How can you defend intellectualism? Why is it that so many philosophers have such a difficult time applying the idea of Think like a wise man, but speak in the language of the people? So much of what I see in so many philosophy groups is people using ten dollar words to explain four-bit concepts. Is it that many somehow feel more intelligent and seek to impress by complicating an idea, so that only they understand what the hell they said? Really baffled by the pretension of so many who try to bury their ignorance beneath an avalance of verbage. I am not seeking to insult. I am really curious about what you guys think about this subject. Personally, I think that if you cant explain your thoughts so that a child can at least grasp the basics of what you are saying, than you yourself dont have a clear understanding of what you mean either. Thoughts? I consider myself a pretty educated guy. I have several sheepskins, but more importantly, long before chalking up any college degrees, I spent a large portion of my youth reading and learning and - more importantly - applying what I learned. And I became very street savvy. It seems to me that many I see writing on these posts have very little real world experience. They have read Kant or whomever and see that historically significant philosophers write a certain why, so they seem to think that they too will appear intelligent if they use words with 12 syllables, not realizing that the end goal of all of this is simple communication. I think too its more than simple speaking logically at a level that anyone can understand. Its also having a flair with the language, which obviously not everyone possesses. Lets face it: When intelligent people seek to impress others with their intelligence, it is about as exciting as waiting at a red light. So much of what philosophy has become is academic, and, personally, I dont think that serves anyone other than those teaching in the academies. Intelligent philosophy needs to be brought back to the streets, so to speak. Philosophy has become the business of university professors, and it was meant to be the enlightenment of those who casually stroll the avenues. Did Socrotes teach other teachers? Philosophers are some of the most intelligent people ive ever met but what good to me is your intelligence if you mask it in hundreds of words i dont understand? How are you getting your point accrossed? I understand you are smart but how are you helping me in my pursuit? if you are smart enough to use painfully large words (for no reason other then to make yourself sound smart) Then you should be smart enough to dumb it down. Using big words doesnt make you smart i feel it makes most people (not all) smug. Big words are not necessary using them serves one purpose and thats to make yourself sound smarter. What possible reason does a person have for using words no one understands if there are most likely 30 less smart sounding words that everyone will understand? (my untenable response:) what you really want is an end to compartmentalization, but even Pragmatism which seeks to accomplish exactly that must confront paradigms and the vocabulary within them, and create new paradigms with new or redefined vocabulary in the process. With no offense meant towards anyone, looking over the posts here, I would say that 75% of them make the point for me about over-inflated egos writing in a style that is simply grammatically nonsensical, with a vocabulary that does nothing to communicate whatever it is so many are trying to communicate. If I - and I would consider myself above average in intelligence - have to re-read a post twice or more to see if I can piece together the puzzle of what he or she is trying to say, then it isnt philosophy. Its jibberish. I know the big words. I have studied the philosophers and their positions, and I see that most here do not write to communicate, but to stroke their own frail egos. As there arent too many Shakespeares, there also arent too many Kants, so why are so many attempting to sound like classic philosophers and to write in a voice that obviously isnt their own? Ironically, after I unjumble what many are trying to say, I would agree with a great deal of it. But wouldnt it have been so much simplier to have thought about what you wanted to say, then . . . say it . . . in plain language. (And regardless of all the talk about new vocabularies being necessary and compartments of thoughts . . . and, yes, language is always a living, growing thing . . . all what I have seen written here, I could have reworded much more succinctly and with greater clarity. My advice: Find your own voice. Trust yourself. Nobody here is Spinoza, so stop trying to sound like him.) -------------------------------------------------- how much wasted time. How do I explain that words are important? How do I explain that commonly used words do not suffice?
Posted on: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:43:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015