The Intellectual of the 21st Century and Criticism of the Education System.

Introduction

While The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy defines an intellectual as someone involved in academic study or the critical evaluation of ideas and issues, it is important to note that this concept is inherently time-dependent and, as such, is subject to varying perceptions in different time periods.

Paradigm One

From the inception of recorded history to what Drucker (1994) referred to as the onset of the Industrial Era, science was perceived as enlightenment. It was categorized into a few primary branches, each of which could be fully mastered by an individual, earning them the titles of ‘Hakim’ or ‘Guru.’ These figures were considered the intellectuals of their era, possessing a superficial understanding, by today’s standards, yet profound within the context of their time. Essentially, one could assert that ‘intellectuals knew something about everything.’ Their knowledge spanned a diverse range of subjects, but as science was in its early stages, their collective understanding was not as profound by modern measures. In this analogy, Alireza has likened them to a lake — covering a wide expanse but lacking depth, reflective of the limited depth of their knowledge. Despite this, these intellectuals successfully met the expectations of their time, as depicted in Figure 1, which provides a typical representation of such individuals.

Paradigm Second

With the onset of the Industrial Era, various scientific branches began to diverge, gaining increasing independence from one another. Simultaneously, these disciplines experienced a rapid quantitative expansion. This divergence led to the emergence of fields that had not previously warranted recognition in the earlier Lake Paradigm era. As sciences became more specialized and intricate, each discipline flourished both qualitatively and quantitatively. Consequently, the educational focus shifted towards cultivating experts with profound knowledge in a single discipline — a paradigm where individuals were expected to know ‘everything about something.’ Their expertise resembled a deep well, hence the metaphor of the well.

The zenith of this paradigm occurred in the last quarter of the 20th century, marked by a surge in the number of individuals with PhDs and post-PhD qualifications worldwide, particularly in the United States, regarded as one of the educational cradles of the modern world. These individuals became the intellectuals of their time. Figure 2 serves as an illustration of such an expert.

Suggestion

The challenges and complexities of the modern world are intricate and interconnected, making any attempt to address them from a singular perspective inherently destined to fail. The systemic nature of these issues means that a solution to one aspect may inadvertently undermine other aspects. An antidote to this challenge has been found in the emergence of interdisciplinary fields such as industrial psychology and neurolinguistics. While these fields have brought attention to previously overlooked areas and proven beneficial, their maturation has led to dogmatism, diminishing flexibility and insight.

In the 21st century, an intellectual is characterized by possessing profound knowledge in one or two disciplines (the abyss of the valley) along with some understanding of various other disciplines (the steep sides of the valley). Such individuals are expected to ‘know a lot about something and something about a lot of things.’ They serve as living examples of interdisciplinary thinkers. Figure 3 provides a typical representation of such an individual.

Individuals with a broad understanding across multiple disciplines can harness the full benefits of synergy. Their wealth of knowledge from diverse fields creates a totality that transcends the sum of its parts. Aligning with the definition presented in this paper, such intellectuals possess a unique capacity for “a critical evaluation of ideas and issues” as they can perceive numerous aspects and facets of complex problems. Unlike experts confined to specific disciplines, these intellectuals can navigate the murky areas of a field, uncovering invisible networks.

To refine the earlier definition of an intellectual, it could be stated as follows: ‘A person who engages in the study of various disciplines to empower themselves to provide critical evaluations of ideas and issues and to illuminate new areas of knowledge by recognizing invisible networks among different fields.’ Real-life examples support the functional value of such individuals. Revolutionary ideas in late 20th-century science often originated from individuals whose expertise extended beyond their specialized fields. Noam Chomsky, renowned for linguistics, significantly influenced philosophy, intellectual history, international affairs, and U.S. foreign policy. Another example is Abdol Karim Soroush, holding an MS in pharmacology and a PhD in the history and philosophy of science, whose contributions span divinity, philosophy, and epistemology.

Further evidence lies in groundbreaking ideas like buffering in change management, fuzzy logic in engineering, and neural networks in management, originating from biology, mathematics, and neurology, respectively. Without individuals bridging the gap between target and source disciplines, such innovations wouldn’t have occurred. These examples underscore the desirability and functional value of individuals with a multidisciplinary perspective, advocating for a paradigm shift from mono-discipline learning (well) to a multi-disciplinary (valley) learning paradigm. This shift should be supported and facilitated by educators and the education system through a corresponding paradigm shift.

Conclusion

Contemporary challenges demand novel solutions and problem-solving approaches that transcend the confines of traditional disciplines and methods. Effective solutions and techniques appear to emerge from minds unbounded by a single discipline. This doesn’t imply that each individual must encompass all knowledge, but it does suggest that the era of solely relying on expertise in a single field is waning.

The suggestion proposed could be perceived as the blueprint for educating a 21st-century intellectual. He şs inclined to believe that it may not only be a key to thriving in the present era but could also serve as a survival strategy in the 22nd century. Embracing a multidisciplinary approach seems essential for navigating the complexities of contemporary and future challenges, fostering a mindset that values diverse perspectives and interconnected knowledge.

Reference:

1. A. Jalali Farahani (2005). The shifting paradigm: Who is the intellectual of the 21st century?