|
The
Neglect of the Intellect: Sloth
by Mortimer J. Adler, Ph.D.
I propose to consider the disuse or nonuse of
the intellect, for which the most appropriate name
is sloth. That English word is the translation of a
Latin term in the Christian catalogue of mortal
sins set forth by St. Gregory the Great. It also
became the name for an almost completely dormant
mammal that is usually found hanging by its claws
on the branch of a tree. Because of this latter
identification, sloth has in ordinary speech come
to signify gross physical inactivity. In borrowing
that term from both ordinary speech and from
theological discourse, I have adopted it to
designate an almost total neglect of the intellect
or an inadequate use of it.
In the catalogue of mortal sins, sloth stands
for spiritual lethargy or torpor. With their
connotation of deep sleep, the words "lethargy" and
"torpor" may be inappropriate for what I mean in
using the word "sloth." But what I have in mind is
conveyed by emphasis on the spiritual, not
physical, dimension of our conduct. It is the
intellectual, not physical, inactivity of a person
for which I am using the word "sloth."
The ideal of intellectual virtue portrayed in
the preceding chapter can be approximated in some
degree by anyone who has the ability and
willingness to make the effort. There are some
human beings who, because of minimal or defective
intellectual endowment, may not have the requisite
ability. But there are a great many more who have
sufficient ability to make the effort and fail to
do so. It is those persons that I am charging with
the fault of not using their intellects in the
proper fashion.
Sloth is a moral fault, but unlike injustice
that results in misconduct toward others, sloth is
a moral fault that causes the misconduct of the
individual's private life. In this respect, it is
more like the lack of temperance, which is
abstinence from sensual pleasures or the lack of
fortitude, which is a habitual unwillingness to
take the pains involved in doing what one ought to
do for the sake of leading a morally good life.
One ought to make good use of one's intellect in
order to lead a morally good life. Stated another
way, one ought to lead an intellectual life. But
many of us do not lead intellectual lives. Many of
us are anti-intellectual. Many do not use their
intellects beyond those uses they cannot avoid its
cooperation with the sensory powers in acts of
perception, memory, and imagination.
If they go beyond such cooperative uses of the
intellect, which confer conceptual illumination
upon the things we perceive, remember, and imagine,
they do not use their intellects for the purpose of
increased knowledge and augmented understanding,
sought for their own sake and not for some
ulterior, practical purpose. They do not engage in
the pursuit of truth for the love of it and for no
other reason. They do not count the sheer delight
of thinking well among the joys they prize and
seek.
Those who do not lead intellectual lives deploy
their intellectual powers in the work-a-day world
of earning a living for the sake of getting ahead
in that world. If they were not compelled to use
their intellects for that purpose, they would not
be inclined to do so. When they are not immersed in
the economic rat race, they resort to various forms
of play and entertainment for the sake of
recreation from the fatigues of toil or in order to
kill the time that lies heavy on their hands. It
never or seldom occurs to them to use free time for
the exacting pursuits of leisure instead of for
recreation or the pleasures of play.
The pleasures of play are intensified by great
skill in one's participation in whatever sports or
games to which one is inclined. One has to use
one's intellect to acquire such skill. But that use
of the intellect, taken together with its use for
economic or even political advancement, is hardly a
sufficient use. While it is not total abstinence
from intellectual activity, it is certainly an
inadequate employment of whatever degree of
intellectual power we have.
In sharp contrast, what I have called the
exacting pursuits of leisure are all forms of
intellectual activity in which the intellect is (1)
used productively in making things that are useful
and enjoyable, (2) used practically in making
judgments about things to be done for the sake of a
morally good life, and (3) used speculatively in
the pursuit of truth and in all forms of learning
for the sake of gaining knowledge, understanding,
and wisdom. These three uses of the intellect will,
if they become habitual, confer upon a person the
intellectual virtues that Aristotle named in Greek
antiquity -- art and prudence, understanding,
knowledge, and wisdom. On the part of those who
have sufficient intellectual ability to do so,
sloth is either a habitual reluctance to employ
one's intellectual power adequately, or it consists
in almost total abstinence from an active
engagement of the intellect in pursuits of
leisure.
Anti-intellectualism gives rise to the most
extreme, the most morally deplorable, form of
sloth. It is to be found in persons for whom the
ultimate objectives in life are the maximization of
pleasure, money, fame, or power and who, thus
motivated, express their contempt for those who
waste their lives in purely intellectual pursuits.
It is almost as if they wished they did not have
the burden of having intellects that might distract
them from their fanatical devotion to
nonintellectual aims. It is man's glory to be the
only intellectual animal on earth. That imposes
upon human beings the moral obligation to lead
intellectual lives. The slothful are blind to the
glory and neglectful of the obligation.
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy
Magazine...
Academy
Showcase
Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|