/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10162408]

What distinguishes a proper pseudo-intellectual?

[Anonymous No.10162417]

>>10162408
If he has liberal beliefs = hack
If he talks positively about whiteness, masculinity, and ethnic homogeneity = geniuous

[Anonymous No.10162453]

You'll want to look for a few things, namely hypocrisy, posturing, and superficial engagement.

Almost all pseudo-intellectuals, in my experience, simply play with ideas and arguments, never embracing them or adjusting their lives to abide by them, hence the hypocrisy; pretend to know more about ideas and arguments than they do instead of admitting a lack of competence and humbly asking others for more information / their interpretations, hence the posturing; and of course speaking about such topics using the language of summary and cliché without revealing any original insight and interpretation, hence the superficiality.

Although there are definitely other tells, these three are the biggest.

[Anonymous No.10162463]

1. Being concerned with how "difficult" a work of fiction is.

Because this implies that reading books is a skill, e.g. some are worse (everyone else) and some are better (the pseud)

2. Using the word 'serious' in reference to fiction

Implies that reading fiction is anything other than masturbation, however fulfilling and sophisticated a form of masturbation it may be. Above all, the pseud comes to fiction to be taken Seriously.

3. Most of their discussion is reference spotting

What better way to show everyone how much you've read? Keep in mind, this person thinks that reading fiction makes you smart. It's also a neat way to say nothing at all about something you've read.

"He was alluding to Paradise Lost."
"I've never read that. Why was the allusion made?"
"Well *chuckles* I'm afraid you'd have to read the work to fully understand."

---

"He was alluding to Paradise Lost."
"Yeah, I know. So what?"
"*sweats* D... do I have to spoon feed you this one?"

4. Is avoided in discussions or social settings by other readers

One who truly loves to read despises someone who wears their beloved hobby like a fashion accessory to pump their little dick up in social settings.

[Anonymous No.10162468]

>Intellectual
Genuine sense of curiosity and dedication
>Pseud
Just wants to waggle his dick around

[Anonymous No.10162470]

>>10162408
Nice one, dude
>>>his/3551480/

[Anonymous No.10162475]

>>10162408
Nice one, dude
>>>/his/3551480/

[Anonymous No.10162478]

>>10162470
I like to make multiple threads on different boards to get many perspectives from different people.

[Anonymous No.10162621]

>>10162408
The easiest ways you can tell is
>if they speak about subjects in vague generalities and never go in to specifics
>if they namedrop things without actually discussing them in detail
>if, should they ever actually do talk about specifics of a subject, it’s usually limited to one or two instances that are fairly mainstream and already well known