tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2460568269380588535.post1597390426865808796..comments2023-09-28T18:23:46.614+05:00Comments on Umer Toor Blog: Intuition and Intellect: An Expert's ViewM Umer Toorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16945276129564758593noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2460568269380588535.post-82095844009558480932008-12-16T21:16:00.000+05:002008-12-16T21:16:00.000+05:00That's what faith demands at certain occasions. He...That's what faith demands at certain occasions. Here I come remember words of Martin Lings he said about Shakespeare, "Shakespeare unlike Milton, has no illusions about the scope of reason. He knew that since reason is limited to this world it is powerless to 'justify the ways of God'." For that Lings say we need the 'faculty of vision' which is intellect, symbolised, he says, by 'the Holy Grail and by the Elixir of Life'. Are you availble with books by authors like Frithjof Schuon, Seyyed Hossien Nasr, rene Genoun, Huston Smith???M. Umer Toorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14084973851357078045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2460568269380588535.post-89270238005135758722008-12-16T20:40:00.000+05:002008-12-16T20:40:00.000+05:00Yea, I'd have to say that while facts are an integ...Yea, I'd have to say that while facts are an integral part of reasoning, they are not the beginning or the ending of an outcome. As a result I don't believe that facts are the end of everything, and that there must be more, even if only to make space for the fact that we may be wrong.<BR/><BR/>So, yes I do believe that we need to look pasts facts in order to come to any credible conclusion, even if it requires some level of faith. That's not to say that we must disregard facts that don't 'suite' our argument, but it does mean that we always need to have a touch of faith.<BR/><BR/>It would be foolish to disregard faith all together.jeb_springfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10554244587819932878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2460568269380588535.post-19587657174674221382008-12-16T19:40:00.000+05:002008-12-16T19:40:00.000+05:00Richard, whatever little I have read so far about ...Richard, whatever little I have read so far about intuition (some call it 'analogical inference', gut feelings, et al), and less little about intellect, supremely testifies your thoughts. Though, I am not clear if intuition can transcend contexts (semantics say that every meaning, of a word or sentence or phrase, is context-bound). But when I look at the word 'Allah', it is a transcendent word, says Hamid Elgar, having no origin from any word, as some claim it to be.<BR/><BR/>So what do you think about it? I've asked some philosophers about it, as I've published it, they say no, you cannot transcend/go beyond above facts!<BR/><BR/>Regards!M. Umer Toorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14084973851357078045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2460568269380588535.post-44229922590824642842008-12-16T19:13:00.000+05:002008-12-16T19:13:00.000+05:00That makes a lot of sense. I think that the intell...That makes a lot of sense. I think that the intellect has more to do with the conscious mind while the intuition has to do with the unconscious. The two are inherently linked, but the one has more to do with taking in surroundings and processing based on previous experiences while the other has to do with the processing of information which is gathered through research / learning.<BR/><BR/>At the same time, it makes sense to me that the two would develop together, because the same deductive reasoning skills are applied to both, and as you develop these skills both intellect and intuition are furthered.jeb_springfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10554244587819932878noreply@blogger.com