Robert Wesley Angelo on Wittgenstein’s colleague in philosophy, C D Broad:

Certainly a work like W. K. C. Guthrie’s History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: 1962-1981) shows what university scholarship (erudition) can be. But as Broad well knew from his own life, scholarship can also be a false god: “I no longer believed in the importance of philosophy” (Broad, “Autobiography”, p. 61). So that all I can think when I look at Broad’s writing is: so much intelligence, so little point to intelligence.

i’m inclined to think that intelligence is only part of the picture, even for a philosopher. i’ve known many very intelligent academics, who, however, don’t think intelligently. Thinking is hard and on the whole they have no real need for it. So while they’re capable of understanding, for example, Bergson or Finnegans Wake, they have no original thoughts. They have no need for them.

The mere intellect must be guided be a kind of meta-intellect, a pilot intelligence. One could call this, simply, character. This is why a man like CS Lewis could not be called a philosopher – the failure is primarily one of character.

My own intelligence is strictly limited, but it is adequate for my needs.