How can you tell if someone is a pseudo intellect ?

they say dumb shit

Not OP but how does someone not be a pseudo intellectual ? I've always wondered this because i'm a bit of a brainlet

I've noticed this too. Being unnecceasarily formal and condescending is another big one.
Part of intelligence is understanding how to behave in various settings. If you're invited to a physics symposium and use Twitter slang, you're autistic. Same goes the other way.

this. peterson is vastly more invested in his political agenda than academic truth

Their primary communication method is underhanded implications instead of the words they speak.

I'd say deep down he's more of a nihilist who's in it for the patreon shekels and campus thotts

He isn't a nihilist. Him talking about psychedelics, his emotional investment in Western civilization and his desire to help people go against it.

People overrate Peterson's political involvement. All he did was refuse enforced pronoun usage because of his free speech/tyranny rationale. He was still making the same ideals long before he blew up.

wtf are you talking about

Just bee yourself

what ideals?

You're far more a nihilist than he is, reducing every action to a monetary motive.

those ideals are in the domains of philosophy but he uses assbackwards psychology to back up his claims

Might be just my opinio, but I think an intelectual is someone who contributes to his culture. For example, a lot of writers translated books into their native language. A pseud is someone who has nothing to show for, who only parrots clever quotes and engages in flowery talk.

None of that is what a pseud does. It's like, would you be bothered if he wrote a book on cliff notes? Would you call all authors of cliff note books pseuds? No. It takes effort to translate complex concepts into pills for the masses.

Now, people who REPEAT Petersons thoughts and pretend to be better than others simply by virtue of having heard them, but without any further thoughts being actually prompted by the hearing, that is a pseud. And people who equally dismiss peterson and pretend that they're better than him despite having NO thoughts equal or greater in clarity or usefulness, nor any ability to communicate philosophical ideas AT ALL to others? Pseuds.

Pseuds basically try to play top dog from a bottom dog position. They act superior without having anything going for them.

The biggest tell is the tendency to frame everything in terms of two allegedly opposite forces, something Peterson does all the time for example.

All his Jungian crap. Watch his lectures. He was doing them since the 80's I think.
>assbackwards psychology
How is Jungian psychology assbackwards?

Is the alt right still a thing?

What are the two forces?

youtu.be/giUj-FLoais

still think he's not a pseud?

He posted his IQ on twitter. You can't respect somebody that insecure if over the age of about 19

Good and bad

where did jung write about anything that has to do with freedom or identity politics?
people discredit psychology as a science because it presents itself as empirical fact yet very rarely can psychological studies can be successfully replicated. his reluctance to confront the subjectivity of his profession shows just how much of a psued he is

Did he post it out of insecurity or the lack of it? How do you know?

Then why the fuck hasn't he read anything for 30 years?!

I don't know, but I'm definitely an intellectual. If you met me, you'd know...

Ha, you fucking pseud.

Name one serious self respecting academic who publicly announced his score at a brain smartz test

same

Besides being up to date with all the published literature in personality and neuropsych?

You remind me of the film director who screamed at Siskel and Ebert, can you do any better? Well maybe not but you still made a bad movie and I can see that with my own two eyes.

That doesn't answer my question. Maybe he just doesn't give a fuck.

It never was

N-no! I'm right! I have all sorts of brilliant ideas in my head!

Talk about that then and keep your uninformed 'musings' to yourself. Oh wait teenage retards won't give me clicks and donations, better wing some shit about political correctness

Lol like you have any idea what that entails. Last year before you discovered there was an actual academic who shared your petty bigoted views you would have dismissed 'psych' as a useless discipline for women who want a career in starbucks.

I'm nearly finished a clinical psych PhD you nong. Quit projecting you pseud lazy crap.

Theyre all haters, and jealous of JP's IQ and success.

Whats the topic of your dissertation

I cannot see the problem you have with this video.

You are acting as if the video speaks for itself proving your point, but it really doesn't.

Maybe it's not the most eloquent clip of him, I'll agree with that, but I don't see the problem with the ideas presented here.

Elaborate. Why do you think this clip proves him as a pseud?

Ha, yeah OK. Lets shut this whole website down too. Last thing we want is people sharing their musings. Right?

Comparing the cognitive differences underlying different worldview belief systems and also the different psychological well-being outcomes of various worldview belief systems.

I think he says the clip shows Peterson to be a pseud because Peterson says the quote about Sisyphus is from Nietzsche when it is actually from Camus.

Misattributing a famous metaphor to another famous philosopher
Anyone who does a minimum of research fucking knows who wrote the myth of Sisyphus but peterson loves wanking of Nietzsche without knowing the slightest thing about him, he's on par with that facebook girl who says she loves nihilism

>makes an interesting and decently expressed set of interrelated ideas
>slips up an attribution
WOW FUCKING IDIOT PSUED

not that guy. jp is clearly very smart but also selectively dishonest. he believes intelligence is genetic but denies racial divergence.

everythng falls apart from there

he is more interested in his patreon account than advancing science, like most clinicians. that said hes very, very smart for a clinician.

2nd post best post

It sucks whenever people mistake the former for the latter. Crap, did I just do it?

So, for examples of, let's say, English intellectuals, you'd cite maybe... John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, J.R.R. Tolkien, or Arthur C. Clarke?

>denies racial divergence

he has said that Jews have some of the highest IQ. If he went any further than that he'd lose his job and book deals. sure maybe it's disingenuous but crusading for race realism obviously isn't what he wants to do with his life.

How about trying to summarize human history as one or two incredibly simplified concepts? Like Marx's Class Warfare, or "War Never Changes"?

its not just a slip up though, it shows how shallow his knowledge is. If someone attributed a line from Genesis to Walk Whitman you'd think they were fucking stupid; thats how people who actually know about philosophy react to a pseud like Peterson

>its not just a slip up though
But it literally is. The rest of your post is bitter speculation.

yeah? fuck him then

he already made a stand on "political" grounds. there is no single issue more important. he has complete independence to do anything he likes. if he is afraid, he betrays the reason people gave him all that money

he can hang

bitter about what, his success and patreon money and big cock?

When I was little, I always wondered how people end up like you and if they will be a thing of the past. Now I know, having seen it unfold before my own eyes.

have you read everything jung ever wrote then dickhead? He talks about the importance of the individual and the trap of ideology

You're just showing how shallow your knowledge is as well. Because you don't know anything you can't see it in others.

people end up like me because blacks suck up a million dollars per person net in government money and go on killing rampages and blame us for it

its only hard to understand if you're a retard

I'm not the guy you replied to, but I can almost hear your raspy whining. Choke back those tears, and tell him what it is you don't like about him. Or shut up. You don't think you'll actually make him feel ashamed of himself with your "muh hate" crocodile tears, on an offbrand Korean Manga forum, do you?

I don't even necessarily agree with redditman here, I'm just sick of the whining.

dude just stop

No, I just give people a break when they deliver more than 500 hours of online lectures, most for free, that there is going to be one or two errors in there and their whole reputation and value doesn't need to be on the line each time.

mate this would be like a maths professor calling a^2+b^2=c^2 thales' theorem
Literally anyone with basic knowledge in philosophy wouldn't make this mistake

I don't disagree with the fact that blacks, on average, are lower in intelligence and consequently ability to delay gratification, nor that they have built a mainstream culture around their worst traits, which unfortunately they themselves equate with the colour of their skin. Unlike meme 'white supremacists', who are by no means homogeneous, a worrying proportion of Anglo blacks have managed to equate being ghetto with the colour of their skin.

I just disagree with hanging everyone that doesn't use their public platform to talk race. And those who do, have infantile retarded solutions like ethno-nationalism. I just don't like your attitude mate, that's all.

CAlm down babes, I was merely doing some masturbatory posting. I was sick of his whining just like you were sick of mine.

dude i hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you're retarded

So are you out there on a soapbox screaming about racial differences? Put your money where your mouth is, if nothing is more important to you.

is intended for

>peterson shouldn't talk outside his area of expertise
>peterson should spend his entire time in psychology lectures riffing on racial differences.
He just can't win with you neckbeards.

1. People make mistakes. Big mistakes, even. I do not know how big it is this false attribution nor do I particularly care.The one to whom this belongs does not affect the argument.

2. This was a talk he made, not a paper he wrote. When you write something you can fact-check to see if you didn't screw up something before publishing it. You don't have that option when talking to an audience in public, specially because his talks are not scripted.

3. Almost every single person, intelectual or otherwise has said at least something very very stupid. The best dirt you can dig from him is a wrong attribution. Wow. Impressive.

its true. I don't have privilege and its not my fault blacks commit so much murder. if you insist on blaming my entire race for it you are going to have a civil war.

stop taking my money. stop blaming me for things I didn't do. stop forcing me to be subject to crime

fuck you, leave me alone or you're gonna get your head blown off

pic related got found to be "innocent"

all I ever asked for in my entire life is to be left alone to read. people like you got trump elected. try it again, faggot. you're all gonna die if you take this further

He spends good time discussing the literature, that there are more in group variations than between group variations and diversity should not be approached as a racial issue but as an individual personality issue.

Mate, I'm not sure how you think Veeky Forums works, but chances are, throughout the course of this thread you haven't interacted with only one person.

I haven't claimed either of those things.

You've CLEARLY never done any public speaking. He said the wrong name, it doesn't mean he doesn't know to whom the phrase belongs.

this boy is right

It's not his only mistake his entire interpretation of Nietzsche is one giant mistake

>pic related got found to be "innocent"
Dude, you're on the fucking internet, I just Googled that news story, you lied, that's not true, that's FAKE NEWS.

1 woman involved pleaded guilty to a hate crime and got probation, the 3 other are pending trial.

Maybe if he weren't constantly namedropping and doing his research he wouldn't make a mistake that basic
At least Zizek knows which philosophers had what ideas

You're implying this is the only time he's outted himself as a pseud when it comes to philosophy

>uses Nietzsche in a defense of traditionalism

Since your only offered example is clearly just a public speaking faux paus, feel free to offer another from this vast sea of outings you suggest exist.

Harry Frankfurt's "On Bullshit" is a very brief but will fine tune your BS detector

elaborate please

I'm black, I haven't kill anyone or done any bad crime. I don't know if this may seem like a anecdotal response but some of us aren't bad people

...

>people discredit psychology as a science because it presents itself as empirical fact

Jung specifically said his own discoveries and those of Freud, Adler and others were not empirical, though. He wrote a deal about just that. Try reading him?

>these guys blame people like me
>not all the people like me end up like I did
>the way I ended up is the fault of those guys who blamed people like me
do you hear yourself, you're just as bad the ones you're against

here you go it was already done for me
reminder anyone who defends this is also a pseud who doesn't understand godels theorem or logical deductions

the gist of it here

>200 hour community service for kidnapping, torture, hate crime
k mate

I demand the right to live in an area free of black criminals. YOU can choose to do it if you like

I demand the right to pay for my race, not theirs (a MILLION per black.) YOU can choose to do it if you like

I demand the right to not pay for the crimes of people I am not descended from. YOU can choose to do it if you like

leave me alone. I only read books. if yuo cant do that, fuck you. you are dead. you aren't going to survive the revolution.

poor baby

Single determining factor: do they use the word "pseudointellectual"?

lol ironically needs to read some jung and integrate his shadow

That's why no matter what I see on this website, I try my best to not let it affect the way I treat others.

hour community service for kidnapping, torture, hate crime
She was only present at the crime, didn't actually do the torture, hence the lenient sentence AND the fact she she pleaded guilty before any of her peers. The system works, sorry it's not a good boogeyman.
He's not wrong, he just expressed it poorly, and what do you expect in a fucking tweet?