How to spot a psuedo-intellectual

[Broke Wave]

Arguing all the time and being vocal = being a pseudo intellectual according to ya'll.

 

[Another Man]

Arguing all the time and being vocal = being a pseudo intellectual according to ya'll.

Nah, arguing all the time pushing a point w/ no legs to stand on all while trying to only get the last word in = a pseudo intellectual. True intellectuals don't walk around with a chip on their shoulder trying to provoke "debates" with everyone just to show out.

 

[-G$-]

They also spell "pseudo" like "psuedo".

 

[T-K-G]

On the real, one of the quickest way to point em out is the fact that they're very pretentious in nature, and seem to jump at the opportunity to flex their "intellectual muscle", even answering questions no one asked. Then, once challenged and/or proven wrong, it starts out a debate, then pretty much ends up being an fight for the last word, complete with the adult equivalent of "LALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOUUUU, YOU'RE AN IDIOT, I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG DUMBASS!" <-----that is a pseudo-intellectual self destructing. Alot of them also tend to try and push their opinions on others as facts, and when the other party disagrees and/or the pseudo-intellectual cannot comprehend their stance on the issue, they get frustrated and resort to name calling like dude mentioned earlier. People who act like this usually get their mentality from spending a lot of time around yes men and people who see through the bullshyt, but don't wanna bother wasting time arguing with those types.

man these are the only type of people that i legitimately hate.

I knew 3 nikkas like this, all were brothers so you already can imagine.

nikkas just ask each other to voice their opinions on something to try and prove a point, im sitting there like " nikka this dont even count as an outside opinion you lived with this nikka your entire life, yall nikkas think the same off GP"

but they swear if the other 2 agree to it then it's fact so apparently:

1. The illuminati is using all mainstream rappers to destroy black people
2. All modern science is false because i haven't seen the experiments done myself (all textbooks are lies)
3. No other planets exists outside of our solar system (which might not even be a solar system since there is no proof we aren't at the center ) because we haven't been out there ourselves
4. The military (or any sports coach) yelling at people/forced work out as punishment in training is morally wrong because some people get upset quickly when you yell at them and they should be allowed to fight the coach/drill sergeant

i had to stop hangin with them nikkas mane, had me on edge all day after i would leave them nikkas, lookin at everybody on some

type shyt

Usually they be so full of shyt and lies, don't have anything going
for themselves, so you really can't take anything they say seriously.

At least, these dudes in LJ had careers. The ones I have ran into just had
great mouthpieces, funny, but, in the end, not worth resources or time

so damn true of these nikkas

 

[Another Man]

man these are the only type of people that i legitimately hate.

I knew 3 nikkas like this, all were brothers so you already can imagine.

nikkas just ask each other to voice their opinions on something to try and prove a point, im sitting there like " nikka this dont even count as an outside opinion you lived with this nikka your entire life, yall nikkas think the same off GP"

but they swear if the other 2 agree to it then it's fact so apparently:

1. The illuminati is using all mainstream rappers to destroy black people
2. All modern science is false because i haven't seen the experiments done myself (all textbooks are lies)
3. No other planets exists outside of our solar system (which might not even be a solar system since there is no proof we aren't at the center ) because we haven't been out there ourselves
4. The military (or any sports coach) yelling at people/work out as punishment in training is morally wrong because some people get upset quickly when you yell at them and they should be allowed to fight the coach/drill sergeant

i had to stop hangin with them nikkas mane, had me on edge all day after i would leave them nikkas, lookin at everybody on some

type shyt








so damn true of these nikkas

Cot damn those types are definitely the worst...the ones who will PURPOSELY only consider the opinions/viewpoints of those who they KNOW will agree with them, and then try to act as if they're correct. A pack of misinformed people does not equal the truth.

 

[T-K-G]

Cot damn those types are definitely the worst...the ones who will PURPOSELY only consider the opinions/viewpoints of those who they KNOW will agree with them, and then try to act as if they're correct. A pack of misinformed people does not equal the truth.

the idea that all 3 of them could be wrong is alien to them bruh, cuz they always reassuring each other that they right

i had to give up smoking with them nikkas cuz it always ruined my high on some type shyt

 

[tru_m.a.c]

pseudointellectual*(plural*pseudointellectuals)Someone who*pretends*to be more*intelligent*than they are.*&#8195;[quotations*&#9660;]

[edit]Usage notes

Usage is fraught, and*pseudointellectual*may be used as a general term of abuse for intellectuals one dislikes or disagrees with. Nevertheless, in more careful use a rather clear distinction is drawn:[1]*a*pseudointellectual*is someone dishonestly or insincerely using the language, style, or topics of an intellectual, but who lacks the goals, morals, or ability of a “genuine” intellectual. It is someone who acts pretentiously and wishes to win an argument or impress, rather than modestly trying to find the truth – a focus on surface and*rhetoric*over content. These often involve a superficial understanding of a subject and condescension to the audience, as well as possible self-delusion (not being consciously dishonest, but rather genuinely thinking themself to be behaving as a genuine intellectual despite their incompetence).

From wiki

45 post in before somebody upped the definition

leaving 44 post before them looking foolish

lmao the irony of y'all all being that which you were trying to describe



no no seriously, re read this definition and then go re read this thread

 

[Another Man]

the idea that all 3 of them could be wrong is alien to them bruh, cuz they always reassuring each other that they right

i had to give up smoking with them nikkas cuz it always ruined my high on some type shyt

shyt's the very definition of a circle jerk.

 

[Another Man]

45 post in before somebody upped the definition

leaving 44 post before them looking foolish

lmao the irony of y'all all being that which you were trying to describe



no no seriously, re read this definition and then go re read this thread

Using that logic, the very person who created the definition itself could be considered a pseudo-intellectual.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of people in here have described some pretty common character traits that go right along with that definition.

Maybe you're the pseudo-intellectual?

 

[T-K-G]

45 post in before somebody upped the definition

leaving 44 post before them looking foolish

lmao the irony of y'all all being that which you were trying to describe



no no seriously, re read this definition and then go re read this thread

im guessing you are talking about this

*pseudointellectual*may be used as a general term of abuse for intellectuals one dislikes or disagrees with.

if you are, then i dont think you read the rest of it.

Nevertheless, in more careful use a rather clear distinction is drawn:[1]*a*pseudointellectual*is someone dishonestly or insincerely using the language, style, or topics of an intellectual, but who lacks the goals, morals, or ability of a &#8220;genuine&#8221; intellectual. It is someone who acts pretentiously and wishes to win an argument or impress, rather than modestly trying to find the truth &#8211; a focus on surface and*rhetoric*over content. These often involve a superficial understanding of a subject and condescension to the audience, as well as possible self-delusion (not being consciously dishonest, but rather genuinely thinking themself to be behaving as a genuine intellectual despite their incompetence).

if i'm wrong could you explain cuz I missed it (no shots intended)

 

[threattonature]

Nah, arguing all the time pushing a point w/ no legs to stand on all while trying to only get the last word in = a pseudo intellectual. True intellectuals don't walk around with a chip on their shoulder trying to provoke "debates" with everyone just to show out.

I got a friend like this. He'll just repeat anything he hears on any subject as fact just to appear smart. A lot of times it just annoys me hearing incorrect information being passed around so I'll jump in and question him on what he's saying or point out how it's wrong. Then he'll usually try to pass off what he's saying as something he heard and doesn't believe. Or he'll just resort to name-calling if the first route doesn't work.

What pisses me off is that he refuses to acknowledge he's wrong. The funniest was at one point he was tryign to be a smart ass and correct somebody else. I called him out on being completely wrong and his response was "oh I misheard him". When I pointed out that he repeated back exactly what other dude said before trying to correct him and it turned into name calling after that.

 

[Roaden Polynice]

Someone who disagrees with Mowglis posts.

Someone who refers to themselves in the third person.

Funnily enough, those who frequently dabble in Illeism are often those who are not that smart or who cannot or fail to grasp the necessary syntax to use the more apposite first person.

E.G. Sloth from the Goonies, Jimmy from Seinfeld.

Personally I enjoy referring to pseudo-intellectuals as sophists. Whatever the case may be they all are pseudo-isodorians at the root.

 

[Mowgli]

Someone who refers to themselves in the third person.

Funnily enough, those who frequently dabble in Illeism are often those who are not that smart or who cannot or fail to grasp the necessary syntax to use the more apposite first person.

E.G. Sloth from the Goonies, Jimmy from Seinfeld.

Personally I enjoy referring to pseudo-intellectuals as sophists. Whatever the case may be they all are pseudo-isodorians at the root.

You are a pseudo intellectual. You speak to impress, not to communicate. You are also a fakkit though so it makes sense.

 

[Roaden Polynice]

You are a pseudo intellectual. You speak to impress, not to communicate. You are also a fakkit though so it makes sense.

How to spot a pseudo-intellectual, seconda rata:

They laugh at their own jokes, oftentimes using smileys to save face. A face for a face as we say, lol.

E.G.:

You are a pseudo intellectual. You speak to impress, not to communicate. You are also a fakkit though so it makes sense.

 

[zerozero]

ehh it's not something I've ever really thought about

either people are right or they're wrong or I guess, they have a well developed point of view or don't