Intellectual Generosity
I am inviting folks to attend my upcoming AREA Studies Seminar & Studio regardless of whether they can make the time and take the initiative to read any of the referenced texts. This is because, unlike typical academic seminars, mine isn’t a gathering for “out-reading” but, rather, it is one for “reading-in”. The four theses below endeavor to develop the distinction between intellects that endeavor to “out-read” and those “read-in”.
One.
A statement often uttered by intellectuals: “Well, first you have to read … before you can say anything about …”
This kind of statement, and many others like it, serve to make the intellectual appear exclusive, part of an in-group composed of persons “in the know.” It is the statement of an intellectual who, consciously or unconsciously, derives satisfaction from “out-reading” others, leaving them behind in a cloud of dust.
I have little patience for such intellectuals. They are misers or, to be more precise, mere academic intellectuals.
Two.
As a counterfoil to academic intellectuals, I want to make the case for magnanimous intellectuals who “read-in” others instead of “out-reading” others.
The magnanimous intellectual, recognizing that a text holds knowledge another person might need, integrates that knowledge into their conversations and correspondence. In other words, the magnanimous intellectual—one who transcends mere academic posturing—finds ways to impart knowledge directly, generously sharing insights rather than hoarding them.
If you are certain that a text offers knowledge someone else needs, it is because you have already acquired that knowledge yourself. Therefore, you can provide that knowledge directly without imposing the text on the other person. This, of course, requires effort on your part to explain and contextualize, but generosity often demands shouldering burdens for others when you are able.
Three.
The magnanimous intellectual doesn’t “out-read” others but instead reads ahead for others, then backtracks to read them in. They offer others the intelligence they need to determine what they might choose to read for themselves.
If the magnanimous intellectual feels uncertain about their ability to convey the knowledge a text contains, they cannot confidently assert that the text provides any useful knowledge at all. In such cases, the magnanimous intellectual’s only recourse is to offer to read the text alongside the other person.
Four.
Magnanimous intellectuals do not demand silence from others until they have read the book on a topic. Instead, they:
(i) engage in conversation or correspondence to share the knowledge they have gained from the book,
(ii) offer to read the book alongside others,
(iii) patiently listen to others, or
(iv) withdraw from the conversation altogether.
Options (iii) and (iv) are critical. A magnanimous intellectual listens patiently before imparting knowledge, especially when they suspect that the other person might misuse the knowledge a text provides. If the other person explicitly expresses intent to abuse such knowledge, the magnanimous intellectual must withdraw from the exchange entirely.
