Quiddity of Intellectual and Intellectuality: A Comparative Exploration

Abstract

     The conceptual landscape within social sciences lacks a singular, universally accepted definition for phenomena. This inherent ambiguity and heterogeneity persistently challenge our understanding of terms, including “intellectual” and “intellectuality.” Diverse perspectives have shaped distinct interpretations of these concepts, resulting in multifaceted definitions.

·        Kant’s Perspective: Immanuel Kant characterizes the intellectual as an individual who attains intellectual maturity and engages in independent thought.

·        Socratic and Platonic Notions: Socrates and Plato associate intellectuals with a critical consciousness of society, emphasizing their role as societal critics.

·        Jean-Paul Sartre’s View: Jean-Paul Sartre identifies intellectuals as individuals with a mission—a purpose beyond mere contemplation.

·        Ali Shariati’s Definition: Ali Shariati views intellectuals as self-aware agents with a social mission, bridging theory and practice.

However, context matters significantly. Each term acquires specific connotations within a particular framework, influencing societal interactions. Precise definitions are essential for coherent theoretical discourse and practical applications. Despite the inherent diversity of interpretations, relative definitions can emerge from this multiplicity of perspectives. In this article, we endeavor to explore the quiddity of “intellectual” and “intellectuality,” examining definitions provided by scholars and experts, while highlighting their distinctive characteristics.