General discussion


Dialogue by Intellectuals

By XEntity ·
Intellectual discussions, in days of old, were in mahogany rooms filled with smoke and polite chatter. The warm glow of incandescent lamps cast across the humored faces of distinguished middle aged men in high back leather chairs upon which their sport coats ride up on occasionally. Their shirt collars were open and wilds of hair curled out of their shirt as well as around their thick black rim glasses. Cigars smoldered in half full ash trays sitting cockeyed atop folded newspapers. This is the setting of a retro intellectual conversation.

Today, conversations on a host of topics are carried out not in the same manner but rather over the internet without a face-to-face dialogue which is somewhat informal and most certainly undisciplined.

Most honest intellectuals, besides being humble, will remark that there is a sense of decorum, a rigor, to elevated thought and subsequent dialogues; much of which was taken from those old swanky mahogany rooms. A well humored intellectual will realize that reason and commonsense are quite apart from each other. Reason is the ability to go beyond awareness and develop understanding but commonsense is when a reasonable argument appeals to our God-given sensibilities.

When it comes to truly deep issues there is a strong temptation to retreat to unreasoned beliefs often wrongfully calling it commonsense. To deal with this the ancient Greek philosophers attempted to establish formalized human reasoning using unassailable rules of logical deduction. These Greeks would stand upon flat elevated rocks as an orator to those who gathered. In more current times, intellectuals would sit in high back leather chairs and smoke pipes in dimly lit mahogany rooms and exchange views. And today, many who profess to be intellectual sit in dimly lit rooms as the glow of a computer monitor cast shadows across their face. The only sense of their identity is perhaps hidden in an avatar rather than in their proclamations of character.

Many people today have lost sight of not only the other human but the purpose of such conversations. These conversations are not as much to espouse a viewpoint, gain followers, or confirm a belief but to discern the strength or weakness of a particular view point. There is an art to carrying an intellectual conversation.

The successful intellectual conversation is unlike ordinary run-of-the-mill chatter. One has to bring recognized credibility into the dialogue and a foundational base from which the dialogue begins. Often proper names with surnames are used in reverence another?s views. During discourse when presenting an opposing opinion, one often caveats the dissenting opinions with respectful language that softens the objection. Such language may include ?There is another view on that point?? or ?I would like to provide an alternate perspective? in lieu of ?I disagree??, ?you are wrong?, or other language that diminishes the other person?s significance or contribution. Rarely are first person pronouns used as ego is ideally removed from the dialogue and the focus is placed on the information and knowledge exchanges. For example, ?My studies?? may be rephrased as ?The understanding I have come to know ? ?. Unfortunately, there are those who ego is to argue simply to hear their own voice. These people are so busy listening to themselves that they have little time to form original thoughts. The goal is to debate without heightened language. More important than the language, acumen, and respect is the keen awareness of fundamental Theorems, Principles, and Laws that intellectual discourse relies on. Some of the most basic are:

Ockham's Razor
Competent Analysis
Innocent Humor
Da Vincian Principles
Creative Thinking
Critical Thinking
Common Thinking

There are styles and methods that are not acceptable to use in intellectual discourse which include:

Building Prejudicial Arguments
Inappropriate humor

To be proficient in carrying an intellectual dialogue one must not only be studied but also trained and practiced. That which is reasoned must use a variety of available tools. These tools respect other views and can strengthen one's own argument. The structure to reason involves both mathematics and words. Most often the language is translated into mathematics but mathematics can demonstrate behaviors that must be translated into words.

Deeply religious people mistakenly equate the hearts and minds of humans divisively to emotion and reason respectively. They fail to realize that the Bible encourages intellectual conversations as long as they are centered rightfully on the knowledge and wisdom that God grants humans. In executing such dialogues one has to employ the rigors of integrity, intellect, resourcefulness, and love. By incorporating these attributes into the dialogue and sharing meaningful understanding and growth can mature and everyone becomes 'refreshed'.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Nope; it's gotta be "JOLT" cola.

by deepsand In reply to He should

Jeesh, man, that's so obvious that I've got to wonder where your mind was when you suggested Pepsi. After that, you're definitely not managing the marketing.

But, there is a choice assignment available for production of a live webcast of the blessed event; its your's if you like.

Collapse -

Artistic content??

by maecuff In reply to Bring Back Gentlemen Club ...

You've got to be kidding. That self-indulgent crap? Perhaps if you want people to appreciate your witty, 'original' prose, you should learn how to write first. Or,if it's applicable, find a better site to copy and paste from.

I'm predictable? Oh, Mr. Miami, I think we have a pot and kettle moment once again, don't we?

I don't understand the killing off of the odd dream, What dream are we talking about here?

Collapse -

Walk away, Mae

by neilb@uk In reply to Artistic content??

Unless, of course, you feel he warrants the attention. Personally, I can't be bothered to work out the parameters of his sad little world any further.

Neil :)

Collapse -


by maecuff In reply to Walk away, Mae

I'm a little under the weather this morning and this is a nice little distraction. Wish he'd come up with something better than feminazi, though. Rush really over did that a long time ago.

Collapse -

Speaking of Rush it isn't just the left that seeks access to the mainstream

by Absolutely In reply to Neil

via adoption of extremist versions of various ideologies. Rush himself gained access to mainstream society by adopting chauvinist bigotry. He never warranted anybody's attention, but perpetrated the fraud of his relevance with 'reverse discrimination' as the pretext.

Collapse -

You do make a good point, though.

by maecuff In reply to Walk away, Mae

I'd rather talk to you anyway. :)

Collapse -

:) at least I'm not a misogynist

by neilb@uk In reply to You do make a good point, ...

Unless, of course, one of you damn women beats me at something!

I've just had an entertaining day. We've had a lot of storms over here, up to 80mph winds, and today was nice so I popped down to check that my boat and its dinghy were all snuggled up in the Marina. Mine's OK - just popped one of the fenders - but the boat across the other side only has a couple of feet of the bow sticking out of the water. Apparently, a half dozen boats broke their moorings and either sank or crashed into the boat next to them and then sank.

The sad thing is that we know the owners quite well and have rowed across for many a drink. Hope they're insured and that they'll be back!

Roll on, Summer!


Collapse -

By the way

by maecuff In reply to :) at least I'm not a mis ...

I thought of you when I titled my first post in this thread, I wondered if you would get the Pulp Fiction reference?

Collapse -

Mae. Just remember that there are people worse off than you

by neilb@uk In reply to :) at least I'm not a mis ...

Related Discussions

Related Forums