What do you think?
Rate this book
Intellect: Mind Over Matter
The author examines the nature of the human intellect, its link to artificial and alien intelligence, the role of language in terms of mind and meaning, and the uses and abuses of intellect
205 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1990
8 people are currently reading
415 people want to read
About the author
Mortimer J. Adler
595 books1,053 followersNumerous published works of American educator and philosopher Mortimer Jerome Adler include
How to Read a Book
(1940) and
The Conditions of Philosophy
(1965).
This popular author worked with thought of Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas. He lived for the longest stretches in cities of New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and San Mateo. He worked for Columbia University, the University of Chicago, Encyclopædia Britannica, and own institute for philosophical research.
Born to Jewish immigrants, he dropped out school at 14 years of age in 1917 to a copy boy for the New York Sun with the ultimate aspiration to a journalist. Adler quickly returned to school to take writing classes at night and discovered the works of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and other men, whom he came to call heroes. He went to study at Columbia University and contributed to the student literary magazine, The Morningside, (a poem "Choice" in 1922 when Charles A. Wagner was editor-in-chief and Whittaker Chambers an associate editor). Though he failed to pass the required swimming test for a bachelor's degree (a matter that was rectified when Columbia gave him an honorary degree in 1983), he stayed at the university and eventually received an instructorship and finally a doctorate in psychology. While at Columbia University, Adler wrote his first book: Dialectic, published in 1927.
In 1930 Robert Hutchins, the newly appointed president of the University of Chicago, whom Adler had befriended some years earlier, arranged for Chicago’s law school to hire him as a professor of the philosophy of law; the philosophers at Chicago (who included James H. Tufts, E.A. Burtt, and George H. Mead) had "entertained grave doubts as to Mr. Adler's competence in the field [of philosophy]" and resisted Adler's appointment to the University's Department of Philosophy. Adler was the first "non-lawyer" to join the law school faculty. Adler also taught philosophy to business executives at the Aspen Institute.
Adler and Hutchins went on to found the Great Books of the Western World program and the Great Books Foundation. Adler founded and served as director of the Institute for Philosophical Research in 1952. He also served on the Board of Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica since its inception in 1949, and succeeded Hutchins as its chairman from 1974. As the director of editorial planning for the fifteenth edition of Britannica from 1965, he was instrumental in the major reorganization of knowledge embodied in that edition. He introduced the Paideia Proposal which resulted in his founding the Paideia Program, a grade-school curriculum centered around guided reading and discussion of difficult works (as judged for each grade). With Max Weismann, he founded The Center for the Study of The Great Ideas.
Adler long strove to bring philosophy to the masses, and some of his works (such as How to Read a Book) became popular bestsellers. He was also an advocate of economic democracy and wrote an influential preface to Louis Kelso's The Capitalist Manifesto. Adler was often aided in his thinking and writing by Arthur Rubin, an old friend from his Columbia undergraduate days. In his own words:
Unlike many of my contemporaries, I never write books for my fellow professors to read. I have no interest in the academic audience at all. I'm interested in Joe Doakes. A general audience can read any book I write—and they do.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortimer...
This popular author worked with thought of Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas. He lived for the longest stretches in cities of New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and San Mateo. He worked for Columbia University, the University of Chicago, Encyclopædia Britannica, and own institute for philosophical research.
Born to Jewish immigrants, he dropped out school at 14 years of age in 1917 to a copy boy for the New York Sun with the ultimate aspiration to a journalist. Adler quickly returned to school to take writing classes at night and discovered the works of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and other men, whom he came to call heroes. He went to study at Columbia University and contributed to the student literary magazine, The Morningside, (a poem "Choice" in 1922 when Charles A. Wagner was editor-in-chief and Whittaker Chambers an associate editor). Though he failed to pass the required swimming test for a bachelor's degree (a matter that was rectified when Columbia gave him an honorary degree in 1983), he stayed at the university and eventually received an instructorship and finally a doctorate in psychology. While at Columbia University, Adler wrote his first book: Dialectic, published in 1927.
In 1930 Robert Hutchins, the newly appointed president of the University of Chicago, whom Adler had befriended some years earlier, arranged for Chicago’s law school to hire him as a professor of the philosophy of law; the philosophers at Chicago (who included James H. Tufts, E.A. Burtt, and George H. Mead) had "entertained grave doubts as to Mr. Adler's competence in the field [of philosophy]" and resisted Adler's appointment to the University's Department of Philosophy. Adler was the first "non-lawyer" to join the law school faculty. Adler also taught philosophy to business executives at the Aspen Institute.
Adler and Hutchins went on to found the Great Books of the Western World program and the Great Books Foundation. Adler founded and served as director of the Institute for Philosophical Research in 1952. He also served on the Board of Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica since its inception in 1949, and succeeded Hutchins as its chairman from 1974. As the director of editorial planning for the fifteenth edition of Britannica from 1965, he was instrumental in the major reorganization of knowledge embodied in that edition. He introduced the Paideia Proposal which resulted in his founding the Paideia Program, a grade-school curriculum centered around guided reading and discussion of difficult works (as judged for each grade). With Max Weismann, he founded The Center for the Study of The Great Ideas.
Adler long strove to bring philosophy to the masses, and some of his works (such as How to Read a Book) became popular bestsellers. He was also an advocate of economic democracy and wrote an influential preface to Louis Kelso's The Capitalist Manifesto. Adler was often aided in his thinking and writing by Arthur Rubin, an old friend from his Columbia undergraduate days. In his own words:
Unlike many of my contemporaries, I never write books for my fellow professors to read. I have no interest in the academic audience at all. I'm interested in Joe Doakes. A general audience can read any book I write—and they do.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortimer...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
October 5, 2021
Even though this is not one of the best book written by Adler (unlike Reforming Education, How to Read a Book & Great Ideas from the Great Books), this book to some point, serve its own significant spectrum of discussion.
The three central ideas of this book are i) human mind, unlike animal – has intellectual powers; ii) these powers differs radically in kind, not just in degree; and iii) this power are immaterial and not embodied in brain or sense-organs.
Adler begin the discussion with how B.F. Skinner treat mind as merely physical phenomena and subsequently elaborate how human thought (conceptual) is different from animal thought (perceptual).
Then, Adler explain on three grades of life (read: soul): i) vegetative - which allow plants to nourish and grow; ii) sensitive - which allow animals for locomotion, attachment to a place, having sense, appetite and desire; and iii) intellectual soul - which allow human being to think, judge, reasoning and give decision.
If we understand our real nature of man, we will reach the virtue itself. When reason controls passion, the habits is called “virtues”, but when behaviour has been dominated by sensual impulses, the habits is called “vices”. Habits of using the intellect properly are the intellectual virtues.
According to Aristotle, there are five intellectual virtues: Nous, epistemé and sophia (understanding, knowledge and speculative wisdom) which are under umbrella of speculative virtues; techné and phronesis (art/skill and prudence/practical wisdom) which are under umbrella of practical intellect.
The pursuit of leisure can be divided into three; i) for useful and enjoyable, ii) for good life, and iii) to gain knowledge, understanding and wisdom.
Further rich elaboration on this topic, definitely can be read (and re-read) from Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam by Prof. Naquib al-Attas in Chapter 4: The Nature of Man and the Psychology of the Human Soul.
The three central ideas of this book are i) human mind, unlike animal – has intellectual powers; ii) these powers differs radically in kind, not just in degree; and iii) this power are immaterial and not embodied in brain or sense-organs.
Adler begin the discussion with how B.F. Skinner treat mind as merely physical phenomena and subsequently elaborate how human thought (conceptual) is different from animal thought (perceptual).
Then, Adler explain on three grades of life (read: soul): i) vegetative - which allow plants to nourish and grow; ii) sensitive - which allow animals for locomotion, attachment to a place, having sense, appetite and desire; and iii) intellectual soul - which allow human being to think, judge, reasoning and give decision.
If we understand our real nature of man, we will reach the virtue itself. When reason controls passion, the habits is called “virtues”, but when behaviour has been dominated by sensual impulses, the habits is called “vices”. Habits of using the intellect properly are the intellectual virtues.
According to Aristotle, there are five intellectual virtues: Nous, epistemé and sophia (understanding, knowledge and speculative wisdom) which are under umbrella of speculative virtues; techné and phronesis (art/skill and prudence/practical wisdom) which are under umbrella of practical intellect.
The pursuit of leisure can be divided into three; i) for useful and enjoyable, ii) for good life, and iii) to gain knowledge, understanding and wisdom.
Further rich elaboration on this topic, definitely can be read (and re-read) from Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam by Prof. Naquib al-Attas in Chapter 4: The Nature of Man and the Psychology of the Human Soul.
December 13, 2012
This small volume (205 pages, including index) presents a forceful case for the existence of a distinct human nature that makes us fundamentally different from any other kind of animal.
Intellect was published in 1990, when its author was 87. It represents the views of someone who had spent a long life learning, thinking, teaching, and writing. Adler, a maverick of 20th-century philosophy who stopped trying to get the attention of his academic colleagues in 1977 and decided to write only for the general reader, draws on the tradition of thought that stems from Aristotle. Against all the modern and postmodern philosophers, psychologists, anthropologists, neurologists, and artificial-intelligence researchers, who mainly hold that, since our experience and mental powers arise from the brain, there is no basic difference between humans and other animals, Adler asserts that the human intellect is unique on Earth, and that, although the brain is necessary in order for the intellect to manifest, it is not sufficient. The intellect, which gives us our powers of conception, judgment, and free choice, is immaterial and not a mere product of brain activity, as, say, our sense of hearing is.
Moving quickly over the terrain, the author describes what the intellect is, discusses what he regards as the errors of philosophy and science in losing a grasp of this classical concept, enumerates the special powers of the intellect, and finishes with a short section on virtue and vice, or the proper and improper use of the intellect.
So what is the intellect? It is the mental power to form and use general concepts: the power of abstraction. It allows us to reason deductively and to create and use language with which to communicate. Adler is at pains to demonstrate that animals do not possess these abilities in even the most rudimentary degree. He maintains that rats, for instance, that can recognize triangular shapes in order to press a button for food, are making use only of perceptual abstraction. In other words, the rat recognizes triangular shapes as similar, but has no notion of "triangularity" as such. No rat will ever know what a triangle is. No rat will ever be able to define triangle or to read Euclid.
When I reached the final part where Adler shows how intellect gives rise to the virtues and vices, and allows us, because of its fundamental freedom, to lead lives of virtue (if we so choose) and thus of dignity as human beings, I was excited and inspired. Among other things, it's not easy to find such a short, cogent, clear, and authoritative account of virtue and vice, and in my opinion this part of the book alone is worth its purchase price.
Do I buy the author's argument? I'm not sure. His breadth of learning and depth of thought and experience in this area are vastly greater than mine. My own philosophical training, such as it is, has been mainly Buddhist. In the Buddhist view, all sentient beings have fundamentally the same mind. It is this that allows reincarnation as different kinds of beings in different lives. All sentient beings want to be happy and to avoid suffering. Different beings have different aptitudes and powers, but in the nature of things there cannot be any categorical difference between them.
Adler's view, which he expressed in his earlier book Difference of Man and the Difference It Makes, is that if we lack a clear understanding of the difference between human and animal, then we can never have any principled reason to treat humans differently than we treat other animals. If we round up and slaughter cattle because it suits us, there is no fundamental reason why we shouldn't round up and slaughter people if it suits us. The morality of it is the same.
There's no easy answer to this. I think the Buddhist reply might be that instead of transferring our cruelty from animals to humans, we might think about transferring some of our human kindness toward animals.
But Intellect provides plenty of food for thought. Indeed, it's a workout for the intellect, which, for many of us, has become as flabby as our bodies. If you want to read about something that matters, give this a go.
Intellect was published in 1990, when its author was 87. It represents the views of someone who had spent a long life learning, thinking, teaching, and writing. Adler, a maverick of 20th-century philosophy who stopped trying to get the attention of his academic colleagues in 1977 and decided to write only for the general reader, draws on the tradition of thought that stems from Aristotle. Against all the modern and postmodern philosophers, psychologists, anthropologists, neurologists, and artificial-intelligence researchers, who mainly hold that, since our experience and mental powers arise from the brain, there is no basic difference between humans and other animals, Adler asserts that the human intellect is unique on Earth, and that, although the brain is necessary in order for the intellect to manifest, it is not sufficient. The intellect, which gives us our powers of conception, judgment, and free choice, is immaterial and not a mere product of brain activity, as, say, our sense of hearing is.
Moving quickly over the terrain, the author describes what the intellect is, discusses what he regards as the errors of philosophy and science in losing a grasp of this classical concept, enumerates the special powers of the intellect, and finishes with a short section on virtue and vice, or the proper and improper use of the intellect.
So what is the intellect? It is the mental power to form and use general concepts: the power of abstraction. It allows us to reason deductively and to create and use language with which to communicate. Adler is at pains to demonstrate that animals do not possess these abilities in even the most rudimentary degree. He maintains that rats, for instance, that can recognize triangular shapes in order to press a button for food, are making use only of perceptual abstraction. In other words, the rat recognizes triangular shapes as similar, but has no notion of "triangularity" as such. No rat will ever know what a triangle is. No rat will ever be able to define triangle or to read Euclid.
When I reached the final part where Adler shows how intellect gives rise to the virtues and vices, and allows us, because of its fundamental freedom, to lead lives of virtue (if we so choose) and thus of dignity as human beings, I was excited and inspired. Among other things, it's not easy to find such a short, cogent, clear, and authoritative account of virtue and vice, and in my opinion this part of the book alone is worth its purchase price.
Do I buy the author's argument? I'm not sure. His breadth of learning and depth of thought and experience in this area are vastly greater than mine. My own philosophical training, such as it is, has been mainly Buddhist. In the Buddhist view, all sentient beings have fundamentally the same mind. It is this that allows reincarnation as different kinds of beings in different lives. All sentient beings want to be happy and to avoid suffering. Different beings have different aptitudes and powers, but in the nature of things there cannot be any categorical difference between them.
Adler's view, which he expressed in his earlier book Difference of Man and the Difference It Makes, is that if we lack a clear understanding of the difference between human and animal, then we can never have any principled reason to treat humans differently than we treat other animals. If we round up and slaughter cattle because it suits us, there is no fundamental reason why we shouldn't round up and slaughter people if it suits us. The morality of it is the same.
There's no easy answer to this. I think the Buddhist reply might be that instead of transferring our cruelty from animals to humans, we might think about transferring some of our human kindness toward animals.
But Intellect provides plenty of food for thought. Indeed, it's a workout for the intellect, which, for many of us, has become as flabby as our bodies. If you want to read about something that matters, give this a go.
November 1, 2016
Ever since I discovered, collected, and have started my lifetime of studying 'The Great Books of the Western World', Mortimer J. Adler has emerged as one of my heroes. A true polymath, his foundations lie in a classic liberal education, and practical experience gained teaching experimental psychology and philosophy.
In 'Intellect', he combats the 20th-century trend to see 'mind' and 'intellect' as the same things, reducing the concept of mind to the biological functions of the brain. Adler argues that the intellect sets up apart and makes us uniquely human.
It would be reasonable to see what Adler calls 'intellect' as the same thing that Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) calls 'the observing self.' ACT helps you realise that you are not your thoughts or your emotions; that you can stand apart from them and observe them.
He also has a timely chapter on Artifical Intelligence and why machines will never have an intellect that rivals humans.
Musical Recommendation: Listen to Mozart's 'Requiem' as you read this; it makes it easier to absorb the challenging intellectual ideas.
In 'Intellect', he combats the 20th-century trend to see 'mind' and 'intellect' as the same things, reducing the concept of mind to the biological functions of the brain. Adler argues that the intellect sets up apart and makes us uniquely human.
It would be reasonable to see what Adler calls 'intellect' as the same thing that Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) calls 'the observing self.' ACT helps you realise that you are not your thoughts or your emotions; that you can stand apart from them and observe them.
He also has a timely chapter on Artifical Intelligence and why machines will never have an intellect that rivals humans.
Musical Recommendation: Listen to Mozart's 'Requiem' as you read this; it makes it easier to absorb the challenging intellectual ideas.
May 30, 2012
Mortimer Adler, a partisan of Aristotle, present Aristotle's theory that the mind is immaterial. Aristotle's argument is that when we think abstractly, we are abstracting the form away from the matter. Each object in the world is a combination of matter and form. The concept of a chair in our minds is a combination of the forms of all the chairs we have seen in our lives. Our minds contain the forms of all the chair, but our brains do not contain the matter of any of the chairs. The mind is then form without matter. The mind is not material, hence it is immaterial. Aristotle's philosophy supports a third way, an alternative to the reductionism of the physical sciences, and the irrationality of revealed religion. We can have our soul, and our reason, too.
December 28, 2025
I'm giving this a 4 because while there are parts that are definitely 5 stars I was disappointed by a couple points. Those points are 1. his treatment of ai, this was obviously written decades ago and I believe he would certainly renounce his views about ai if he was aware of the modern conception of it (as a large language model just connecting inputs to outputs according to an algorithm) so I didn't factor this much into the ranking but it was kind of annoying and should be noted; 2. his treatment of arguments for the immortality of the soul, Adler has a great defense of the immateriality of the soul but towards the end of the book asserts there is no sound argument for its immortality, this wouldn't be an issue if he actually explored the arguments (that he was well aware of, having read the Scholastics and others) in question but unfortunately he just asserts that there is no good argument and leaves it at that. I think if this book had a much longer exploration of the arguments on that front and his issues with them it would be a 5 for sure. Nevertheless, if someone were to ask me what is the best initial book to read on a classical Aristotelian approach to the Philosophy of mind I would probably tell them to read this book and then follow it up with Madden's book "Mind, Matter, Nature." This is because it is very digestible, easy to understand, and hits the important parts of an Aristotelian philosophy of mind without getting into some of the murkier waters of philosophy of nature that may scare off a first time Aristotelian inquirer (this is what Madden's book presents very well and why it should be read subsequently). I also think his discussion of the intellectual and moral virtues are very edifying and both a beginner and a veteran would benefit from reading that portion. My least favorite of everything I've read from Adler and yet still 4 stars, he truly was an amazing philosopher.
July 25, 2017
All that 'Intellect' presents has come more true since it's first publication. Instead of reasoned conclusions, imaginary fantasy is creating laws and warping mindset. Mortimer Adler would be considered very un-P.C. today. Likely why his name seems to have disappeared during the Great Ideas conferences he developed at the Aspen Institute. I'm almost gald he is not still with us today to asee what has happened in the world. Though I would LOVE to hear what he would say about it.
This volume lays out Adler's reasoned view of the elements of intellect: the brain and the mind, and why the two are separate. Adler breaks down his view and argues just about every angle. It's all reasonable and logical. He also addresses counter arguments to his view and lays out why those are wrong.
As was Adler's goal, the writing is not overly complicated. For those of us that read a lot of philosophy, his writing is too simple. Some philosopher's have tagged Adler as a Pop Philosopher for spurning academia and writing for the general public and not to justify college tenures. As Adler introduced his simpler approach to writing philosophy, he couldn't have known how even his approach is overly complicated for today's American population.
He addresses his concerns about technology and what it could do to the intellect. His concerns, writing almost 40 years ago, are very mild to what has happened so far. I remember reading these views of Adler's decades ago and thinking the ideas sounded extreme. An iPhone came into human's lives and made concerns horrors.
Something else that has solidly entered human's lives is the introduction to the panicky view of being healthy. To most all that means eating well and exercising. To Adler it is only involving reasoning. If you use your brain and mind, the grape-nuts & track run are obvious conclusions. But without the thinking part, it's just a fad without commitment & dedication.
I found Adler's arguments that language and communication being the same wanting. His argument is flimsy if that and his "natural & "nurture" arguments. Both chapters are short and he later in the book writes that those are his shallowest views. I agree.
Overall, this should be required reading for anyone wanting to be motivated to greater reasoning skills of the brain and mind.
Bottom line: I recommend this book. 9 out of 10 points.
This volume lays out Adler's reasoned view of the elements of intellect: the brain and the mind, and why the two are separate. Adler breaks down his view and argues just about every angle. It's all reasonable and logical. He also addresses counter arguments to his view and lays out why those are wrong.
As was Adler's goal, the writing is not overly complicated. For those of us that read a lot of philosophy, his writing is too simple. Some philosopher's have tagged Adler as a Pop Philosopher for spurning academia and writing for the general public and not to justify college tenures. As Adler introduced his simpler approach to writing philosophy, he couldn't have known how even his approach is overly complicated for today's American population.
He addresses his concerns about technology and what it could do to the intellect. His concerns, writing almost 40 years ago, are very mild to what has happened so far. I remember reading these views of Adler's decades ago and thinking the ideas sounded extreme. An iPhone came into human's lives and made concerns horrors.
Something else that has solidly entered human's lives is the introduction to the panicky view of being healthy. To most all that means eating well and exercising. To Adler it is only involving reasoning. If you use your brain and mind, the grape-nuts & track run are obvious conclusions. But without the thinking part, it's just a fad without commitment & dedication.
I found Adler's arguments that language and communication being the same wanting. His argument is flimsy if that and his "natural & "nurture" arguments. Both chapters are short and he later in the book writes that those are his shallowest views. I agree.
Overall, this should be required reading for anyone wanting to be motivated to greater reasoning skills of the brain and mind.
Bottom line: I recommend this book. 9 out of 10 points.
November 10, 2024
It was a short book and I skipped over certain section that I didn’t think were too relavant. I think the book is interesting but not foundational as some of the other works by the author. It’s important to see the intellect as something distinct and unique though but Muslim writers have said that for generations.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews