What distinguishes a proper pseudo-intellectual?

Making endless assertions without clarification, explanation, or support.

>anything other than STEM is bad lol
What did he mean by this

A great example is people that have to constantly refrence how their are rational

good example of a pseud

If their written works are just survey's of a bunch of other peoples original work.

Why would you waste money learning something that can be either easily automated or by a motivated amateur?

What about economics?

If I don't like them

T R I G G E R E D

...

>listens to hours of sargon of akkad and other youtubers
>never reads theory/history or just read one book like The God Delusion
>took a 101 class and believe they understand the entire field
>use big words they don't understand to seem educated, but in their speech the words are ultimately meaningless, vague, or reductionist (cultural marxism, postmodernism, classical liberalism)
>obsessed with idealism/what one thinks (culture*, religion, free speech*)
>posts on Veeky Forums

Taking one in his purest and most prominent form, the semi-intellectual is a person who has, maybe even with good grades, completed (tertiary or higher) one's education, but in terms of cultural education and moral upbringing has nothing.

>obsessed with idealism/what one thinks (culture*, religion, free speech*)
What does this mean?

people who disagree with me

For example, it's the people who talk about the competency of cultures, religions, races, etc.
>black people are poor because of black culture. Black people need to work harder.
>if women were actually paid less than men, there'd be more women in STEM. They need to stop taking Gender Studies
>the middle east is fucked up because of islam
The cause of all these ills, to the psued, is the thought. And the thought is the obsession. Notice there is no seperation of thought between those with and without power. It is not "because people in power think this way" it's "because people think this way."
>if black people thought differently, things would be better for them
>if women thought differently, things would be better for them
>if middle eastern countries cast away their religionand freed their minds, things would be better for them
This kind of thinking lacks context. When, in reality, the reasons of these problems are not simply from how one thinks in isolation but how peoples respond to the material conditions they're in.
>black people are poor in America because of a long history of systemic exploitation. It is ultimately the result of America's economy, systems of power, and so on.
>women are paid less than men because they are much more likely to take maternal leave and employers benefit by not having to cover the time away.
>the middle east is fucked up because of imperialism, invasion, and foreign exploitation which destabilized the region and gave radical right-wing groups funding
While those 3 points may be wrong, they are based in a physical, material reality.
I also mentioned so-called free speech as it relates to obsession of ideas over material. While the so-called free speech movement is run by mostly fascists or protofascist, it has many psuedo intellectual backers and supporters. There are two reasons for this:
>the obsession of how peoples think is not a far hop to believing that some people are incapable of thinking critically....

>the so-called free speech movement is run by mostly fascists or protofascists
It really isn't, user.

Why do people seem to hate blogs, but follow vloggers and podcasters?

because blogs are soooooo 2008

>..."Blacks are stupid and inferior and violent and beyond saving," "Muslims are violent by nature and need to be kept from our society" and so on. It's not foreign, disgusting ideas anymore.
>There is this consensus that the fascists who speak and recruit won't actually do anything. Rather, the psued believes that these ideas, if he doesn't agree to genocide and totalitarianism, are illogical, bad. And because they're illogical and bad, these people won't gain any power

Run by, yes. Make up the bulk of its members, no.

>run by, yes.
Do you have any sources for that?

>He doesn't engage in argumentum ad verecundium

PLEBIAN. Only big small brained negros attack the ideas and not the source

A pseudo only reads what he likes, a true reads what he disagrees with.

>these people won't gain power
But that's a true statement, user. Nazis are almost universally despised in the united states, and their membership certainly doesn't come anywhere close to threatening the main established political parties. Far-right parties are losing their support all throughout europe as we speak. The nazi party has never had mainstream political power in the US, why do you think that would change now?

On the whole, the ideas circulating in the vlog-podcast sphere seem more prosaic than the ones coming out of the blogs.

You don't need popularity to be in power, just power

Good thing that nazis and the KKK have very little power in the US, then.

>If you hold opinions that do not align with the leftists world view you are a pseud
There, condensed it all down to a single sentence.

You can call me a fascist now. #bashthefash

>What distinguishes a proper pseudo-intellectual?

He makes sense and offers solutions, a real intellectual would never do that.

This is a spot on roleplay of a proper pseudo-intellectual.

Avatarfagging is banned outside of /a/

You're just being a reactionary to /pol/ memes without giving any real definition to anything. Congratulations you played yourself.

He's a leftypol retard, he's exactly as dumb as the polturds in the exact same way but thinks he's smarter than they are because he's read hegel.

As a pseudo-intellectual these are the traits I display.

>My philosophical, political and literary opinions are dominated by the most recent book I read
>I generally cannot express ideas in metaphors and example that are not in the book
>I forget about 50% of a book in 6 months and about 90% in a year
>Only read works once and rarely if any secondary texts
>Have to rely heavily on foot and end notes
>When I come across a difficult or unclear writing I always assume fault in myself or the others and that the work is not obscurantist but profound.
>I only read about half of the books I buy.
>I write down quotes and references to use in conversation.
>I agonise over translations
>Feel personally injured when people I deem more intelligent than me shit on books and authors I like
>I dont bother learning how to pronounce the names or places mentioned especially when it comes to Greek and Russian works
>Go to great effort to preserve my books despite only reading them once.
>Feel revulsion and contempt towards people who ceased reading literature once higschool ended despite doing the same with mathematics and the sciences
>Attempt to veer discussions towards philosophy and literature even when I know the other people dont read.
>Desperately wish people would ask me what Im reading.

>I forget about 50% of a book in 6 months and about 90% in a year
This is killing me

Do you believe the pseud can ascend?

From my experience you can stop being pseud but you wont become an intellectual.

What is and will be a hobby for me will be a vocation for others.

Ive managed to get a measure of peace by realising that the genuinely intellectual life is not for me. As a result I no longer torture myself by trying to force a passion that isnt there in order to gain a lifestyle that isnt really worth the cost. Nor am I deluded into thinking my hobby makes me better than others.

No doubt there are people who make the transition but I am certainly not among them.

It's the European center-left that's collapsing at the moment, though.

I don't usually agree with pol but yea that's pretty much what that was.

This.

writes a paragraph, gets responded with a paragraph, responds with ur a reddit

This, the pseudo-intellectual main goal is to show to other people how smart he is so he will prefer form over content. He will often use quote and make a lot of reference not because they support his argument but because they show that he read a book or watched a movie and he thinks that the book or the movie is the kind that only smart people read/watch.
He will also correct somebody even when it isn't need, you know the guy saying "that armor in this fantasy show isn't historically accurate".

So, a pseudo-intellectual is somebody who main goal in an argument or a discussion is always to show how smart [spoiler]he thinks[/spoiler] he is.

He writes multiple paragraphs to say something that a normal person could say in a single sentence and fills them full of big words that are very awkwardly used.
His arguments totally hinges on citing obscure logical fallacies that he doesn't really understand.

It isn't necessary for his arguments to be fallacious, a pseud can present perfectly correct views and still be a pseud. The key point is that the pseud doesn't really UNDERSTAND the points he is regurgitating, he might have an excellent memory and be able to cite appropriate references but if you ask him to explain the ideas he's putting forth all he can do is repeat himself, he's unable to break an idea down into its parts and explain those to someone less intelligent than himself.

>european center-left that's collapsing at the moment
and the far right is going down with it

>>I forget about 50% of a book in 6 months and about 90% in a year

>>Have to rely heavily on foot and end notes

delet

Avatarfag is an idiot, surprising nobody

The pseud makes constantly citations of books, movies and music, that he thinks are for smart peoplez.

Thinks that by conformism is bad and that he is an individual. But still lives and acts liked most peoplez in his society and period of time.

Starts treads on /his and /lit.

>He will also correct somebody even when it isn't need
I can't stop correcting people if they make grammatical mistakes, whether it be in my native tongue, German, or in English (the only other language I know). Though I reckon this is a trait associated with pseudo-intellectualism, that is not the reason why I do it. I'm not particularly pedantic either. However, proper use of language resonates with me on a deep level. Thinking about it, it's not only grammar, but also phrases and idiomatic speech that I pay careful attention too. When I read someone who has really mastered a language, I get into a state of ecstasy. I must seem like such a faggot to people.

Meant for

...

>When I come across a difficult or unclear writing I always assume fault in myself or the others and that the work is not obscurantist but profound
This mentality is the reason why Marxists still exist.

>>black people are poor in America because of a long history of systemic exploitation. It is ultimately the result of America's economy, systems of power, and so on.
Chinese were discriminated against just as much as niggers in the US and yet they are doing fine.
>>women are paid less than men because they are much more likely to take maternal leave and employers benefit by not having to cover the time away.
True.
>>the middle east is fucked up because of imperialism, invasion, and foreign exploitation which destabilized the region and gave radical right-wing groups funding
Half truth, it's also fucked up because they're stuck in the middle ages due to their religion and due to their low iq's (wich is caused by inbreeding, marrying relatives is still very normal in most muslim countries).

>What distinguishes a proper pseudo-intellectual?
They are not only smart, they are Japanese?

but all marxist literature is easy to understand after reading smith, hegel and feuerbach

The pursuit, not of knowledge, but its fruits.

That's not really what i meant, i mean every one of his posts contains him accusing the other person of some logical fallacy that he doesn't truly understand.
I'm specifically thinking of some guy who shouted "continuum fallacy" when i asked him to define a "spectrum" that he had just made up. He was accusing me of other things too but that's the one that stuck with me.

Yea you sound like a psued.

A Brian Griffin complex.
I don't know how else to explain it other than Seth MacFarlane's pile of shit, but yeah.

Easy. If you call yourself an intellectual, you are a pseudo-intellectual.

The same concept as people who brag about how they are "nice" or "good". Chances are, they're assholes.

hahahahahahahaha this

That's just autism, you could be a pseud as well but being a pedant is pure autism.

He literally said "LOL alt-right are dummies b'cos they have a simplistic explanation for everything (muh culture), but I am smart because I have a simplistic explanation for everything (muh material conditions)", why would you give him the (You)?

Not at all, even Marx scholars couldn't understand what he meant at time because he's often being so general and vague.

lol this is so perfect.

Basically it's kind of someone who really isn't immersed in what they are talking about , but acts like they are.

Kind of the way Brian acts about writing.

.t pseudointellectual

>wich is caused by inbreeding,
I thought the jews were inbred too

You are a top psued

Look, let me give you an answer, but first let me start with a quote from a favorite intellectual of mine, Stephan Hawkins. You might have heard of him. "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." Now obviously, as anyone who is remotely intellectual should know, is that we can't just pretend to be smart. You actually have to be smart, maybe you should read some books by my favorite Russian philosophers and authors, I'll go ahead and tag you on my Facebook post later so you can keep it for future reference. Anyways, proper means that they're actual pseudo (That's basically saying fake) intellectuals (Which is a person who can think deeply, like me) and what pseudo intellectuals (NOT ME) are posers who think they know more than anyone else because they read a book by Tolstoy. Now then gents, if you excuse me I have to get ready tonight for a date with a woman of near-equal IQ (About five points lower, of course). I need to make sure my favorite fedora is ready at the dry cleaners so I'll leave you brainlets to comprehend my post. Cheers, I'll be on later on /r/philosophy if you want to discuss this further.

Exactly.

The typical "dumb" type of pseud inspired by some people I know.
>Can't read very well or for very long due to ruined attention span so gets all information from YouTube videos and anything that can be summarized in 10 words in a meme on social media
>Doesn't have an opinion on any kind of art/news until they've seen discussions on it from other people who can think for themselves.
>Has hobbies and interests purely for the sake of posturing, but almost no idea what people actually find impressive and what they don't care about at all or find pretentious
>"Yeah I really enjoy classical music and smooth jazz. I'm an Atheist and I'm very into physics and [random science related thing that he knows you aren't familiar with just so he can talk down to you in a few seconds when you ask what that is]. I can code HTML, CSS and I'm learning Java.
>When nobody is around to posture in front of just plays video games and listens to anime music
>buys books but doesn't read them
or
>touts the usefulness of the internet as an educational tool but can't read more than a paragraph off a screen without opening Steam

Pop-intellectualism. The pseudo-intellectual wants to impress people rather than teach, and as such his texts are at a surface level easy to follow, but on closer inspection actually aren't since they demand several leaps of logic to be made to reach his conclusion, something he skillfully masks under his witty and charming, and highly un-intellectual, writing style filled with catchy one liners that drive his point home.

That's just called being on Veeky Forums.

>Have to rely heavily on foot and end notes
>I write down quotes and references to use in conversation.
>I agonise over translations
>Feel revulsion and contempt towards people who ceased reading literature once higschool ended despite doing the same with mathematics and the sciences
>Desperately wish people would ask me what Im reading.

f-fuck

That's a hipster not a pseud.

Someone insecure about his intelligence who is using subterfuge to look smarter than he actually is.

Those.

>reddit phrasing
just ask what are the differences you fag

>the quintessance of the alt-right is obsession of ideas over material
not a bad theory, but you are not really talking about pseuds here, or really a very spacial category of pseuds.

A pseud can become an intellectual simply by not caring what other people think about them. The great irony of pseuds is that they are already decent amateur scholars but they're only interested in learning just a little more than the average person. If they stopped caring about their social standing and took a deep approach to learning instead of a broad approach they would gain an actual understanding.

>just ask what are the differences you fag
Ok, what are the differences you fa

Much better senpai.
The pseud is making effort in order to look smart, while the intellectual is genuinly intelligent and when he looks smart it's just a byproduct of something he tried to achieve, he doesn't go out of his way to look smart for the sake of it.
>can a pseud become an intellectual
he can but it would be unlikely, as making effort to be an intellectual is a very pseud thing to do, and as pseuds don't usually have enough iq to be one and that's why they are pseuds in the first place.

Hipsters are essentially pseuds anyway

When will the pseud surpass the original? Unlimited Pseud Works!

My family all think I'm super intelligent but I am a literal brainlet. I just have a good memory, decent(ish) vocabulary and an inquisitive mind. Don't ever ask me to actually form an opinion I didn't read elsewhere.

Don't feel bad for being a pseud, we are the consumers of actual intellectuals. Important part of the market.

>family treats me like I'm a genius all through school
>don't care about my work because I'm like totally smarter than everyone so why should I?
>family still praises me and tells me how great I am
>fast forward
>everyone starts to realize I'm not that smart at all
>immense pressure to prove that I'm not a complete brainlet
Considering becoming full pseud just so I can get that comfy feeling of being appreciated again. Nobody would have to know.

This is almost me, i was constantly praised for being intelligent from an early age and so I never ever tried academically. My Sister struggled with dyslexia and narrowly avoided being sent to a special school. Guess which one of us now has a PhD.

That was me 10 years ago. Since then I embraced being a brainlet, being smart is for faggots.

That's the worst part of it. My cousin who was a few years younger than me got dux of her school and a scholarship to one of the best universities in Australia. I don't even really like asking about it cause I used to be compared to her all the time when we were younger and I know it reminds everyone that I'm terrible.

but how do get date cute uni girls if am branlet??? There's obvious perks to being smart we're both missing out on, user.

Being a brainlet doesn't stop you from going to University. The vast majority of people at Uni don't deserve to be there.

>muh gurls
Yep indeed a brainlet