>
> On Jan 16, 2007, at 5:54 PM, joanna wrote:
>
>> I doubt there's any kind of consensus; how about
>>
>> "someone who cares about the truth even though it's not their job
>> and does not involve any kind of reward."
>
>
> Hmm, that would exclude academics, as well as publishers, editors,
> curators, writers, and artists who get paid for their work. Not to
> mention architects, engineers, and other sundry professions who
> qualify under some definitions. So why does getting paid disqualify
> them?
I think if you get paid, you're part of the "intelligentia." Otherwise, you're an "intellectual." Though it's a real gray area. Because some people get paid so little for intellectual work.
I'm mostly kidding. But you know, the other day, an aquaintance laughed hard in my face when he found out I had written a dissertation in the humanities. He thought that was the most collosal waste of time. I can kind of understand that reaction while, at the same time, not regretting that I spent a good ten years of my life pondering a question that interested me.....while at the same time being completely unwilling to turn the fruits of my research into an marketable academic commodity.
"Intellectual" is both a term of derision or one of praise depending where you stand and what you mean by it.
Actually, I don't like the term much. I think the older, more generic term would have been "philosopher."
Joanna