Intellectuals

[Ad_Orientem]

Maybe Lucifer isn’t as bright as you think he is and human genius deserves a bit more credit. …

Perhaps so. Still, I think it is safe to say that the least angelic intellect is superior to the best human mind (see , Chap. IIThe Angels).

 

[Faith1960]

I don’t think there is a link between being intellectual in and of itself and disbelief. Numbers who believe or disbelieve are in constant flux, and at the moment we’re at a low, but this has not been the general rule.

Do you mean that there have been times when the intellectual crowd did believe?

 

[mariemargaret]

I think this question might be better framed not based on intelligence, but by one’s need for concrete evidence. There are many kinds of intelligence, but I think in general people think of people who do well in school as intelligent. School learning and in particular scientific subjects depend largely on drawing conclusions based on concrete findings. Logic as well is a set of conclusions based on previous evidence. But, I think that need for concrete evidence is the linchpin.

I think that if you need concrete proof to believe things are true, then you will have a hard time with any kind of religion based on believing something because you have faith in it.

Of course, I’m no scholar in this area…

 

[ready]

Why are so many intellectuals agnostic or atheists? Does that mean that God doesn’t really exist, or His word isn’t true, or does it mean that they are intellectualizing something that is a different from what they focus on meaning academia rather than the spiritual?

I believe it means that they are tied down to reason alone and have no faith. Faith and reason are supposed to work together – faith must enlighten our reason. Reason without faith is a dead end street. With pride we can be big rationalists and materialists like many intellectuals today. Many intellectuals today do not give credit where it is due: to God – they are rationalists, materialists, humanists, etc. – not humble and wise Christians who are of the spirit and not of the flesh and of the world God bless you.

 

[schaeffer]

Regardless of religious belief, there’s a lot of people out there (some have advanced degrees, others have a bunch of kids) who seem to think they have it all figured out and cannot handle having their ideas questioned.

Yup, it makes no difference if it’s a person of religious faith, or a non believer…lots of people don’t want to have their ideas questioned. They don’t want to be challenged to consider other possibilities, or step out of their comfort zone.

many don’t want to go into areas that would lead to alienating friend, family, colleagues, or coworkers.

If a person has found a cozy niche in a certain philosophy or community they may see no good reason to go looking elsewhere for fulfillment.

Sometimes they will even defend that philosophy beyond all reason.

 

[Faith1960]

I would reject the premise. Historically, far more (and far greater) “intellectuals” have been theists and atheists or agnostics. The problem here lies in our modern tendency to equate “intellectual” with the sciences. Empirical science demands methodical doubt (the opposite, in some ways, of Faith) and cannot address the reality (or unreality) of the supernatural, as it is intrinsically confined to the study of nature. Hubris leads many scientists into scientism, the self-referentially incoherent philosophy that all knowledge or all certain knowledge can only be attained through empirical science. Scientism goes hand in hand with naturalism and materialism, which, in turn, lead to atheism (or agnosticism). Thus, those “intellectuals” that follow this path will end up atheists not because it is the “smart” thing, but because their a priori assumptions demand it.

Lastly, even if all “intellectuals” were really atheists that would no more prove atheism than all “intellectuals” once believing the Earth remained still was evidence that such was true.

I dont get your second sentence. More intellectuals were thiests or are agnostic or athiest?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Regardless of religious belief, there’s a lot of people out there (some have advanced degrees, others have a bunch of kids) who seem to think they have it all figured out and cannot handle having their ideas questioned.

And this doesn’t apply to religious people?

Otherwise, the idea that someone who is non-religious means they are smart is bogus on so many levels, I’m not even sure where to start.

Can’t you also apply that to the idea that being religious means you’re more spiritual, moral, and all-around better person?

Frankly, there are many times on these boards that only demonstrate the complete opposite.

Let me ask you this: If secular-based societies and individuals have it all figured out, then why do they depend so much on labor and migration from societies that are 95%+ religious?

Because it’s cheap labor that doesn’t require much thinking. Dependence doesn’t imply lack of genius but can actually be just another resource management tactic.

I should know, I live in one such country and work in one such organization. You don’t need a PhD just to set appointments and make follow-up phone calls.

Being on a copywriter on the other hand… oh boy. :hypno:

(In all seriousness though, I’ve really got to start a thread that talks about the unhealthy glorification of third world countries.)

Perhaps so. Still, I think it is safe to say that the least angelic intellect is superior to the best human mind (see Fr. Pascal Parente, The Angels, Chap. II).

Hard to find proof of that when it’s mankind dominating this planet and not a bunch of outer planar spirits. Miracles don’t happen often (though I’m glad for even the smallest of them) and the worst that can be done by demonic manifestation is para-psychological at best.

In other words, the best that Satan’s ever done is give you the spooks. I don’t buy the argument that it’s only because God’s got him locked up. In fact, I don’t buy any argument that thinks either divine or demonic forces are going around the world, making tools out of everybody. From personal experience, that’s only an excuse to depreciate one’s own capacity and that is never healthy.

For some people at least, better for them to think themselves highly in terms of their own brilliance than dragging others down with them in their quest to devalue human significance so as to preserve the divine’s.

 

[Faith1960]

I dont get your second sentence. More intellectuals were thiests or are agnostic or athiest?

?

 

[OraLabora]

?

I suspect a typo. I think it should have read:

Historically, far more (and far greater) “intellectuals” have been theists than atheists or agnostics.

Then it makes sense.

Otherwise PietroPaulo’s post was great. I was trained as, and worked as a scientist for many years. Though I did for a time fall into the science-only trap, I’ve come to realize that science and faith are complementary rather than mutually-exclusive. Or they can be when properly approached.

I disagree wholeheartedly too that most “intellectuals” are atheists or agnostics. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is a brilliant theologian with a first-class mind. Many eminent scientists have been believers, including more than a few Catholics.

Moreover, “intellectual” is not synonymous with “science”. The word encompasses excellence in many fields, including but not limited to science, such as music, philosophy, linguistics, the law, medicine, anthropology, etc. In other words, just about every field in which there are university-level studies going on.

 

[Jack007]

I thought that intellectuals believe in theory of evolution that they have not seen.