Pre-moderns recognized two ways that the mind can know things – in Latin, intellectus and ratio. Some say it’s the difference between heart-knowledge and head-knowledge, or right-brain vs. left-brain understanding. Intellectus is more of an intuitive, passive understanding, while ratio is more of a logical, active knowledge. Intellectus sees the puzzle and appreciates it as a whole. Ratio distinguishes between the pieces of the puzzle and figures out how they all fit together. Intellectus leads to wisdom, ratio to science. Both are necessary for the comprehension of truth.

In ancient Greece, Aristotle used the Greek words Nous and Logos, popular in his culture, to distinguish between the faculties of intuitive understanding vs. the discursive reasoning. It, again, expresses the complementarity of how the mind works: intuitive or passive power in conjunction with logical, active understanding. This anima/animus of mind are co-principles on which the foundations of wisdom and science are born.

There are certain things human beings know through intellectus before ratio tries to make sense of it. Every child, for example, knows it is right to play fair, even before being explicitly taught morality. Every adult knows intuitively the basics of the natural law, even when they are denying it due to the selfishness of sin. The problem with modernity is that it paints without a canvas; it builds a fire without a fireplace. It ignores the context of what is given – that which is understood though intellectus – and seeks to understand and create from scratch (ratio without intellectus). While pre-modern wisdom with primitive science sought to understand reality better, modern science without pre-modern wisdom often seeks to recreate reality itself.

Freedom without virtue is what the post-Christian world strives for, utilizing technology without morality to create a world of ratio without intellectus. Nevertheless, Logos without nous, like a fire without a fireplace, is a very dangerous proposition.