|
| 17 Apr 2014 12:48 AM |
| Intellectualism should be placed above Religion, Social status, Love, and many more, along with Science, and other things that mainly revolve around rationalism. I think it is very sad how Religion and other things are interfering with the development of Intellectualism in this age. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:05 AM |
Don't treat it like a philosophy, it shouldn't be treated that way... it should just be seen as something you should be. Something that's healthy, something that's a virtue. Not a philosophy or something. Also I don't necessarily agree with you here.
"Religion"
Yes. Just yes. Religion is interfering with intellect, rationality, and intelligence.
"Social status"
Hmm. Sure, yeah.
"Love"
Ehh... I don't think so. Sorry if this sounds ignorant I wouldn't trade any amount of knowledge for my boyfriend.
"Science"
Um? I think this is pretty important. I mean, without it, you wouldn't be talking to us over something as advanced as the internet. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:06 AM |
| I didn't say Science should be placed below Intellectualism, I said science should be placed on the same level of societal value as Intellectualism. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:08 AM |
| Love should be nowhere near as important as Intellectualism..... Love often involves just doing things without thinking about it, impulsivity, etc, even though without reproduction, which is the result of Love sometimes, we wouldn't be here, and Earth would be void of all life. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:08 AM |
| Oh I see. I misread it. Quite a tricky sentence you made there. You could try dividing it into two. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:09 AM |
| Well, I wanted to make it more compact / less spacious. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:10 AM |
| Actually, I am not sure 100% on Religion, because a lot of times it revolves around paranoia, and sometimes and more rarely, more intellectual people are Religious because there is no actual scientific proof that Gods / higher beings exist or don't exist. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:11 AM |
| I'd rather be an Atheist though, thinking about trying to follow a set of rules throughout your whole life in fear is something of a tax. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:12 AM |
I'm going to make a big guess that English isn't your first language. Let me try rearranging it to make it more comprehensible.
"Intellect, along with science and other topics that mainly revolve around rationality, should be placed above religion, social status, love, and many more." |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:13 AM |
| Edgy meaning sharp? Sharp in terms of intelligence? (That man was sharp, he was a lot smarter than me and my friends.) Well, I have an I.Q. that is between 135 and 143, which is above average. By the way, I am going to just say that the I.Q. isn't always a 100% accurate measure of intelligence, it is really approximate. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:14 AM |
| Well, I suppose your re-phrasing of my sentence would be easier to read, but my original was is still grammatically correct in the English language. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:15 AM |
| Both your grammar and vocabulary are quite atrocious for someone with an IQ around 140. What's your first language? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:15 AM |
| *ignore the was in my last sentence |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:16 AM |
| My first language is English... but I have OCD and Depression, which is probably altering how I speak in several ways, considering how I like to be organized and use the same words in sequence. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:16 AM |
"Well, I suppose your re-phrasing of my sentence would be easier to read, but my original was is still grammatically correct in the English language."
Not necessarily. You did capitalize a lot of common nouns. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:17 AM |
| Obsessive Compulsive Disorder? That explains it a bit. I thought your first language would have been German due to your odd capitalizations and the order you put your sentence in. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:18 AM |
| Sorry about my failure to use proper grammar at times.... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:19 AM |
| No, it's fine. As long as you could be understood, you know? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:20 AM |
| Well, in theory, intellectualism SHOULD be placed above all else, but I don't think it will ever happen, considering human nature. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:21 AM |
| Oh, and a lot of times more intellectual people have above - average intelligence. This in itself is probably limiting the development of intellectualism, because, well..... people just aren't smart enough on average to become ultra - intellectual. This means that the amount of intellectual people is going to be limited until average intelligence becomes higher than it is right now. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:23 AM |
| Some people estimate the I.Q. of Socrates to have been around 160. Far from the current average. Reminder - the I.Q. is not a 100% accurate measure of intelligence, it is approximate. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:24 AM |
| As a whole, yes, maybe it should. But individually, it would vary. You can't really force everyone to value intelligence more than anything else. Some people are just too materialistic. Me? Well, this sounds sappy but I value my boyfriend more than I do a bit of knowledge. I still value intellect, however. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Apr 2014 01:24 AM |
| Oh, and for those who, sadly, do not know....... Socrates was an intellectual. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|