A newspaper columnist wrote recently: “Clearly we’re not living through a New Enlightenment.” He observed that that in some quarters scholarship and science are disrespected, education is often undervalued and underfunded, and attempts are occasionally made to rewrite History with the goal being to make it “neutral” (resulting in such things as the histories of slavery or the Holocaust being “softened” in how they are allowed to be taught). The columnist concluded that there was a time when being called an “intellectual” was a compliment. That time, he predicted, will return again. But in the meantime, the term inspires suspicion and sneers.
I understand the nervousness many seem to feel about people or endeavors that appear to be overly “academic.” Edward Site wrote: “Intellectuals raise questions that are embarrassing.” Questions like that make us uncomfortable. We don’t like it when someone responds to our random statements with phrases like, “Why do you feel that way?,” OR “Tell me more about that,” OR “Where did you find your information?,” OR “Can you explain your position and help me understand?,” OR “Since you purport to believe in A, just from the standpoint of logic, why do you profess support for B?,” OR “If you claim to be a person of Faith who values the virtue of love, why are you so consistently angry in what you say and post?,” OR any number of other responses that force us to examine our positions in the light of reason. Most of us are pretty good at pontificating but once in a while find it more difficult to defend what we proclaim. Thinking is hard work. And so we let some podcaster or news outlet do our thinking for us. “Intellectuals raise questions that are embarrassing.”
The other side of the coin, of course, is that a denial of intellectual pursuit produces a society that is ultimately vulnerable and individuals who are unevolved. Take the worlds of science and research, as examples. I recently heard a man who is very dubious of scientific endeavors say: “There was a day when everyone knew that herbs and natural potions were the best ways to prevent and heal illness.” He’s correct. That day did exist. And, in that day the average life expectancy was less than forty. Brilliant scientists working long and hard in laboratories developed vaccines to prevent polio, measles, and smallpox as well as medications that send serious illnesses like cancer and HIV into remission. Those scientists are not the enemy. They are the ones who bring hope to millions who were previously hopeless. I recently had surgery. I would not have felt comfortable with a practitioner who is a witch doctor, a medicine man, or who uses leeches to rid the body of excess blood. Instead, I chose a physician with a degree from a respected med school, who went through internship and residency in another, and who has accumulated numerous continuing education certifications over the past twenty years. The next time you get onboard an airplane, would you want the engine builder’s knowledge to be limited to a video he watched on YouTube?
History. Education. Science. Even literature. A story showed up recently about a “book burning” in a small community. The organizers claimed to be protecting their children’s moral values by eliminating books written by people like John Steinbeck, Maya Angelou, Aldous Huxley, Judy Blume, J.D. Salinger, Shel Silverstein, Ronald Dahl, and J.K. Rowling. We’re not talking about porn. We’re talking about James and the Giant Peach and Harry Potter (books that were burned). One of the finest professors I ever had said to me when I was a senior in college preparing for grad school: “Don’t be threatened by ideas different from your own. At worst, they are a nuisance. At best, they’ll help you grow.”
So, why would any of us be threatened by intellectual pursuits? Why are we wary of wisdom? Who knows? This much is sure: The less we learn, the poorer we become in terms of the things that matter most. Socrates said it this way: “The unexamined life is not worth living.” To refuse to think deeply about history, theology, philosophy, anthropology, science, political science, the arts, etc., is to miss the deep (the satisfying and enriching) layers that are just beneath the surface of that which is superficial. To embrace cartoons is fine, but not if it means rejecting Michelangelo. To say, “It is what it is” has a defensible realist’s viewpoint, but that shouldn’t preclude asking, “Why is what it is, and what can I do about it?” There is nothing helpful about “the unexamined life.”
So, maybe we should join a book club … watch a documentary when we could be watching a rom com or a game show instead … attend a lecture at a local university (or online) … expose ourselves to the thoughts of those who are not “in our camp” … learn to discuss without arguing … learn to listen without rejecting ideas simply because of their sources … travel with part of our intent being to see how others live and what they believe about life … commit ourselves to migrating from data to wisdom … become curious to know not just what another believes but why they believe it … rediscover the childhood discipline of daydreaming and asking, “What if?” … know that part of the beauty of life is realizing that every answer ushers in new questions that make the journey an adventure. Why would we not live that way? Why were we given the priceless gifts of thought and reason, if not to use them? Why confine ourselves to wading pools when there is so much to be found in deeper waters?