This document discusses the changing role of intellectuals over time. It argues that historically, intellectuals played an influential role in society by interpreting symbols and guiding cultural norms. However, their influence has declined as technical fields have risen in importance. A divide emerged in the 20th century between two cultures - literary intellectuals focused on philosophy and non-scientists focused on scientific study and discovery. While both make important contributions, the document suggests intellectuals could regain relevance by more fully integrating theoretical and practical knowledge.

1. Sweat and Brains
A Look Into Intellectual and Vocational Trends, and Their Importance
Harry W. Lewis
Saginaw Valley State University
University Center, MI
hwlewis1@svsu.edu
Beth Jorgensen
Saginaw Valley State University
University Center, MI
ejorgens@svsu.edu
Abstract—In 1959, C.P. Snow argued that “the
intellectual lifeof the whole of Western society is increasingly
being split into two polar groups,” which he defined as
“literary intellectuals” and “physical scientists,” the former
concentrating on acquiring literary and philosophical
knowledge, the latterimmersing themselves in scientificstudy
and breakthroughs. With each culture establishing theirown
goals and personalities, Snow posits that a dichotomy
emerged. While Snow was certainly responding to the
increasingly visibleevidence of this divide at the advent of the
Space Age, the divide itself reflects a tension between theoria
and praxis deeply rooted in the Classical periodmanifestedin
the development of modern Euro-western universities.
Meanwhile, preparatory education has suffered a decline
in vocational training in favor of college preparedness with
aspirations toward white-collar employment due to
stigmatization of “hands-on” occupations and an over-
identification with the white-collar class. This decline will
only continue if vocational trades are not presentedas a viable
and respectable career option. The push toward four-year
higher education over training in banausic vocations has
produced a shortage of trade practitioners, privileging
“college knowledge” over vocational education, and the
separation of STEM professions from intellectual society.
The two cultures can be seen as the extremes of one
integrated educational community; with technical writing
connecting and filling the void. Expanding technical writing
practices into the sciences andtechnical vocations can provide
more thoughtful service to a decaying infrastructure, create
more vocational opportunities, and introduce a more
humanistic perspective into STEM education and practice.
Index Terms—Banausic, praxis, theoria, intellectualism,
vocation
“Nothing great or good can be accomplished without
labor and toil.” - Luciano Palogan (1910)
Sociologist Edward Shils notes that the temperaments,
mood, and opinions of intellectuals had a profound effect
on the modern world. He says,“Through their provision of
models and standards,by the presentation ofsymbols to be
appreciated, intellectuals elicit, guide, and form the
expressive dispositions within a society.” [1]. In this
manner, through their educated opinions, intellectuals
established their position as the influences motivating
communities. Nonetheless, arguments are emerging that
intellectuals of the 21st century may be slipping from their
once prominent and impactful position,occupying narrow,
specialized spaces [2]. The question thus emerges as to
whether intellectuals and their impulse toward theoretical
knowledge remains relevant to this new age of high
technology and rapid digital innovation, or whether a more
pragmatic approach should be favored in research,
scholarship, and education.
An online search for contemporary intellectuals results
in a plethora of lists inhabited by prominent figures holding
positions such as novelist, philosopher, activist, politician,
etc.—many of them marked by a removal from day-to-day
practical operations [3]. While intellectuals possess
considerable brainpower, their function within the global,
or even local, community has diminished. Indeed, while
their observations may remain interesting to their fellow
intelligentsia, as well as media pundits, their direct
influence on culture and policy formation has declined.
This paper offers two suggestions: 1) that the loose
definition of “intellectual” passed down from the last
century hinges upon a false, but prevalent dichotomony
between the theoretical and the practical; and 2) that the
relevance of the intellectual may be reasserted by more
fully integrating the theoretical and the practical.
THE HISTORY OF THE INTELLECTUAL
Shils posits that intellectuals are marked by a distinct
sensitivity to symbols and the search for greater meaning
within these symbols, once leading to their socio-cultural
rise predominantly within the religious community. Once
infused into the religious community, intellectuals gained
various positions of power based on their ability to provide
informed and educated judgment. Shils argues that “prior
to the emergence of a differentiated modern intellectual
class, the care of the sacred through the mastery,
interpretation, and exposition of sacred writing, and the
cultivation of the appropriate mental states or qualities
were the first interests of the intellectual” [1].

2. Consequently,a primary purpose ofhigher education in
the Euro-western world, particularly in the liberal arts
trivium, was moral and theological normativity. Arguably,
this defining element carried throughout the twentieth
century, shaping the mission of scholarship in the Arts and
Humanities in the Euro-Western world. Placing the study
of literature at the center of English Studies, for example,
hinged on the argument that literature “as an instrument of
moral and aesthetic education” would “exercise that
influence on taste, on tone, on sentiment, on opinion, on
character, on all . . . which is susceptible of educational
impression” [4, 5].
Despite their spiritual, creative, and innovative
influence on thought, the impact of intellectuals in early
societal administration was often determined by the
extraordinary actions and ideas of a few individuals. That
is, their status was commonly perceived as the driving
force behind revolutionary tendencies. Shils asserts that
“American administrative and political history from the
time of the Jacksonian Revolution until the New
Liberalism of Woodrow Wilson, was characterized by the
separation of intellectuals from the higher administrative
and the legislative branches of government.” [1]. Indeed,
while Presidents Jackson and Wilson were figureheads in
the practice of governance,their success and theirstatus as
intellectuals has not led to intellectual appreciation and the
requirement of it for candidates within higher governance
[6]. Jackson was himself a populist president, as was
George W. Bush, characterized not by a connection with
higher intellectual pursuits,but by a perceived connection
to the common individual, a “folksiness.” Indeed, US
politics has often been stamped with “anti-intellectualism,”
as indicated by the labeling of Adlai Stevenson as an
“egghead” as well as resistance to the “facts and figures”
approach of Al Gore.
Nevertheless, the Enlightenment marked a shift from
the intellectual as a product of a hierarchical structure
within their own exclusionary society to producer of a
more broadly and deeply educated society.As blossoming
intellectuals learn from their more established mentors,
they are imbued with their teachers’thoughts and ideas.In
the twentieth century, the role of the intellectual has been
most significantly affected by the proliferation of the
university systemwith accompanying access to university
education to social strata once excluded from these
endeavors.A result is a drastic evolution of the intellectual
and the intellectual community, as the teachings of the
clergy have come to hold less importance while the
sciences and social sciences have come to dominate.
Universities have also allowed intellectuals to share their
knowledge more readily; “The intellectual who lives from
a salary as a member of an institution devoted to the
performance of intellectual work – has greatly increased in
numbers, and his works make up a larger and larger
proportion of the total intellectual product of every modern
society” [1]. This new role has led to the growth of
attainable intellectuality, as well as greatly increasing
competition within the intellectual community, leading to
a decline in intellectuals independent of university
affiliation and an institutionalization of intellectual thought
and mentorship.
Shils notes this trend in intellectuality as a positive
shift. His claim is that by having intellectuals in positions
of teaching, the opportunity for new ideas from a newer,
larger, more diverse intellectual body is achieved. Shils
describes this effect: “The most original scientists,the most
profound thinkers, the most learned scholars, the greatest
writers and artists provide the models, which embody the
rules of the community, and teach by the example of their
achievement . . . they transmit the traditions of intellectual
life and maintain its standards in various special fields as a
whole . . . Intellectuals are indispensable to any society,not
just industrial society, and the more complex the society,
the more indispensable they are.” [1]. Intellectuals, in this
way, have taken an executive role in the knowledge
revolution brought forth by universities.
THE MODERN ROLE OF THE INTELLECTUAL
Bertrand Russell argues that the intellectual has come
to hold much less influence in modernity than in antiquity,
asserting that intellectuals do not serve as actual catalysts
for events.He offers Jean-Jacque Rousseau’s influence on
the French Revolution as example. Russell states, “the
French were hungry, and they would have been just as
hungry if Rousseau hadn’t existed. Much the same men
would have emerged at the end,and I am not at all sure that
the course of events in France would have been different at
all if Rousseau hadn’t lived” [7]. Russell concludes that
intellectuals aren’t as influential as Shils suggests.
Intellectuals, Russell argues, are those capable of
identifying trends soonerthan the rest of their surrounding
communities, and speak upon it sooner. While their
observations may lead lesser educated citizens (and
perhaps historians) to believe that the intelligentsia cause
events that follow their public observations,their analyses
and philosophies are not causal but reflective. That is,
intellectuals may “influence[d] people’s talk, the phrases
they use[d],” but their influence on action is negligible [7].
Under this analysis, intellectuals are essentially glorified
public announcers with a knack for foresight.
As the Euro-western intellectual world’s focus has
shifted away from the greater meaning of symbols to global
industrialization and technological development, scientists
and technicians,proficient innovators and workers in fields
of technology,have become more influential than thinkers
in the Humanities. While the humanist continues to have
influence in the realms of the ethical, pathetical, and
academic, their ability to provide meaningful impacts upon
society has become less than the potential of scientists,
technologists, and vocational workers. The probability of
implementation has become more important than the idea

3. itself. As Russell points out, “Suppose some individual
were to invent an adequate defense against airplanes! He
would do more to transform the world than all the
preachers that ever existed could” [7]. Indeed, technical
abilities are those that most effect people in need, for
example, those who need irrigation to produce crops in arid
climates.
Despite their tremendous potential, one concern raised
with regard to the practitioner and/or researcher in
technical fields, what Russell calls “the technician,” is a
percieved inability to lead themselves to where they may
be able to do the most good. As Russell argues, “[T]he
technician, when he is left alone, hasn’t any guidance in
him; he hasn’t any direction,” [7]. Thus,the qualities of the
intellectual, as defined by Shils, are required for the
technician to appropriately implement innovation.In short,
the question arises as to whether the painter or the
paintbrush is more important, as one is essentially useless
without the other. Indeed, Russell’s argument points to a
perception that knowledge may be somehow divided into
opposing and exclusionary cultures.
THE DIVIDE IN KNOWLEDGE
In 1958, C.P. Snow argued that “the intellectual life of
the whole of Western society is increasingly being split
into two polar groups.” Under his analysis, scientists and
non-scientists both emerged from the same social sphere to
form their own schools of collective thought, then went
their separate ways.Each new culture began to evolve into
a unique group of peoples, until scientific research and
literary exploration were pushed to the forefront [8]—with
widely disparate purposes.
According to Snow, scientists immerse themselves in
scientific study and breakthroughs, while non-scientists
concentrate on acquiring literary and philosophical
knowledge. Non-scientists view scientists as being overly
optimistic, too set on their work to be engaged in society
and the negative state that it is in. Scientists believe that
their non-scientific counterparts lack foresight and have no
concern for the wellbeing of society, therein making them
anti-intellectual and restrictive of discovery that could
alleviate negative states. Snow further argued that as Euro-
western society’s quest for knowledge increased, the gap
between the two groups began to expand. A desire for an
elite purpose birthed the literary and philosophical
intellectual, an individual valued for a particular kind of
knowledge and opinion. The ensuing notion of “expertise”
spawned the desire to be incredibly well-versed in a single
topic while perhaps naïve about others.
Representative of this group, literary scholars found it
relatively easy to establish such an identity, as they agreed
that indulging in literary minds such as Charles Dickens
and adhering to Oxford and Cambridge scholarship
standards would set them apart as intellectuals. In the
meantime, Snow’s alleged cultural segregation led to
scientists dividing into their own set of groups: “pure”
scientists and applied scientists. Pure scientists
concentrated on higher mathematics and theoretical
understanding, while applied scientists became the
engineers and vocational technicians vital to establishing
the infrastructure of modern society.
Literary and humanistic scholars began to call
themselves intellectuals, while offering intellectual
services such as information sharing and consulting, and
becoming a driving force in academic expansion. Despite
the influence and knowledge of so-named intellectuals and
pure scientists; it was applied scientists who understoodthe
inner workings of industry and became the catalyst for
ensuing industrial and technological revolutions; however,
this became lost on intellectuals as defined above.
Throughout the industrial revolution of the early
nineteenth century, applied scientists provided
opportunities for medical care, education, transportation,
and industrial innovation that benefited a burgeoning
population,as the industrialization that followed employed
the poor and improved quality of life. Pure scientists took
this opportunity to broaden theirresearch, while Humanists
became the foundation of the universities.
As the twentieth century began,pure scientists believed
that their work was more beneficial than that of Humanists,
as their work had the potential to pass down to applied
scientists and technicians and thus serve a struggling
society. Humanists, meanwhile, established themselves as
educators and bearers of moral, aesthetic, and pathetical
knowledge, which they believed superior due to focus on
some sort of universal human condition, removed from the
mundane aspects of everyday affairs.
As “pure” science and humanistic intellectuals place
themselves in such a theoretical sphere, applied scientists
and technicians did the “dirty work” of furthering the
industrial revolution. In this sense,they came to be viewed
as second class citizens, as little more than expendable
workers. Those with boots on the ground, often working
12-14 hour days in unlivable conditions,saw their cultural,
intellectual value, though indispensable, diminished as
merely utilitarian.
LEAVIS AND BUTTHEAD
Though influential, Snow’s Rede Lecture had its fair
share of doubters; most notably,literary critic F. R. Leavis,
who claims that Snow relies on dramatization to show the
two-culture divide, claiming to be both a “pure scientist”
and literary intellectual while posing “applied scientists,”
as a lesser breed. In Leavis analysis, Snow reduces the
applied scientist to little more than a vocational worker, of
little value; comparable to those who “walked off the land
into the factories as fast as the factories could take them.”
[8]. This representation of applied scientists and vocational
workers creates the illusion of an abundant group ofpeople
suitable only for the dirty jobs that support the

4. breakthroughs and scholarly research conducted by Snow
and his scholarly ilk.
As with Leavis, these author’s find Snow’s claims to be
overgeneralized and over-appreciated, as diversification
within the scientific community began long before the
Industrial Revolution. The divide perceived by Snow is,
rather, a gradual broadening and expansion of interests
which have been fulfilled and exacerbated by the struggle
between theory and application. This intellectual divide
was solidified in divergent schools of thought, as well as
the establishment of land-grant universities as a pragmatic
counterpart to universities established under the
Humboldtian ideal of “pure” research, leading to a
perceived gulf between praxis and theoria.
The Humboldtian model, originating in Germany,
favors knowledge for knowledge’s sake, while the
pragmatic model upon which land-grant universities was
established follows a Scottish model, which is aimed at
public service and practical application. Land-grant
institutions were founded upon the Association of Public
and Land-Grant University’s (APLU) educational criteria:
“the three pillars of increasing degree completion and
academic success, advancing scientific research, and
expanding engagement” [emphasis added] [9]. This issue
of engagement is the very factor which, in some analyses,
“soils” the applied scientist in the eyes of some.
Leavis believed that the university should aim at
humanity’s betterment through educating young minds and
empowering them to create social change. He states “Like
Snow I look to the university. Unlike Snow, I am
concerned to make it really a university,something (that is)
more than a collocation ofspecialist departments – to make
it a centre ofhuman consciousness:perception,knowledge,
judgment and responsibility” [emphasis added][10]. While
many institutions follow a similar school of thought,
dissent remains amongst the intellectual offspring of each
school of thought. That is, for idealists, applied science is
often seen as the ugly step-sisterof “pure” research, while
for pragmatists, theoretical research is often seen as out of
touch with realities on the ground.
KNOWLEDGE AND THE UNIVERSITY
At bottom, knowledge and education are not so simply
classified, as there is no singular way they should be
applied that is discernably more beneficial than the other.
The philosophical mindsets that emphasize theoria over
praxis, or vice versa, seem to be deeply-seeded in
contrasting intellectual communities, with each taking their
rightful place within university departments far and wide
[11].
Praxis, adhering to a pragmatic concept of knowledge,
stresses the needforsocialimpact and responsibility within
education. Theoria stresses the importance of pure
research, that is, “knowledge for knowledge’s sake.” The
two schools of thought occupy different ends of an
educational spectrum, rather than an educational
dichotomy; thus, each should serve in concert with the
other. Nonetheless,discrimination against applied research
often exists withing university departments, as well as
creating a grey area, serving as a bridge between the
idealist and the pragmatist. For example, English
departments often continue to privilege literary studies,
while courses in rhetoric and technical writing are seen as
little more than a boost to declining budgets and a means
for English majors to find employment while seeking
further studies in literature. Likewise, land-grant
universities, established as a bastion ofapplied science, are
often seen as second-tierto universities who predominantly
pursue “pure” research.
While this divide has diminished over time, it
nonetheless colors education and research into the present.
The 21st-century, however, requires a more forceful move
into applied research well-informed by theoria, as well as
“defragmentation” of disciplinary knowledges to produce
intellectual collaboration across the disciplinary divide.
YOUR MISSION (IF YOU CHOOSE TO ACCEPT IT)
William Riley Parker claims that the birth of English
departments within universities can be attributed to the
divide in Oratory and Rhetoric away from Philology, the
three components that led to the creation of English
language departments [12]. These authors believe that
these three studies are present along the educational
spectrum, with pragmatic and theoretical studies
positioned at either end, each possessing a different blend
of Oratory, Rhetorical, and Philological qualities.
The different mindsets and missions of universities has
led to a revolution in the availability of educational
offerings. In turn,the democratization of universities paved
the way for equal opportunity and a subsequent move away
from university education being a bastion of elitism. With
these shifts,the interests ofthe educationalspectrumbegan
to shift and, in regards to English studies, theoria and
praxis continued to move away from each other. Oratory
and Philology became removed from one another, pushing
Rhetorical studies into the grey area between the two. The
departmentalization of English studies and the subsequent
specialization of these departments created an abstract
theoretical treatment of knowledge that stood in stark
opposition to practical knowledge and application.
With the dispersion of English studies into three
distinctly separate concentrations, Parker argues that
English departments “lost both integrity and vitality by
dispersing itself to academic thinness” [12]. Over-
specialization and departmentalization has created two and
a half cultures within English studies; rhetoric falling short
as it was reduced to delivery of ideas gained elsewhere. By
contrast, John C. Scott states that university’s mission
statements are based on “the triad (20th century) mission of
the university: teaching, research,and public service” [13].

5. If Oratory occupies teaching, Philology, now in the form
of linguistics, serves the “scientific” aspect,while Literary
Studies serves as a form of “pure” research, then Rhetoric
and public service are lost in the proverbial ether.
Following the connections ofRhetoric to practical service,
technical communicators are the vocational workers of the
English world accompanied by a certain loss of
institutional prestige.
Rhetoric, and the technical communicators who
embrace its usage,may be pigeon-holed into insignificance
and neglected as a result of the tug-of-war between two
“sexier” siblings. The pragmatic element of Rhetoric has
been over-emphasized, reducing it to, at best, a problem-
solving tool in the eyes of many. With the practical
application of English studies being ignored,the real-world
impact of a once crucial practice fell into steep decline,
impeding collaboration across the disciplines.
Collaboration, not specialization, is the key to the future.
An expanding world with increasingly more technical
problems needs a more technical class of problem-solvers
and communicators. By melding rhetoric and technical
writing with vocational work such as engineering,
fabrication, and other banausic trades, we can create more
educated, more useful workers, increasing the workforce
necessary to rebuilding infrastructure, as well as producing
a more insightful workforce. By placing technical writers,
excelling in pragmatic knowledge and well-versed in
theoretical knowledge, in context with practitioners in the
vocations, we can create these problem-solvers. Applying
the theoretical benefits of rhetoric across the disciplines
promises to create a workforce and knowledge class with
the ability to work from the ground up,engaging boots-on-
the-ground understandings rather than imposing an elitist,
top-down perspective, resulting in more effective and
thoughtful solutions [14].
FOCUS ON THE VOCATIONAL WORKER
Mike Rowe, host of Dirty Jobs, speaking at a TED
conference in 2008, focused on the pariah that vocational
workers have become, as parents and students push toward
occupations that have the veneer of the elite. Over-
identification with an economic elite has encouraged the
middle and working classes to pursue occupations that
appear [emphasis added] to offer membership in this elite,
but often produce incomes lower than the trades.
Meanwhile, they cling to romanticized view of the
tradesman, farmer, or industrial worker that inhabits their
family tree. As Rowe points out, “We turn [vocational
workers] into heroes, or we turn them into punchlines”
[15].
Vocational workers are behind the labor and
maintenance of a growing society.They are the carpenters,
welders, plumbers, and pipe-fitters who build our
infrastructure and keep everything functional and well-
maintained. The need for highly-skilled workers is never
out of demand, but the availability of these workers has
significantly decreased over the years [16]. While there
was an influx of enrollees in vocational schools in 2012, it
did little to combat the decline of the trades over the last
decade.
The inclusion of technical education was once common
in high schools across the country. Recently, it has
experienced a sharp drop in participation. In a report
published by the National Center for Education Statistics,
the average number of credits a high schoolstudent in the
United States earned before graduation as of 1990 was
between 4.0 and 4.5 [17]. This number remained the same,
whereas numbers for scientific, mathematic, and artistic
classes increased. In this ten-year gap, English increased
by roughly 0.2, social studies by about 0.3, and
mathematics and sciences by almost 0.5.
In 2000, technical education’s place in primary school
began to take a major dip. By 2009, technical curriculum
had decreased from 4.25 credits to 3.6 [17]. In this same
nine year gap, English, sciences, and mathematics
continued the same upward trend as in the previous decade.
Sciences in particular had a slightly greater increase as
technical education experienced its decline.
As a result of technical education being greatly
diminished in primary and secondary education, the
increase in the average age of skilled tradesmen has
increased. In a 2012 study,the Manpower Group, reported
that 53 percent of these skilled trades workers were 45 or
older; 18.6 percent were between the ages of 55 and 64.
This is in stark contrast to the overall work force, where 44
percent of workers were at least 45, and only 15.5 percent
of workers were 55 to 64 [18].
Fig 1. As vocational education is neglected, the existing workforce of
vocational workers is aging rapidly [21].
This age gap will continue to widen because the average
vocational worker will have retired before they reach age
65, a consequence of the physically demanding nature of
the job. Yet according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
becoming a plumber, a carpenter, or an electrician yields
salaries between $39,940 and $49,140, incomes higher
than many occupations requiring higher education, while
only requiring a high school diploma [19]. These specific
trades rely on an apprenticeship, on-the-job style of

6. learning, but currently, the pupils are hard to come by, and
the teachers don’t have anybody to pass their trades on to
[20].
Between 2000 and 2013, the number of 15-24 year old
high schoolgraduates who had completed or were enrolled
vocational classes was only a deficit of 10,000 students.
297,000 students in 2000 versus 287,000 students in 2013
represents a decrease of 3.4 percent. Nevetheless, these
numbers have shown a steady decline in vocational
enrollment [21].
Meanwhile, technical education, including home
economics, has been both intellectually and physically
removed from the general curriculum in primary and
secondary education [22]. Instead, these courses are often
relegated to students deemed unsuited for more intellectual
pursuits. Students on the path to 4-year-or-more higher
education have been encouraged to pursue these subjects
as a means to maintaining their domiciles. Rarely, if ever,
are such vocational pursuits directly integrated into the
wider curriculum where they will benefit from the
theoretical and analytical lines of thought directed toward
“white collar” education [23]. Thus, vocational education
has been “dumbed down,” further leading to the impression
that it occupies a space for the non-elite.
As technicians become more and more essential to a
higher quality oflife, we need to focus on maintaining their
numbers and promoting trade schools as an appealing way
to obtain higher education, placing an emphasis on
practical application while sustaining the theoretical [24]
analysis that can serve such application. One means to do
so is to integrate vocational education with elements of
more theoretical and analytical education. Indeed, this gap
is a space into which the theoretical and analytical aspects
of rhetoric and technical writing are crucial [25].
INTELLECTUALS IMPORTANCE TOMORROW
The need for applied knowledge has neverbeen greater,
in the developed world as well as in the developing world.
Hans Rosling, in his TED talk, The Magic Washing
Machine,argues that the washing machine was the greatest
invention of the modern era [26]. Not the birth control pill,
not a military or scientific breakthrough, but the washing
machine. He says this because it has a far-reaching effect
on not just people’s lives, but their everyday lives. The
washing machine gave those who toiled over buckets the
time needed to develop themselves economically and
intellectually. Such developments have been integral to
development ofand sustenance ofthe Euro-western middle
class.
While intellectuals are capable of producing the ideas
that will revolutionize the world and keep our clothes
theoretically crisp, it is the technicians who put these
theories into motion, pushing the idea into realization, who
make our clothes physically crisp. By immersing technical
writers into the vocational practices a real-world difference
can be made, producing practical, life-improving solutions
informed by the larger picture theory can provide.
The primary author of this paper notes that in his three
plus years of enrollment in higher academia, he has heard
countless people say they want to be published,featured in
the media, or pass their knowledge onto others. But in that
same span of time, he has only come across a single peer
who sees the importance of the vocationalworker. His peer
works as a machinist, and has the ability to make objects
that most of us in higher education would never imagine
ourselves being able to do. That alone makes him
valuable—the potentiality to make an immediate
difference. Likewise, the tech writer possesses practical
skills informed by a body of theory that promises to
improve practice. Engaging the vocationalworker with the
theories and practices of rhetoric holds great promise for
solving current and future problems.
IN CONCLUSION
The intellectual, the individual who lifts thought above
the mundane to percieve the symbolic and to search for
greater meaning within the symbolic will always hold a
very significant place in history. They pioneered the
modern age, and without their influence, we would not
have evolved as a society able to perceive the larger picture
of our pragmatic concerns. But the intellectuals’
evolutionary journey has become severely retarded, and
they have settled nicely into their positions as the heads of
academia. They are imperative to the continued educations
of the millions of students who enroll in higher education
every year and for that, they are indispensable. However,
while the intellectual was the harbinger of change in a time
when clergy was the highest authority, the focus in the
postmodern era must now shift towards collaboration
between the skilled vocational worker and the intellectual
class.
The issue then becomes spreading interest and
awareness of technical studies within the youth of the
nation, to wed that study to the theoretical, and, in doing
so, to promote a positive outlook on the benefits that can
be attained through practical knowledge.
Works Cited
[1] E. Shils. "The intellectuals and the powers: some
perspectives for comparative analysis."
in Comparative Studies in Society and History.
Chicago. University of Chicago. 1972 pp. 5-22.
[2] C. Kurzman and L. Owens. "The sociology of
intellectuals." in Annual Review ofSociology (28th
Ed.) Chapel Hill. UNC. 2002, pp. 63-90.
[3] "Top 100 public intellectuals. (2008,
May)" Foreign Policy. [Online]. Available:

7. http://foreignpolicy.com/2008/05/15/top-100-
public-intellectuals/
[4] J. C. Collins. “The study of english literature
(1891).” in The Origins of Literary Studies in
America: A Documentary Anthology. New York:
Routledge, 1989, pp. 77-81.
[5] G. Graff, M. Warner. “The study of english
literature (1891).” in The Origins of Literary
Studies in America: A Documentary Anthology.
New York: Routledge, 1989, pp. 77-81.
[6] D, Milne "America's ‘intellectual’ diplomacy."
in International Affairs. London, England. Vol.
86 No. 1, 2010, pp. 49-68.
[7] B. Russell. "The role of the intellectual in the
modern world." in American Journal ofSociology
Chicago. University of Chicago. 1939. Vol. 44.
No. 4 pp. 491-498.
[8] C.P. Snow. “The two cultures and the scientific
revolution.” in The Syndics of the Cambridge
University Press. Cambridge. Cambridge
University. 1959, pp 1-55.
[9] Association ofPublic & Land-Grant Universities.
“About us” [Online]. Available:
http://www.aplu.org/about-us/
[10] F.R. Leavis. “Two cultures? the significance of c.
p. snow.” Cambridge. Cambridge University.
1962, pp 53-89.
[11] K. Cmiel. “Scholars versus critics” in Democratic
Eloquence: The Fight Over Popular Speech in
19th
Century America. New York. William
Morrow. 1990, pp. 148-175.
[12] J. C. Scott. “The mission of the university:
medieval to postmodern transformations.” in The
Journal of Higher Education. Columbus. OSU.
2006, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 1-33.
[13] W. R. Parker. “Where do english departments
come from?” in College English.Indiana.Vol. 28,
No. 5, 1967, pp. 339-351.
[14] M. Gladwell. (2011, July). Malcolm Gladwell:
The Strange Tale of the Norden Bombsight
[Online Video File]. Available:
http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell
[15] M. Rowe. (2008, December). Mike Rowe:
Learning from Dirty Jobs [Online Video File].
Available:
http://www.ted.com/talks/mike_rowe_celebrates
_dirty_jobs
[16] R. Ryan. Maybe You Should Have Gone to Trade
School. New York. [Online]. Available:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rachel-
ryan/maybe-you-should-have-
gon_b_3727695.html
[17] US Department of Education (2014, November)
"Trends in CTE Coursetaking." Washington,D.C.
[Online]. Available:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid
=2014901
[18] J. Wright. (2013, March). America's Skilled
Trades Dilemma: Shortages Loom As Most-In-
Demand Group Of Workers Ages. San Francisco.
[Online]. Available:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/emsi/2013/03/07/a
mericas-skilled-trades-dilemma-shortages-loom-
as-most-in-demand-group-of-workers-ages/
[19] K. Price Mueller. (2014, January). Is Trade
School a Better Investment than College?
[Online]. Available: http://www.nj.com/inside-
jersey/index.ssf/2014/01/is_trade_school_a_bette
r_investment_than_college.html
[20] T. Hamm. (2013, December 16) Trade School
Might Be a Better Choice Than College. Here's
Why. [Online] Available:
http://lifehacker.com/trade-school-might-be-a-
better-choice-than-college-her-1484086007
[21] The United States Census Bureau. (2013,
October). "Current Population Survey Data on
School Enrollment." [Online]. Available:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/school/data/cps/
[22] National Center for Education Statistics (2013,
October) "Vocational Education in the United
States: The Early 1990s." Washington, DC. Oct.
2013. [Online]. Available:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs95/95024.pdf
[23] E. Driscoll. (2012, April 6). Going to Trade
School: Should You Do It? (1st
Ed.) [Online]
Available:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-
finance/2012/04/06/going-to-trade-school-
should-do-it/
[24] J. Anderberg. (2014, November 10). Reviving
Blue Collar Work: 4 Myths About the Skilled

8. Trades; The Art of Manliness (1st
ed.) [Online].
Available:
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2014/11/10/revi
ving-blue-collar-4-myths-about-the-skilled-
trades/
[25] American Society for Engineering Education.
“Engineering by the numbers.” [Online].
Available: http://www.asee.org/papers-and-
publications/publications/11-47.pdf.
[26] H. Rosling. (2010, December). Hans Rosling:The
Magic Washing Machine [Online Video File].
Available:
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_
magic_washing_machine
Harry Lewis is a current Professional and Technical Writing
student at Saginaw Valley State University. A 3-year member of
the SVSU Men’s Ice Hockey team, he hopes to use his PTW
abilities, as well as minors in Marketing and Economics, to obtain
a career in the sports marketing field, promoting the game of
hockey to the next generation of young players. Throughout his
undergraduate career at SVSU, Harry’s work has focused heavily
on educational trends, critiquing them and analyzing the various
impacts they have upon Western society.
Beth Jorgensen is associate professor of Rhetoric and
Professional Writing at Saginaw Valley State University
(Michigan) where she engages in interdisciplinary eco-economic
research. Her work in environmental discourse has been featured
in the international collections Global Encounters – Pedagogical
Paradigms and Educational Practices and Education Landscapes
in the 21st Century: Cross-cultural Challenges & Multi-
disciplinary Perspectives (Cambridge Scholars Press 2011,
2008). Interdisciplinary work includes serving as technical editor
for textbooks in materials science and computational
mathematics, as well as co-disciplinary publications in alternative
agriculture. Jorgensen’s current research focuses on memes in the
discourse of agriculture and energy.