The virtue of intelligence presumes the quality of faith.
Without this prerequisite of trust and patience, the door of intelligence opens
to no one. After walking through the door of intelligence, the light grows
brighter as we choose to embrace the new challenges that allow us to grow into
greater intelligence. However, without paying the price, the virtue of
intelligence appears foolish. Just as described in this excerpt: “Here is the casual assumption that a
choice must be made between goodness and intelligence; that stupidity is first
cousin to moral conduct, and cleverness the first step into mischief; that
reason and God are not on good terms with each other; that the mind and the
heart are rival buckets in the well of truth, inexorably balanced--full mind,
starved heart--stout heart, weak head.” In truth, it is when the mind and heart
learn to work together that harmony comes, and the stark realities of life flow
better all through the lens of intelligence.
Perhaps the lack of pictures painted by the printed word of intelligence and goodness working in synchrony results from man’s lack of preparation to understand the laws upon which such underpinnings align. Also, the virtue of humility must be exercised for the good and intelligence to flow more meaningfully than in the prose of good guys whose life is plagued with tragedy or bad, intelligent guys. For example, “in Shakspere's plays there are some highly intelligent men, but they are either villains or tragic victims. To be as intelligent as Richard or Iago or Edmund seems to involve some break with goodness; to be as wise as Prospero seems to imply some Faust-like traffic with the forbidden world; to be as thoughtful as Hamlet seems to be too thoughtful to live. In Shakspere the prizes of life go to such men as Bassanio, or Duke Orsino, or Florizel--men of good conduct and sound character, but of no particular intelligence.” Perhaps, Shakespeare wanted to highlight true tragedy, man caving into his own pride.
With pride, people sell themselves short to gain that grace which marks that path wherein goodness and intelligence flow more meaningfully. Interestingly, it is characteristically the poor among the ranks of the humble. “No less significant is the kind of emotion the English novelist invites towards his secondary or lower-class heroes--toward Mr. Boffin in Our Mutual Friend, for example, or Harry Foker in Pendennis. These characters amuse us, and we feel pleasantly superior to them, but we agree with the novelist that they are wholly admirable in their station.”
For me, the irony purports itself in the lack of grace remaining for the reader to uncover, so this means that the literature has been written intelligibly, but with seemingly unintelligent and good characters for a more noble cause, whether intentionally or not. “Fielding wrote Tom Jones to show that a good man sometimes does a bad action, consciously or unconsciously, and a bad man sometimes does good, intentionally or unintentionally,” demonstrates the condemnation that comes upon a prideful man who can’t have it all.
Erskine poses the greatest moral obligation for each reader to explore: “that it is the moral obligation of an intelligent creature to find out as far as possible whether a given action leads to a good or a bad end; and that any system of ethics that excuses him from that obligation is vicious. If I give you poison, meaning to give you wholesome food, I have--to say the least--not done a good act; and unless I intend to throw overboard all pretence to intelligence, I must feel some responsibility for that trifling neglect to find out whether what I gave you was food or poison.”
The following summary matches my thoughts and sentiments: “Obvious as the matter is in this academic illustration, it ought to have been still more obvious in Matthew Arnold's famous plea for culture. The purpose of culture, he said, is "to make reason and the will of God prevail." This formula he quoted from an Englishman. Differently stated, the purpose of culture, he said, is "to make an intelligent being yet more intelligent." This formula he borrowed from a Frenchman. The basis culture must have in character, the English resolution to make reason and the will of God prevail, Arnold took for granted; no man ever set a higher price on character--so far as character by itself will go. But he spent his life trying to sow a little suspicion that before we can make the will of God prevail we must find out what is the will of God.” For me, these ideas align with the scripture, “The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.” Psalms 34:18
Although this article causes a reader to dive into the exploration of the virtue of intelligence in literature, I feel that it is our moral obligation to check ourselves to determine if we are being true to the intelligence within us. When we chose to be humble, and exercise faith through trust and patience, then we can develop the good gifts planted within us to fulfill our personal missions and help other to fulfill their own missions.
Perhaps the lack of pictures painted by the printed word of intelligence and goodness working in synchrony results from man’s lack of preparation to understand the laws upon which such underpinnings align. Also, the virtue of humility must be exercised for the good and intelligence to flow more meaningfully than in the prose of good guys whose life is plagued with tragedy or bad, intelligent guys. For example, “in Shakspere's plays there are some highly intelligent men, but they are either villains or tragic victims. To be as intelligent as Richard or Iago or Edmund seems to involve some break with goodness; to be as wise as Prospero seems to imply some Faust-like traffic with the forbidden world; to be as thoughtful as Hamlet seems to be too thoughtful to live. In Shakspere the prizes of life go to such men as Bassanio, or Duke Orsino, or Florizel--men of good conduct and sound character, but of no particular intelligence.” Perhaps, Shakespeare wanted to highlight true tragedy, man caving into his own pride.
With pride, people sell themselves short to gain that grace which marks that path wherein goodness and intelligence flow more meaningfully. Interestingly, it is characteristically the poor among the ranks of the humble. “No less significant is the kind of emotion the English novelist invites towards his secondary or lower-class heroes--toward Mr. Boffin in Our Mutual Friend, for example, or Harry Foker in Pendennis. These characters amuse us, and we feel pleasantly superior to them, but we agree with the novelist that they are wholly admirable in their station.”
For me, the irony purports itself in the lack of grace remaining for the reader to uncover, so this means that the literature has been written intelligibly, but with seemingly unintelligent and good characters for a more noble cause, whether intentionally or not. “Fielding wrote Tom Jones to show that a good man sometimes does a bad action, consciously or unconsciously, and a bad man sometimes does good, intentionally or unintentionally,” demonstrates the condemnation that comes upon a prideful man who can’t have it all.
Erskine poses the greatest moral obligation for each reader to explore: “that it is the moral obligation of an intelligent creature to find out as far as possible whether a given action leads to a good or a bad end; and that any system of ethics that excuses him from that obligation is vicious. If I give you poison, meaning to give you wholesome food, I have--to say the least--not done a good act; and unless I intend to throw overboard all pretence to intelligence, I must feel some responsibility for that trifling neglect to find out whether what I gave you was food or poison.”
The following summary matches my thoughts and sentiments: “Obvious as the matter is in this academic illustration, it ought to have been still more obvious in Matthew Arnold's famous plea for culture. The purpose of culture, he said, is "to make reason and the will of God prevail." This formula he quoted from an Englishman. Differently stated, the purpose of culture, he said, is "to make an intelligent being yet more intelligent." This formula he borrowed from a Frenchman. The basis culture must have in character, the English resolution to make reason and the will of God prevail, Arnold took for granted; no man ever set a higher price on character--so far as character by itself will go. But he spent his life trying to sow a little suspicion that before we can make the will of God prevail we must find out what is the will of God.” For me, these ideas align with the scripture, “The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.” Psalms 34:18
Although this article causes a reader to dive into the exploration of the virtue of intelligence in literature, I feel that it is our moral obligation to check ourselves to determine if we are being true to the intelligence within us. When we chose to be humble, and exercise faith through trust and patience, then we can develop the good gifts planted within us to fulfill our personal missions and help other to fulfill their own missions.