r2i forum

I read this quote in the "Random Thoughts, Thought for the day and Quotes" thread:

"If having a problem with everything is considered the epitome of intellectualism, i am better off naive and ignorant"

A nice quote.

- What (all) does it mean to you?

- What would be a good way, a good rule of thumb to follow so one's thinking, attitude and behavior is in neither extreme - neither at the epitome of intellectualism, nor naive and ignorant.

- How can we try to instill this "middle-path" in our children? How do we help them develop into independent thinkers but not the "have a problem with everything" kind?

modus_vivendi;427295 - What (all) does it mean to you?

I thought it also meant: "If questioning the truth or fairness of every thing is considered the epitome of intellectualism, i am better off naive and ignorant".

[quote]- What would be a good way, a good rule of thumb to follow so one's thinking, attitude and behavior is in neither extreme - neither at the epitome of intellectualism, nor naive and ignorant. [/quote]
I don't know of any formula. For sure, everything to do with organized religion sure needs to be questioned before being accepted or followed or even ignored.

[quote]- How can we try to instill this "middle-path" in our children? How do we help them develop into independent thinkers but not the "have a problem with everything" kind?[/quote]
I guess like most desired behaviors modeling it in daily life is the best hope that child will pick it up?

I came across this letter written by Richard Dawkins to his ten year old daughter. It is his advice to her about evidence, questioning, tradition, belief and authority. He ends it with:

[QUOTE]Next time somebody tells you something that sounds important, think to yourself: "Is this the kind of thing that people probably know because of evidence? Or is it the kind of thing that people only believe because of tradition, authority, or revelation?" And, next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: "What kind of evidence is there for that?" And if they can't give you a good answer, I hope you'll think very carefully before you believe a word they say.

modus_vivendi;427295I read this quote in the "Random Thoughts, Thought for the day and Quotes" thread:

"If having a problem with everything is considered the epitome of intellectualism, i am better off naive and ignorant"

A nice quote.

- What (all) does it mean to you?

- What would be a good way, a good rule of thumb to follow so one's thinking, attitude and behavior is in neither extreme - neither at the epitome of intellectualism, nor naive and ignorant.

- How can we try to instill this "middle-path" in our children? How do we help them develop into independent thinkers but not the "have a problem with everything" kind?

I think you may have missed the qualifier "IF"...there is nothing wrong with extreme [sic!] intellectualism, but such extreme intellectualism is not to be considered as "having a problem with everything".

One should aim to exercise their intellect to its intended limits (if there is indeed a limit) and let the intellect dictate what path to take. Sometimes the path may be extreme, sometimes not.

What is stated in the quote is false intellectualism, or pseudo-intellectualism. In contrast to such, being naive and ignorant is the other extreme, but it is not intended to glorify such a state. It is sort of similar to Gandhi's quote on preference to violence:

"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence." - MK Gandhi

The above doesn't suggest one be violent. All it suggests is evaluate one's impotence, than hide behind a cloak of non-violence. Similar to hiding behind intellectualism and blame everything to be a problem created by those that aren't. Just tackle the problems, if there are indeed problems. That is intellectualism. :)

boca2blr;427305I think you may have missed the qualifier "IF"...

It is a fairly short quote, my reading skills are reasonable, and I've started a thread based on the quote; would be dashed hard to miss the "IF".

[quote]What is stated in the quote is false intellectualism, or pseudo-intellectualism. In contrast to such, being naive and ignorant is the other extreme, but it is not intended to glorify such a state. It is sort of similar to Gandhi's quote on preference to violence:

"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence." - MK Gandhi

The above doesn't suggest one be violent. All it suggests is evaluate one's impotence, than hide behind a cloak of non-violence. Similar to hiding behind intellectualism and blame everything to be a problem created by those that aren't. Just tackle the problems, if there are indeed problems. That is intellectualism. :)[/quote]
Thanks for sharing what (all) the quote meant to you.

modus_vivendi;427345It is a fairly short quote, my reading skills are reasonable, and I've started a thread based on the quote; would be dashed hard to miss the "IF".

My comment was around the below:

modus_vivendi;427295- What would be a good way, a good rule of thumb to follow so one's thinking, attitude and behavior is in neither extreme - neither at the epitome of intellectualism, nor naive and ignorant.

Why would you not want to be at the extreme of intellectualism?

modus_vivendi;427302
I came across this letter written by Richard Dawkins to his ten year old daughter. It is his advice to her about evidence, questioning, tradition, belief and authority. He ends it with:

Seems like overkill to me....for a 10 year old! Maybe he could have kept it simple and said "question everything" or something and saved this letter for her teens or something.

modus_vivendi;427295I read this quote in the "Random Thoughts, Thought for the day and Quotes" thread:

"If having a problem with everything is considered the epitome of intellectualism, i am better off naive and ignorant"

A nice quote.

- What (all) does it mean to you?

- What would be a good way, a good rule of thumb to follow so one's thinking, attitude and behavior is in neither extreme - neither at the epitome of intellectualism, nor naive and ignorant.

- How can we try to instill this "middle-path" in our children? How do we help them develop into independent thinkers but not the "have a problem with everything" kind?

The above quote just opines about the purest interpretation of intellectualism suggesting if being rational equates to being at odds with everything including societies, systems, religions and rituals and censuring any behavior that is backed by emotion as opposed to reason and if being overly rational affects the tranquility of one's mind and existence, one is probably better off being ignorant and naive instead of reeling under the wrath of hatred for every action and ritual that has no proper disposition endorsed by rationalism.

Rule of thumb: It all depends on how much time one has at disposal for rationalistic assessment of everything around them and whether one has reached a point when one realizes being a rationalistic extremist is counter productive and has a profound impact on one's quality of life. A good rule of thumb is being rational by one's own definition of rationalism and not being critical of non conformance of others to the definition. Please note this does not mean not to fight for a cause that is commonly agreed as irrational and nonsense and deeply affects a section of the society.

modus_vivendi;427295I read this quote in the "Random Thoughts, Thought for the day and Quotes" thread:

"If having a problem with everything is considered the epitome of intellectualism, i am better off naive and ignorant"

- How can we try to instill this "middle-path" in our children? How do we help them develop into independent thinkers but not the "have a problem with everything" kind?

Surely we can try, but isnt this behavior more of nature than nurture.
My Ex-Boss(IIT,MS..) an avid Dawkins fan is also a rationalist and atheist like his wife who is a Doctor(Surgeon). Education mentioned to illustrate their education level and the intellectual environment in their own house. They have two daughters and one is an atheist and other very staunch believer and ofcourse both are very good at their studies.
So me thinks its more to do with genes than environment.

MadMax;427356Seems like overkill to me...

my ten yr old read that, and she had a lot of questions, of course i replied after a point...."because I tell you":)

I agree with the general premise....there are areas where suspension of intellectualism is useful. There have been many instances where every logic and bit of science tells me that I should not operate on this patient, and we still get in and get out lucky.

But overall there are many areas where suspension of intelligence is harming the society, religion, caste, quack medicine......and overall there are more harm to oneself and society by suspending ones intellect than not supressing intellect. I would ask my children to try to read explore and challenge their intelligence as much as they can and then temper it from time to time should they reach an intellect level thats dysfunctional.

RK