[RooxiaNof]

Intellect – Intelligence – (and) Emotions

For the benefit of those who do not know the history of this thread, I posted a patristic definition on what the “intellect” is in the “censors” thread as a direct response to the discussion about using products, originally designed for use in other religions, even if these are now only being produced commercially.

I am sure, that this post caused a degree of confusion for everyone and a challenge was put forward that there is nothing wrong in using “intelligence” to discern the things of God; which I do not disagree with.

Respectfully, no one should “assume” that because I posted about the “Intellect” (in the Censers thread) that I was implying or proposing that “intelligence” is any less important or should be downgraded or even, not used at all; if that is what some people assumed I meant then that (IMO) is an error made on behalf of each reader …

The purpose of posting about the “intellect” was to remind people, highlight, that “intelligence” is not the only factor that we should use to “discern the things of God” (using the example of the “censors” thread, a poster made reference to the fact that she returned to one of these shops only to feel ‘sick’ from the smells – a clear indication that her body, under the direction of her intellect, was giving her strong warnings that this shop and its products were not good for her).

This is the main issue I think people are struggling with: What does a human being require that gives him the knowledge to discern/know/see the things of God? This is an Intellect versus Intelligence issue though for me it is how do they compliment.

To cover such a BIG and topic I propose that we can explore the following basic questions:

1) What is the definition given to us by our fathers for “reason/intelligence”
Reason (Gr. Dianoia): the discursive, conceptualising and logical faculty in man, the function of which is to draw conclusions or formulate concepts deriving from data provided either by revelation or spiritual knowledge or by sense-observation. The knowledge of the reason is consequently of a lower order than spiritual knowledge and does not imply any direct apprehension or perception of the inner essences or principles of created beings, still less of divine truth itself. Indeed, such apprehension or perception, which is the function of the intellect is beyond the scope of reason

2) What is the definition given to us by our father for “intellect”
Intellect (Gr. Nous): the highest faculty in man, through which (provided it is purified) he knows God or the inner essences or principles of created things by means of direct apprehension or spiritual perception. Unlike reason (Gr. “dianoia”) – from which it MUST be distinguished carefully- the intellect DOES NOT function by formulating abstract concepts and then arguing on this basis to a conclusion reached through deductive reasoning. It understands divine truth by means of immediate EXPERIENCE, intuition or ‘simple cognition’ (St. Isaac the Syrian’s term). The intellect dwells in the ‘depths of the soul’ and it constitutes the innermost aspect of the heart (St. Diadochos) – it is the organ of contemplation or the ‘eye of the heart’.

Having established an Orthodox based definition for reason/intelligence and intellect then the fundamental question is (thereby also providing some understanding behind why I put an emphasis on intellect in the other thread):

How is the “intellect” distinguished from “reason”?

To start the discussion, I took the liberty to post the definitions for intellect and reason, as given by the Philokalia, above.

Personally, the definitions in themselves SAY MUCH. I never debated them in the other thread and dont feel I need to in this thread .. since, the definition for reason says it all.