Came here to say this. I would like to know the definition (and its theory behind) to have a conversation about it, but I won’t watch three hours of a video to get the answer (or not!).

Exactly. That's all this is. That's all ANYTHING is. Just a series of meaningless bullshit until we can get home from work/school for the day, and be naked for the next 6 hours. Freely letting our farts out without fear of judgement. Letting our man-titties and butt cheeks jiggle in the vibrations of the long fart. Then we can masturbate, and eat dorritos.

Everything else is just made up bullshit designed to waste our time.

When we do testing in schools to determine giftedness it is the top 95th percentile of different tests. It wasn’t just reading and math but also nonverbal tasks (like tangram type things). We used state testing and IQ scores as well. We tried to create a whole profile of a child and then determine which ones met the criteria of requiring gifted services (95th percentile and above). I don’t think there’s a federal guideline so each state (or even each district) sets their own parameters. The twice exceptional kids were the ones with ADHD or other diagnoses. But yes, it was possible that these kids were not the “smart, model student” though I’ve had plenty of those as well.

To me, being an intellectual doesn’t necessarily mean someone is exceptionally smart in the traditional sense. I’ve always taken it to mean a person who can take a few steps back and dispassionately, honestly evaluate things from a distance. It describes how they think, not what they think.

I listen to a lot of podcasts with guests/hosts I’d consider intellectuals, and I’ve often found that, given the same information, these people tend to land on the same or similar conclusions on unrelated topics. Another common trait of an intellectual is that their ideas don’t map neatly onto a political ideology. They don’t adopt ideas wholesale but instead form opinions on different subjects individually. Maybe I’m talking about intellectual honesty now, which might be slightly different, but that’s my take on it. I remember Sean Carroll defining intellectualism along these lines on an old podcast, and it resonated with me.

There have been two recent events that, in my view, serve as good tests of a person’s intellectual honesty. First was the Trump assassination attempt. One of the thinkers I admire most is also one of the most anti-Trump people I know, but I was confident they’d still condemn political violence like this, which they did. The second event was just a few days ago: the landing of the Starship 1st stage. If a person is so blinded by their hatred of Musk that they can’t admit how impressive that was, then I don’t consider them an intellectually honest thinker.