[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Ben Thornton

People seem to have different ideas about what an intellectual is. It always sounds like a rather pretentious word to me - can one be a proper intellectual without a smoking jacket?

Agreed, it is a hard to define term, which is why it's silly for someone like Sonist to try to narrowly define who is or isn't an intellectual.

Looking it up on dictionary.com, their definitions include "a person who relies on intellect rather than on emotions or feelings" and "a person professionally engaged in mental labor, as a writer or teacher", but I think that we've been talking about "a person who places a high value on or pursues things of interest to the intellect or the more complex forms and fields of knowledge, as aesthetic or philosophical matters, esp. on an abstract and general level".

I'd agree with those general definitions. To me an intellectual is just someone that actual puts there mind to use. Who tries to improve their intelligence and critical thinking skills, who tries to have informed opinions on every topic if interest to them.

And I think the "mental labor" bit is worth being included, as in today's society most people's lives are dominated by their careers (at least those of working age) so it's hard to fully be an intellectual if you're not having to use your intellect for your career. Though one can still be pretty intellectual even if they have menial jobs--so it's not a must.

So, if an intellectual is someone who is interested in "the more complex forms and fields of knowledge, as aesthetic or philosophical matters, esp. on an abstract and general level", perhaps we can all agree that:

• Reading pulp fiction is unlikely to contribute to that a great deal
• Reading pulp fiction is unlikely to do you any harm either
• There are lots of different ways in which you could pursue an interest in such matters, including by working in a complex field as your day job

I'd agree with those. Though I'd add that I don't think any fiction is going to contribute to it to the same degree as non fiction reading, philosophical reading, doing intellectual work like research etc. Quality fiction will contribute more than pulp fiction for sure. But if one really wants to develop their intellect, they shouldn't be spending most of their time consuming fiction period IMO--unless they want to be an author, poet, movie director themselves and need to specifically develop an intellect fine tuned for storytelling, language, visual arts etc.

Which gets back to the point that what is or isn't an intellectual is pretty ambiguous and there's no reason for people to say someone isn't an intellectual because they don't read good fiction or some other silly arbitrary standard. As you note, there's a lot of ways one can develop their intellect. One doesn't have to be a genius in every area to be an intellectual.