Why do so many scholars and intellectuals think that language is necessary for thought?

Because it is!

It is difficult to see how thought could be possible without any medium such as language. We do see creatures without language doing complicated tasks, but for them to think about what they are doing involves wondering what the consequences of their actions are, considering a range of actions, reflecting on past experience and so on. These all involve language.

My answer is a little different from Olilver's. Why do so many scholars and intellectuals think that language is necessary for thought? Answer: Because it really is easier to think about definite rather than indefinite things. But indefinite and formless things also have to be thought about. It takes more of an effort of course to think in a pathfinding sort of a way about something new, and one may or may not be thinking "in" language, whatever that means (muttering to oneself, sub-vocally?) If one is trying to come to an understanding of some hard and new logical or mathematical matter, it may be more like shaping forms in ones mind, and then moving them, and less like chattering in French. If one insists on calling "shaping forms", or whatever the metaphor is "a kind of language", then of course the claim is drained of any content, and with that of any interest. People of say that mathematics is a language, or a "language", something like a language. But it has a function and a status very different from those of a language.

Read another response by Oliver Leaman, Jonathan Westphal
Read another response about Language, Mind