>>> furuhashi.1 at osu.edu 07/09/01 04:14PM >>>
>>"Suggests" is incorrect. If one constructs a meaningful
>>category of intellectuals, perforce there must as well be a
>>non-empty category of non- or unintellectuals, who presumably
>>do not do or cannot do the things intellectuals do. But what
>>do intellectuals do that other kinds of people don't do?
>
>Oh, puleeze. Intellectuals read, write, and interpret difficult
>abstract concepts in disciplines requiring special training and long
>study. Most people read, write, and interpret something or other,
>but that no more makes them intellectuals than the fact that I
>occassionally knowck together a few shelves makes me a carpenter.
>The fact that my sister, a journeyman carpenter, reads a book or
>writes an email now and then doesn't make her an intellectual; she
>would bew as helpless placed in front of Rawls or Adorno as I would
>be if you told me to hang a door. I am not saying that one is better
>than other. Carpentry is also a discipline requiring study and
>training, which I aint got. Btw, most professors and professionals
>are not intellectuals, if that is supposed to mean persons of wide
>culture. Most philosophy, law, and political science profs I know
>(to take the disciplines I knnow best) are narrow technicians. --jks
It boils down to questions concerning the division of labor. I think the division of labor is here to stay even if we get around to establishing socialism, though that is a thought unacceptable to some LBO-talkers.
((((((((
CB: I agree a division of labor there must continue to be. But does the division between predominantly mental and predominantly physical labor , and its gradations have to be the divide ?