What do you think?
Rate this book
483 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1947
For a mass of people to be led to think coherently and in the same coherent fashion about the real present world, is a “philosophical� event far more important and “original� than the discovery by some philosophical “genius� of a truth which remains the property of small groups of intellectuals.
Anyone with a superior intellectual formation with a point of view opposed to his can put forward arguments than he and really tear him to pieces logically and so on. But should the man of the people change his opinions just because of this? In that case he might find himself having to change every day, or every time he meets an ideological adversary who is his intellectual superior. […] The man of the people thinks that so many like-thinking people can’t be wrong […] and he remembers, indeed, hearing expounded, discursively, coherently, in a way that left him convinced, the reasons behind his faith.
1. Never to tire of repeating its own arguments (though offering literary variation of form): repetition is the best didactic means for working on the popular mentality.
2. To work incessantly to raise the intellectual level of ever-growing strata of the populace, in other words, to give a personality to the amorphous mass element. This means working to produce élites of intellectuals of a new type which arise directly out of the masses, but remain in contact with them to become, as it were, the whalebone in the corset.
The popular element “feels� but does not always know or understand; the intellectual element “knows� but does not always understand and in particular does not always feel. The two extremes are therefore pedantry and philistinism on the one hand and blind passion and sectarianism on the other. Not that the pedant cannot be impassioned; far from it. Impassioned pedantry is every bit as ridiculous and dangerous as the wildest sectarianism and demagogy. The intellectual’s error consists in believing that one can know without understanding and even more without feeling and being impassioned. […] One cannot make politics-history without this passion, without this sentimental connection between intellectuals and people-nation.