Intellectual Acuity

[coberst]

Intellectual Acuity

I think that reality is multilayered like an onion. We live our life on the surface rarely penetrating the surface of reality. To seek a comprehension beyond the surface requires some kind of intellectual acuity.

Most people are familiar with the arts as a form of intellectual acuity but far fewer have any recognition of self-learning through books as a means of developing an intellectual acuity that can penetrate the surface reality.

What do you think of this opinion?

[Roboramma]

Intellectual Acuity

I think that reality is multilayered like an onion. We live our life on the surface rarely penetrating the surface of reality. To seek a comprehension beyond the surface requires some kind of intellectual acuity.

Most people are familiar with the arts as a form of intellectual acuity but far fewer have any recognition of self-learning through books as a means of developing an intellectual acuity that can penetrate the surface reality.

What do you think of this opinion?

Without being more specific, I don't know what to think about it.

For instance, I could take what you mean to say that most of our lives are lived in the day to day, almost instictive (perhaps not "almost"):
Get up, eat, go to work, eat, work, come home, eat, hang out, sleep kind of cycle that doesn't get involved in asking or answering important questions.
If that's what you are saying, then, sure, I can agree with you.

If by intellectual acuity you mean the capacity to look at ourselves objectively to see what is behind this behavior, to see also the things going on around us that interact with us, and how those things operate, and what the underlying forces are that seem to control those things, then again, sure, I can agree with that.

On the other hand, while I think asking such questions can be inspiring, fulfilling, even fun, and almost certainly important, I don't think that it is necessary. I could live my whole life without such questions and still it might be a life worth living.
Of course, I love such questions. I seek them out, and I seek out their answers. Some of that questioning helps me to make intelligent decisions in life. Much of it does not. The fact that we live when we do means that many of those answers are accessible, which is awesome.
On the other hand I think there's a lot more to life than just those questions. And much of that certainly penetrates the surface of existence.

Laughing with loved ones; traveling to places I've never been before; hiking up a challenging mountain and enjoying the view from the top with a good friend; these are all things that I think have deep meaning, even if they require no "intellectual acuity".

So, I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but hopefully I've answered your question anyway.

[coberst]

Roboramma

We seem to agree on everything except for the need of a more intellectually sophisticated citizen than now exits without a conscious effort.

I think that our ability to constantly advance our technology requires that we counter balance that technology with a more sophisticated citizen to understand what is going on and in understanding to take better control.

Examples are establishing a stewardship of the planet and dealing with poverty amongst plenty that leads to a lack of hope that leads to terrorism. Other examples are evidence of how dangerous it is when citizens in a democracy make a really bad choice for their leaders and the fact that we are unable to dialogue in any suitable manner.

Also I think that a more intellectually acute comprehension of all forms of reality can prove to be a delight to the individual. Carl Sagan said “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy”.

We waste away our most wonderful legacy, our brain, which atrophies from lack of challenge. Our unconscious reason is our every active servant and it is a shame to leave that servant unemployed for most of our life.

[Apathia]

"Intellectual Acuity"

It leaves me cold.
I know people who have more intellectual acuity than myself. They are dead on thinking machines who ace out chess and sudoku. yet at the same time they hold political and relgious views that on the bottom line are just plain mean, if not cruel.

What we need isn't merely intellectual. Awareness, Empathy, Understanding, Openess, and Creativity are what we are hurting for.

I think you don't mean to be as Platonic and Hegalian as you usually sound. I've read enough of you to see you mean more by "Intelectual Acuity" and that it includes some heart. It's just the stye of academic speech that was impressed upon you in your education. It's not serving you well.

[coberst]

"Intellectual Acuity"


What we need isn't merely intellectual. Awareness, Empathy, Understanding, Openess, and Creativity are what we are hurting for.

Intellectual acuity is necessary but not sufficient. Also we need an orderly mind, curiosity, and caring.

[Roboramma]

Hey coberst, I think we pretty much agree.

I do think that critical thinking is an important and useful tool. I also think that anyone who takes an active role in politics has a responsibily to use it.
I think that whenever we do anything, we have a responsibility to use that tool whenever our actions have repercussions.

I just think that it's possible to live a life that has few negative repercussions, and to stay out of other people's way, basically. In that case, lacking critical thinking skills isn't a big deal. You may lose out something, but there's a lot more to life as well.

[Tricky]

Intellectual Acuity

I think that reality is multilayered like an onion.
Ah, that would put you in the "Shrek" school of philosophy.

We live our life on the surface rarely penetrating the surface of reality.
Which is a way of saying "There's more things that we don't know than there are things we do know." A truism (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/truism).
To seek a comprehension beyond the surface requires some kind of intellectual acuity. Another truism. Yes, in order to know more we have to look.

Most people are familiar with the arts as a form of intellectual acuity but far fewer have any recognition of self-learning through books as a means of developing an intellectual acuity that can penetrate the surface reality.What arts are you talking about? Some arts have nothing to do with intellectual acuity or intellect at all. They are pure emotion.
Books aren't actually self-learning, because they require someone else to write a book. That is no more "self-learning" than deciding to take a class that is not required. Carefully listening to what was said is not a great deal different than carefully absorbing what you read, other than that with reading, it is easier to go over a part you didn't understand. But they aren't fundamentally different. Just as you can zone out in class, you can skim over a book. Or you can pay attention.

What do you think of this opinion?
I think it is a few truisms combined with a dash of self-congratulation. There's very little here that is intellectually nourishing.

[slingblade]

Ah, that would put you in the "Shrek" school of philosophy.

What about parfait? Everybody like parfait!

[Krandal2]

Intellectual Acuity

I think that reality is multilayered like an onion. We live our life on the surface rarely penetrating the surface of reality. To seek a comprehension beyond the surface requires some kind of intellectual acuity.

Most people are familiar with the arts as a form of intellectual acuity but far fewer have any recognition of self-learning through books as a means of developing an intellectual acuity that can penetrate the surface reality.

What do you think of this opinion?

Reading isn't nearly as important as actively and creatively thinking about oneself and the world, and challenging ones personal assumptions of both.

Books give only knowlege, while true mental acuity requires the kind of understanding that can only be aquired through both knowlege *and* experience.

[coberst]

Hey coberst, I think we pretty much agree.

I do think that critical thinking is an important and useful tool. I also think that anyone who takes an active role in politics has a responsibily to use it.
I think that whenever we do anything, we have a responsibility to use that tool whenever our actions have repercussions.

I just think that it's possible to live a life that has few negative repercussions, and to stay out of other people's way, basically. In that case, lacking critical thinking skills isn't a big deal. You may lose out something, but there's a lot more to life as well.

I think that learning CT (Critical Thinking) is number one importance to everyone who wishes to become a solid independent thinker.


I once asked a philosophy professor “What is philosophy about?” He said philosophy is “radically critical self-consciousness”. This was 35 years ago. Only in the last five years have I begun to understand that statement

I took a number of courses in philosophy three decades ago but it was not until I began to study and understand Critical Thinking that I began to understand what “radically critical self-consciousness” meant.

I consider CT to be ‘philosophy light’. CT differs from other subject matter such as mathematics and geography in that it requires, for success, that the student develop a significant change in attitude.

Anyone who has been in military service recognizes the significant attitude adjustment introduced into all recruits in the eight weeks of boot camp. During the first eight weeks of military service each recruit is introduced to the proper military attitude. During the eight weeks of basic training there is certain knowledge and skills that the recruit learns but primarily s/he undergoes a significant attitude adjustment.

I would identify the CT attitude adjustment to be a movement from naïve common sense realism to critical self-consciousness. It is necessary to free many words and concepts from the limited meaning attached by normal usage—such a separation requires that the learner hold in abeyance the normal sort of concept associations.

The individual who has made the attitude adjustment recognizes that reality is multilayered and that one can only penetrate those layers through a critical attitude toward both the self and the world. To be critical does not mean to be negative, as is a common misunderstanding.

[coberst]

Tricky

By arts I am thinking of music and painting but I suppose there are other activities that qualify.

[coberst]

Reading isn't nearly as important as actively and creatively thinking about oneself and the world, and challenging ones personal assumptions of both.

Books give only knowlege, while true mental acuity requires the kind of understanding that can only be aquired through both knowlege *and* experience.

Reading is an experience and often a delightful one.

[Tricky]

Tricky

By arts I am thinking of music and painting but I suppose there are other activities that qualify.
Only about a million. Anything that you do with creativity can be reasonably called art, even if it is designing port-o-potties.

[fuelair]

I suspect that developing intellectual acuity involves a lot more than reading books- even good ones. Suspect it requires interacting with world and materials/denizens of same in as many ways as possible - and especially with those who seem to posses more i. a. than the seeker (like playing chess/sports, etc. against better performers to force either further development/improvement or to learn your limits.

Ogres have layers. Good parfait recipe anyone (hint: I love lemon!!).

[coberst]

I suspect that developing intellectual acuity involves a lot more than reading books- even good ones. Suspect it requires interacting with world and materials/denizens of same in as many ways as possible - and especially with those who seem to posses more i. a. than the seeker (like playing chess/sports, etc. against better performers to force either further development/improvement or to learn your limits.

Ogres have layers. Good parfait recipe anyone (hint: I love lemon!!).


No one needs to encourage playing chess/sports, etc. but someone does need to encourage reading. I suspect the hours spent with sports outruns the hours spent reading books by 8 trillion to one.

[Tricky]

No one needs to encourage playing chess/sports, etc. but someone does need to encourage reading. I suspect the hours spent with sports outruns the hours spent reading books by 8 trillion to one.
I would suggest that you are about as wrong as this as you could possibly be, even given the hyperbole.

Do you consider any kind of outdoor playing to be sports? Hide and seek? Tag? Pretending to be Superman?

Believe me, I share your love of the written word (my library is so overstuffed with books that they are crowding me out of my house). I also strongly encourage reading and reading-based learning, but I don't share your apparently fanatical fidelity to reading and reading alone.

Oh, and based on the physical fitness of America's kids, someone does need to stress some sort of physical activity. There is more to life than books.

[coberst]

Tricky

I share your apprehension regarding obesity.