself that this was right and true. Mattias Desmet, a psychologist that wrote a book called The Psychology of Totalitarianism, incorporated a study in his book that showed four lines of varying length labeled 1, A, B and C. The participants were asked to identify which of the lettered lines were the same length as the line labeled 1 but some of the participants were the researchers conducting this study who purposely chose the wrong lettered line to throw off the other participants. Some of the participants did conform with what the others were saying while some did not. I bring this up as another example of the effect peer pressure can have on your idea of truth no matter what the case be, whether it be something trivial like the line study or something more serious like one’s health.

In all, the intellectual class has the greatest potential to contribute greatly to the world and provide “truth” to the world with their research and scholastic endeavors. Yet, they also have the ability to deter the public and lead people by their own idea and interpretation of the “truth”. Coming from a university where intellectuals are bred it is important to think critically of ourselves and the environment that we are set in and create. It is all too easy to get caught up in power aspect of class hierarchy.