79. Intellectuals
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 июн 2023
- 79. Intellectuals
From Émile Zola to Edward Said, from Antonio Gramsci to… Joe Rogan? In episode 79 of Overthink, Ellie and David discuss the figure of the high-minded ‘intellectual’ and their role in today’s mass-media landscape. Who are intellectuals, what do they do, and what are they for? Ellie and David ask whether intellectuals have a duty to participate in public debate, and whether they can truly partake in liberatory action in such a capacity.
Overthink is a philosophy podcast hosted by your favorite new professors, Ellie Anderson (Pomona College) and David Peña-Guzmán (San Francisco State University). Check out our episodes for deep dives into concepts such as existential anxiety, empathy, and gaslighting.
Works Discussed
Julien Benda, The Treason of Intellectuals
Christoph Charles, Birth of the Intellectuals: 1880-1900
Didier Eribon, Returning to Reims
Antonio Gramsci, The Intellectuals
Immanuel Kant, What is Enlightenment?
Mary McCarthy, The Groves of Academia
Edward Said, Representations of the Intellectual
Émile Zola, J’accuse...!
Armchair Expert Podcast
Binchtopia Podcast
SmartLess Podcast
Support Overthink on Patreon here: / overthinkpodcast
Website: overthinkpodcast.com
Facebook: / overthink-podcast-1054...
Apple podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4aIlXHT...
Buzzsprout RSS: feeds.buzzsprout.com/1455199.rss
Find us on Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok at @overthink_pod
this contrast between “making an original, creative contribution” and “*disseminating* existing ideas”, raised at 37:55, really set off my derrida alarm ngl 😅
It's also important to not just highlight the increased access to channels of information and also those who would abuse that by engaging while remaining lazy.
One thing that isn't spoken about enough is how the combination of the narrowness of what markets value, coupled with rising poverty and profound costs attached to education affects deeply interested people who simply cannot afford to go for expertise in this domain (philosophy) even if they love and respect it greatly.
I've known quite a few people who suffered through a life doing other work simply due to responsibility to family or survival concerns, when in fact they are both cognitively geared towards as well as deeply respectful of and interested in a profession that seems materially impossible to go after.
What is your opinion on journals and the peer-review system considering submissions by individuals who are not represented or backed by an institution?
Thank you both for your honest and disciplined work. You are among my favorite YT channels/podcasts.
8:30 brilliant comedic timing Ellie
An Intellectual is a noun!
So the thing about public intellectualism as it stands today is that many figures who the masses listen to we know better and it is more apt to call them pseudo-intellectuals. They have the veneer of legitimacy without the rigor of academic thought and well-researched nuance that is demanded of a *true* intellectual.
Wisecrack did a good video on this critiquing Idiocracy (a cult classic, btw!) a few years back…
I agree that an intellectual must be public. So it makes it all the more worrying that who we see speaking publically the most is more a function of income than anything else. So the studied truth can become buried in all the noise.
Good to hear you guys again...2 great subjects...are you still planning to do a dive into the OKC bombing?... cheers from Mexico!
Thanks
It's striking how present philosophers are in French and German media, compared with the English-speaking world (including the UK) and Italy. I believe that the world's least anti-intellectual area is the Franco-German European core.
the dreaded Dreyfus affair... there's a decent film about this (from a not so decent human being) called An Officer And A Spy (2019) worth the watch... and also related is the miniseries Paris Police 1900 (2021) about the chaos that ensued in its wake
Very good episode. Although I am not a hardcore philosopher, and consider myself more as a fiction writer on a hobbyist level, I do consider intellectuals (or philosophers) as an important component of fiction writing. Without philosophy to mold and interpret the era they are living in, novels, poetry, and movies would be empty. On the flip side, philosophy would be stale and inert without the drama of fiction.
On a different note, have you considered making an episode on fiction? Like, I would like to hear your favorite novels, poems, plays, or maybe a tv show or movie that moves or make you overthink. Hamlet had been exhausted by Freud and Lacan in their effort to animate their ideas, crime or detective novels could be a sociological commentary that would be rife for a Marxist (or variant or it), and Dostoevsky's novels were talking points for Heidegger, Satre, Camus, and Nietszche. I think it would be a fun episode for both you and us listeners.
Apparently unpopular philosopher Kathleen Stock used to write about imagination.
I'd like to hear about that
(+ wonder if it is the basis of her dismissal of certain people - would be useful to discuss or refute some of what she says).
V. interesting lecture on UEA uk philosophy website about science "Knowledge Through Imagination".
As an engineer-y type arts person it made me see how some of our categories of truth work behind the scenes.
I think better understanding how much our western ideas of rationality are entwined with our imaginations would make it easier for us to bridge cultural divides, as well as divisions between disciplines that are more due to tradition and group norms than usefulness.
Dunno why I'm musing my philosophy in your comments section but I can't help myself. 🍄
I came across Julien Benda in André Gide's journals of the late 30s, early 40s. They seem to have been feuding, as Gide is scathing.
Nice. I am reading it just now. Big fan. Arguable the most ignored "french intellectual" of the last century - right now. It is a weird thing, but I guess his epistemic honesty around the USSR trip makes him a little too inconvenient. It can't be "Corydon" - and this part makes his avoidance even more dubious - to me, at least. I really admire the way he did things, his honesty and integrity stand out, always with skin in the game, oftenly disregardingv his own benefit. A one of a kind.
6:21 I tried googling this title and could not find the book. Is it only in French ?
It’s the graves of academe. He misspoke
i think there is a sorte of distinction between an intellectual and a philosopher, this last one, is highly Abstract in the way that he thinking, and other is less abstract and he keep in touch more with reality .
I’d rather hear a talk about the work process of an intellectual. What is the structure? How does anyone intellectualize in a real sense in the understanding as a democratic sense of the masses. Such that indigenous work amongst the people is knowable.
I found the discussion on the Dreyfus Affair enlightening but I thought the cheap shots at Joe Rogan were very intellectually lazy and amounted to “intellectuals cannot be people I don’t like”. Cheap and kitsch.
But really the most glaring omission was Ludwig Feuerbach. A discussion on intellectuals and their role without once mentioning Feuerbach is criminal.
Lovely episode. Never considered myself an intellectual or even a pseudo intellectual. (No badge of universitat) however my peers are walking encyclopedias. The lived experience would speak for itself. Regardless of influence I would hope? Do I need more reach or do I need more credentials? Falling into false dichotomy. Both. Clasist.
Tight knit circle is being removed and neither seem important these days. . A man can dream to make a difference.
THANKS ELLIE AND DAVID
An intellectual is a way of living. The examined life. Differentiate being an intellectual and being employed as an intellectual and being a public intellectual
Yeah intellectual is more about an attitude toward the world and thinking and dealing about it. Or as you said much better: It is a way of living.
That is why i don't see what you called "public intellectual" as belonging really in that space.
Most of them are more focused on the social appearance of their "way of living" than anything else. To me calling them "public intellectual" is too much polite. Those belong to what i usually call as pseudo-intellectuals.
Note. That doesn't mean that one should ignore the social aspect of life, but there is no need to ignore that there is real differences between the two.
another banger
Thanks l enjoyed the podcast .
Indeed there is the academic level of intellectual ( well deserving ) and then there is the pseudo-intellectual who thinks they know yet don't know ( psychologically neurotic, if forceful crosses over into psychosis, over the ledge where knowledge breaks down )
Social Media has become a stage for pseudo-intellectuals to spread ideas that have no roots in classic philosophy thus presented in a salad bowl of inferior rhetoric!
I think there is a difference between intellect and wisdom. The former transforms into the latter.
A university student can and for the most part, intellectually can wrap their mind around Plato though when reaching the grand age of seventy can reflect and understand the whole better having reached the cloud!
An ancient piece of wisdom l always liked ( and referred to by Jung ) goes as this...
One can see far from the mountain top but in order to see one must go down into the valley!
Russel l believed never left the academic mountaintop while Wittgenstein did, resulting in his second philosophical concept. The view that Russel did not applaud nor understand because he never went down into the valley!
Also aware it’s an adjective, but not as used.
Bertrand Russell...Eric Bliar... Christopher Hitchins... are all out there if your time is short.
ahhhhh... the intellectuals are coming !! !!
No right-wing public intellectuals? REALLY? I don't particularly like Jordan Peterson, but he made his name with a public stand against compelled speech laws in Canada. Moving on, how can you do a podcast on public intellectuals and skip over Bret Weinstein, Lex Fridman, John McWhorter, and Paul Krugman?! All peer-reviewed academics! I love your podcast and support you on Patreon, but you need to explore outside your tiny intellectual bubble. Also, as a tenured academic myself (in psychology), I believe Ellie puts far too much faith in the "double-blindedness" of peer review - basically, everyone knows what everyone else is working on. This was, for me, your most slipshod podcast.
Jordan B Peterson the big daddy of youtube intellectuals
Mostly agreed
According to Said. He had reasons, which they lay out. Maybe engage with them...?
😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡