This paper examines whether intellectualism in epistemology is plausible in light of the relation between knowledge and practical interests. The discourse begins by first conceptualising the debate, and providing a brief overview of terminology; including some definitions of the term ‘epistemology’ and what it entails, and a brief overview of what ‘intellectualism’ is and what it refers to. Following on from this, there will then be a section looking at the role of intellectualism in epistemology, and asking whether the marriage of the two ideas is still plausible when considering that much knowledge is produced as the result of practical subjective interests based upon instinct (with instincts having no place in the thought processes of the intellect). While this is a multifaceted and complex problem, a relatively simplistic view will be taken in order to clarify this discourse, and some examples will be given in order to illuminate some of the academic discussions in this area. Furthermore, there will also be a brief section looking at epistemology in the twenty-first century, and how such ideas reflect upon how people currently see the world; before a brief discussion is held critiquing the discourse in this area. Finally, some tentative conclusions will be offered with regard to whether intellectualism has any place in current theories of knowledge.
2 Conceptualising the Debate: A Brief Overview of Terminology
2.1 Defining ‘Epistemology’
The word ‘Epistemology’ comes from the Greek episteme, meaning ‘knowledge’, and logos, which means ‘study’. Therefore, from a linguistic point of view, the word epistemology is referring, in the most literal sense, to the study of knowledge (Horrigan, 2007). However, Horrigan (2007) elaborates upon this somewhat, and states that epistemology is “the science of knowledge studied from the philosophical point of view” (p. vii), or “the science of knowledge in its ultimate causes and first principle, studied using the light of natural reason” (Horrigan, 2007, p. vii). Moreover, Popkin & Stroll (1969) also argue that epistemology is one of the most important branches of philosophy, and that: “Philosophers have attempted to discover the means by which our knowledge is acquired, the extent of our knowledge, and the standards or criteria by which we can judge the reliability of knowledge claims” (p. 204). Indeed, much knowledge that has been acquired throughout human history has already been overturned.
2.2 An Overview of ‘Intellectualism’: What is it?
Halliwell & Rasmussen (2014) note that some academics use the term ‘intellectualism’ synonymously with the term ‘rationalism’. However, Patterson (2012) takes a more straightforward approach, and explains that intellectualism is the philosophy or theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason; or, it is someone who is “limited to the brain and its thinking” (Patterson, 2012, p. 64). Thus, pure reason alone is used by the intellect, with any notion of intuition or insight (which is likely the result of unconscious thought processes) being dismissed. As such, for the intellect, only the conscious mind is utilised in order to come to reasoned decisions, and intellectualism is thus a more pure form of rationalism. Therefore, the discourse shall now turn to whether intellectualism in epistemology is plausible.
3 Intellectualism in Epistemology: Is It Plausible?
To begin with, Bengson & Moffett (2011) question whether epistemology is compatible with intellectualism. The problem is that there are various kinds of knowledge, some that is based upon reason and science, and others that are based upon beliefs and instincts. For example, many people believe in a god. While for some, this is purely an instinctual belief that is based upon faith and religious scriptures, for others, it also has a scientific basis (with the ‘big bang’ theory pointing to, in the opinion of some, the existence of an original creator). However, for intellectuals, instinct and blind faith have no place in the creation of knowledge, and only pure logic and reason are the guiding lights. Moreover, Stanley (2005) points out that knowledge is also, on an individual level, often the result of practical interests, and people’s knowledge is often the product of what interests them—which is often a fragment of any comprehensive knowledge, and can result in researcher bias.
To elaborate upon this, Jun (2006) notes that: “a human activity is closely related to a person’s practical interests, and knowledge is a social product of shared m
Order this paper