[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 10 KB, 235x282, cutesie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17272935 No.17272935 [Reply] [Original]

What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit? Books, talking points, favorite philosophers/writers, etc.

>inb4 people that make threads like this

I just wanna see the biggest stereotypes on /lit/. Nothing personal. Give a newfag his dues.

>> No.17272945

being 50-100 years late
like Peterson with his boner for Jung

>> No.17272956

>>17272935
Caring whether people think your a pseud/midwit

>> No.17272958

Ontotheological beliefs

>> No.17272960

>>17272935
Not appreciating mathematics

>> No.17272962

anything right wing or overtly christian in its morality/messaging

>> No.17272964

>>17272956
I KNEW SOMEONE WOULD SAY THAT
argh, and I tried so hard! I even put an inb4 just because...
damn...

>> No.17272978

>>17272935
>bigoted against old philosophy
>bigoted against new philosophy
>bigoted against right-wing philosophy
>bigoted against left-wing philosophy
>bigoted against religious philosophy
>bigoted against secular philosophy
before having read all of them.

>> No.17272979

The biggest one by far is silence or unwillingness to contribute to discussion, both on the internet or in real life.
The person might try to convince themselves that they're doing this because they don't have any expertise in the topic at hand, and thus have nothing to contribute. The heart of this lies in their deep-seated fear of being wrong, as the person won't ever feel comfortable giving an opinion on something without being fully prepared. It is by far one of the biggest pseud traits in existence, and probably one linked closely to slightly above average but still middling IQ (say, 105, 108).
Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally. This betrays a severe inferiority complex, most likely stemming from the fact that they never read much as children (and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)

Finally, the biggest one I've noticed has to do with textbooks. People who take too many notes while reading a chapter are invariably pseuds. This is especially true if they jot down definitions/examples which they could just look back up in the textbook. Most people I've met who do this don't even refer back to their notes.

>> No.17272989

>>17272935
Worrying about who is a pseud/midwit and how one can spot them

>> No.17272992

>>17272979
This post seems like a cope

>> No.17273006

>>17272979
>IQ
pseud

>> No.17273012

>>17272979
The first thing reads more like impostor syndrome

>> No.17273020

>>17272979
My IQ is 142 and I'm terrified of speaking when I'm not familiar with a topic. I'd rather listen and absorb as much information as I can rather than provide an uninformed opinion.

>> No.17273023

>>17273012
Imposter syndrome is very much inextricably linked with pseuds. Actually intelligent people are confident in their abilities.
t. pseud

>> No.17273026
File: 104 KB, 1340x1044, projector.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17273026

>>17272979
>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally. This betrays a severe inferiority complex, most likely stemming from the fact that they never read much as children (and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)
Oddly specific.

>> No.17273027

mispelling mispell

>> No.17273035

>>17272979
> This is especially true if they jot down definitions/examples which they could just look back up in the textbook. Most people I've met who do this don't even refer back to their notes.

The act of physically writing information aids memory. You’re a pseud

>> No.17273045

>>17272935
This post
>>17272979

>> No.17273050 [DELETED] 

> What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit?
using IQ points to validate themselves
https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39

>> No.17273057

>>17272935
Having a strong political opinion on the left-right spectrum

Inability to separate one's thoughts from oneself

>> No.17273063 [DELETED] 

>>17272979
The amount of replies from buttblasted pseuds proves your assumptions correct. Perfect.

>> No.17273067

>>17272935
If someone has a pet idea that they aren’t willing to part with in the face of contrary evidence, they’re a pseud.

>> No.17273081

>>17273050
Fascinating article, are you educated in scientific stats and read the zagorsky paper quoted? I'm curious about it

>> No.17273107

>>17272935
plato and aristotle attract a lot of pseuds. anyone that has read heidegger without reading husserl is a pseud. anyone that hasn't read kant is a pseud

>> No.17273130

>>17272935
Started with nietzsche, stirner, and evola, doesn't seem to understand them, still justifies what he does with them, and never continued their thoughts, just accepted them as """true""" because they are recommended sometimes. Has a lot of war books though, and maybe some other books, mainly some esoteric fascism stuff.

>> No.17273140

>>17272978
This, and I would like to add; not attempting to reconcile them even if they are on the surface disparate.

>> No.17273160

>>17272979
That's the opposite of a pseud. A pseud is on the left side of the Dunning-Kruger curve. You're talking about an average person who recognizes their limitations.

>> No.17273170

>>17272935
It all comes back to a desire to appear smart.

>> No.17273189

>>17272979
holy projection

>> No.17273203

>>17272979
good bait

>> No.17273208

>>17272979
I've also noticed that people who make blanket statements, either to stroke their own egos or to instigate an argument, are top midwit pseuds.
Another thing I've noticed is that such people generally claim all opposition is proof that they are correct.

>> No.17273219
File: 82 KB, 578x389, 6CECE26B-DE97-4903-A3DC-08A61B5922F7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17273219

>>17272935
Quoting popscientists. Eg Sagan, neil degrasse tyson, sam harris, jordan peterson. And to a lesser extent dawkins.
This can be contrasted by people who quote polymaths are almost never psueds and if they are they are on the right path out of it at least.

People overly concerned with projecting an image of intellectualism. They can be seen writing or reading at cafes, wearing tweed ever, looking very manicured and acting glibly.

People who talk about science and government as trusted entities, not usually useful processes.

edutainment. Ted talks, numberphile for example, documentaries, articles etc.
This can be contrasted to reading blogs and watching conferences, presentations, podasts etc.

Reads new books without touching any old books ever.

>> No.17273221

The number one pseud signifier has always been overcomplexity. Pseuds always prefer the needlessly complex over the simple and the elegant. Even if the simple is at best just a good explanation and not perfect, the pseud will always reject it for something more complex that is completely wrong

>> No.17273236

>>17272979
These things make you a pseud (or rather a pseud does these things) but why is that bad?

>> No.17273253

>>17272935
only reading authors who are still alive is peak pseud

>> No.17273258
File: 1.11 MB, 2606x1748, Joos_van_Craesbeeck_-The_Temptation_of_St_Anthony.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17273258

Honestly, the largest thing I can accurately and completely pin as complete pseud nonsense is when -- and you'll encounter this a lot, even in circles that are supposed to be "intellectual" and perhaps especially so there -- a person exposes themselves as a complete pseud (although sometimes others don't notice) by critiquing, dismissing, insulting, exalting, aggrandizing, or denouncing authors/thinkers/artists they have quite simply NEVER READ. It really ticks me off.

Every fucking undergraduate student thinks they're fucking experts on anything, or everything, because of a very reductionist sketch of whichever field they learn / are introduced to through their still progressing classes... Shout-outs to Comp.Sci., Psych., Physics, and possibly English literature, for being the absolute worst with this.

If you want to stop being a pseud, the first thing you can do is ***just stop having opinions on thinkers you know nothing about except something some person or collective, usually very informally, told you!*** ***ACTUALLY READ THE TEXT to judge for yourself!***

Apologies for the rant. :/

>> No.17273275

>>17273219
the kind of person who only concerns themselves with what is popular in public intellectual circles? for example treating the 'intellectual dark web' as intellectual gatekeepers, what comes through is approved what stays on the other side isn't deemed relevant kind of thing
some of my friends and family fall into these categories.. start on what could be a good discussion and always ends up dead

>> No.17273287

>>17272962
niggers and kikes will die. all of them.
Hail Victory

>> No.17273311

>>17272962
Only rightwingers and christians, not also atheists and leftwingers. Pseud detected.

>> No.17273425

>>17273258
>denouncing authors/thinkers/artists they have quite simply NEVER READ
This, especially when they dismiss the author on purely ideological grounds, even when the author's ideology has no relation to the work in question (i.e. "So-and-so was a fascist!")

>> No.17273434

>>17273050
Nah, the entire media is just assblasted that internet nazis started using iq data to justify their racism

>> No.17273451

>>17272935
hylicism

>> No.17273459

>>17272979
The amount of replies to this post makes me believe that it is correct.
Thanks for opening my eyes anon.

>> No.17273463

You guys are all intelligent! Stop worrying so much about it.

>> No.17273468

>>17272935
Obsessing about being a "pseud" and being insecure about your intelligence. Actual smart people don't do that shit

>> No.17273469

>>17273221
This is true, but also, people who prefer the pithy to the thorough and hide behind that apocryphal "Einstein" quote (which I'm pretty sure was actually by Feynman but I don't care enough to look it up) about being able to say what you know simply or you don't really know it. Which to them means, "distill your entire field into terms I know and like or I'll dismiss you out of hand".

Simplicity is good but people who insist on simplicity for its own sake are usually covering up lack of depth knowledge.

>> No.17273489

>>17272979
>vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25
someone here got filtered by Joyce or Geoff Hill, and it ain't me!

>> No.17273506
File: 31 KB, 600x305, u.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17273506

>>17273258
undergrads are basically the embodiment of this image, try to forgive them, for they know not what they do (literally)

>> No.17273528

>>17273258
I used to do this in highschool. Now, when I am asked my opinion on an author I haven't read or when there's a discussion about one I just say "I couldn't know, I haven't read them." and if someone does what you describe, I ask genuine questions about the specific book in question and watch my interlocutor drop all of their spaghetti.

>> No.17273558

>>17272935
The 14 years-old Nietzsche-fags who are only interested in the idea of the death of God because it sounds so cool and alternative, ignoring every other aspect of Nietzsche's thought, which is ridiculously wide

>> No.17273573

>>17273170
>>17273468
These.

>> No.17273773

>>17272979
Writing notes, i.e. reformulating knowledge in your own words, is proven to be THE best way of learning. It's what all good students do.

>> No.17273784

>>17272979
imagine not being able to recreate the development of language in an instant in order to synthesize the meaning of a word you don't know with nothing but the phonetics of it's root... pleb

>> No.17273797
File: 122 KB, 4096x2160, virgin_intellectual_chad_retard_1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17273797

>>17272935
Thinking they're smart. Worrying about if they're smart

Just be a retard. Embrace it. Revel in it. This shit fucking rules

>> No.17273804

reads nietzche, mishima,
watches zizek, thinks marx was smart
hates hitler, loves hitler
is a leftist

>> No.17273863

>>17272978
>>17272979

>> No.17273917

>>17272979
honestly if you want to speak on a topic you are only partially informed on just try to make that fact clear, that your only partially aware, than speak your opinion

>> No.17273949

>>17272979
love the asshurt that this post caused

>> No.17274020

>>17273023
Can confirm
t. actually intelligent and never felt it in my life

>> No.17274026

>>17272935
People who believe certain emotions are bad, or good. Like for example, if someone hates someone else of another trace/tribe/culture then this is bad and if they ever change their mind then they have been ''reformed'' as if they were villains from a fantasy novel.

Its midwittery at its max

>> No.17274030
File: 7 KB, 1525x34, 123557.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17274030

>>17272979
oh no no no no nO NOO!!!

>> No.17274056

>>17272979
that's not even really "fear" though, what's the fucking point of saying something if you know it's probably gonna be false? nothing. there is no point.

>> No.17274066

Narcissism is a sign of a pseud. Vulnerable narcissism especially so.

>> No.17274070

>>17272978
Incredibly based

>> No.17274079

>>17272979
>talk about something you don't understand and you risk being called out for a pseud
>don't talk about something you don't understand and you also risk being a pseud
So what's one to do??

>> No.17274094

>>17273258
This could also go the other way. I wont argue with you because you haven't read all the theory on the subject. I guess that usually implies that the incognito pseud hasn't read any theory either.

>> No.17274295

>>17272978
>using the word bigoted while pretending to be smart
Is another good one

>> No.17274311

>reads exclusively military history
>reads exclusively pop-sci books like Sagan, Michio Kaku etc.
>reads exclusively penguin classics

>> No.17274320

>>17272935
>his dues
dues are something you pay, retard

>> No.17274357

>attacking strawmen
>ad hominem arguments
>people making threads criticizing something that they have no actual clue about, stating that "they don't have to read something to know it's bad"
Last one in particular apllies to 95% of threads about Marxism, postmodernism or "muh pomo neo marxists"

>> No.17274360

>>17273258
every thread on marx

>> No.17274363

>>17272960
this is the major one

>> No.17274437

>>17272979
Ahem,
GR8 B8 M8, I R8 8/8
>he's pretty right though, in some ways

>> No.17274445

>>17272979
zoz

>> No.17274455

>>17273035
no it doesn't lol. Notetaking does not help retention

>> No.17274481

>>17272935
>looking down on poetry
I have no problem with people not interested in poetry but looking down on it is generally a sign of intellectual dishonesty
>looking down on free verse but pretending to like poetry
this is a sign that you only like poetry for the status it procures or that you are not curious of anything produced since the 1850s which is ridiculous
>talking about books with opinions and not with taste
this is the worse one, I'd rather have a pleb friend talk to me with passion about the last football match of his team than have to listen someone talk about literature with pre-made conceptions

>> No.17274503

>>17273797
Based

>> No.17274558

>>17274360
there is no point in reading marx

>> No.17274559

>>17272979
pseuds don't hold their tongue they regurgitate what they've heard and if they haven't heard anything yet they force whatever the subject is into the stupid lens or worldview they read about

>> No.17274635

>>17274558
yes, that’s exactly what a pseud would say

>> No.17274670

>>17274559
Well put.

>> No.17274687

>>17272945
Not a fan of peterson but what the fuck do you want him to do? Be born 50 years before he was? retard lmfao

>> No.17274719

>>17272960
I want to be more aware but hardly have more knowledge than basic algebra

I blame American public schools

>> No.17274748

>>17274635
Just because there is no point doesn't mean it shouldn't be read.

>> No.17274994

>>17272935
Look in the mirror

Rekt

>> No.17275011

>>17273773
Writing worsens memory because you rely on the physical copy that you can look up at any time instead of your natural memory. Why do you think oral traditions survived so long? Why do you think civilizations with writing kept oral traditions at all?

>> No.17275080

Exclusively reading books from the 'western canon'. Few things are more psude.

>> No.17275094

>>17272935
people that no matter what, WANT to discuss and mansplain any and everything to you based on pop culture. that's the ultimate pseud.

>> No.17275252

>books
anything by ted k
revolt against the modern world
>talking points
IQ
haplogroups
>philosophers/writers
jordan peterson, obviously
stefan molyneux

>>17272979
holy projection

>> No.17275283

>>17272978
>having read all of them and not becoming deeply pessimistic on formalized school of thought by virtue of its existence

>> No.17275355
File: 52 KB, 646x474, 25561BC0-9CC8-4B17-8FA3-334B9A51D38A.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17275355

>>17275252
>IQ
>haplogroups
Hmmmm

>> No.17275368

>>17272935
Reading.

>> No.17275370

>>17275283
;)
you have to earn it though

>> No.17275373

>>17273057
>Having a strong political opinion on the left-right spectrum
>Inability to separate one's thoughts from oneself


The Idealism on this fucking post

>> No.17275392

>>17272979
>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally.
What do you mean? How should someone learn new words from a book more efficiently than writing them down?

>> No.17275395

>>17275355
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrKrGkgeww4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teyvcs2S4mI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVmj8dDx9yY
here, take it from a conservative who actually knows what hes talking about.

>> No.17275837

>>17275395
>OMG a youtube popsci video, case closed! Suck it magatards!

>> No.17276387
File: 14 KB, 480x360, Diogenes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17276387

>>17273468
Is being smart an inevitable consequence of intelligence?
What about absent minded professor types?

>Various anecdotes have discussed his absent-minded nature. In one story, Smith took Charles Townshend on a tour of a tanning factory, and while discussing free trade, Smith walked into a huge tanning pit from which he needed help to escape. Another episode records that he put bread and butter into a teapot, drank the concoction, and declared it to be the worst cup of tea he ever had. In another example, Smith went out walking and day-dreaming in his nightgown and ended up 15 miles (24 km) outside town before nearby church bells brought him back to reality.

https://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/smitha/about.htm

>> No.17276391

>>17272962
Based

>> No.17276488

>>17273219
>People who talk about science and government as trusted entities, not usually useful processes.
based, science and the government should be trusted on the basis of the value they have been shown to produce, not because they are science and the government. I am so sick of people parroting "trust the science".

>> No.17276695

>>17272935
Copying 4chan posts into a word processor or having a screenshot collection

>>17272979
(You)

>> No.17276875

People who read Vonnegut

>> No.17276883

>>17272935
understanding definitions but not meanings
inability to understand polymorphism of phrases

>> No.17276962
File: 361 KB, 677x680, u-got-a-loicence-for-those-opinions.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17276962

>>17276695
Guilty.
Then I rearrange them into mosaics and pass it off as my own.

>> No.17276974

>>17274357
>>ad hominem arguments
I have been accused of this frequently. Is it ad hominem if I am debating, and say "Wow you are a dumb bitch. How the hell did you get into this university? [Explanation of why she is wrong]"

>> No.17276989

>>17272979
You've hit them where it hurts.

>> No.17277000

>>17276989
Stop being insel

>> No.17277002

>>17276974
If you separate the personal attack and the argument, you haven't committed an ad hominem.
You can continue to make personal attacks without tying them into the main logic of your positions.

>> No.17277018

>>17272979
Based lol at the replies

>> No.17277067

>>17276974
Midwits think that succesful debating is tantamount to using archaic foreign language.

>> No.17277165

psued = pretending to know things you don't

midwit = above-average intelligence but not exceptional

it shouldn't have to be explained how these traits manifest

>> No.17277321

>>17273469
well stated

>> No.17277344

>>17272935

Read enough and interact enough and eventually you'll feel comfortable with saying stuff and more importantly with hearing stuff back. Until then you're just acting pleb

>> No.17277349

People who don't like F. Gardner books.

>> No.17277357

>>17272979
>The biggest one by far is silence or unwillingness to contribute to discussion, both on the internet or in real life.
>The person might try to convince themselves that they're doing this because they don't have any expertise in the topic at hand, and thus have nothing to contribute. The heart of this lies in their deep-seated fear of being wrong, as the person won't ever feel comfortable giving an opinion on something without being fully prepared. It is by far one of the biggest pseud traits in existence, and probably one linked closely to slightly above average but still middling IQ (say, 105, 108).

this is called humility you projecting pseud.

>> No.17277372

being a bookworm is the hallmark of a true pseud. it doesn't matter what they read... people who read too much do so because they can't think

>> No.17277383

>>17277357
Humility is definitely a pseud trait. Cockiness and confidence are linked with higher intelligence.

>> No.17277397

>>17273221
wrong. the pseud can't handle complexity or nuance; that two things can be true at once, etc. pseuds love consistency and simplicity, which is why they subscribe to libertarianism or some other retarded ideology.

>> No.17277422

>>17272979
>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally. This betrays a severe inferiority complex, most likely stemming from the fact that they never read much as children (and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)

t. never learned a second language

excellent bait though

>> No.17277449

>>17273107
>starts with the greeks
>immediately is a pseud

>> No.17277502
File: 77 KB, 960x720, chad_FPA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17277502

>>17272935
People who exclusively watch youtube video essays and haven't read a book since their public highschool prescribed them one. The particular philosophical and political disposition doesn't matter. If you don't read books you might as well be espousing propaganda, there's mentally no difference. If you read any form of nonfiction you have ascended midwittism by at the very least a small magnitude.

>> No.17277578

>>17272979
This is the best troll in the thread. True insight mixed with bait, the ratio just perfect, its constituent parts perhaps not even known to their author lest he betray them. It has already outed many pseuds of every defect and will continue to until archival.

>> No.17277664

>>17275392
you can't
writing down is a memory aid
autistposter implies that chads rely on memory
memory is fallible

>> No.17277671

>>17276695
hey buddy, i only copy my own posts down (so i can revise and submit them later)

>> No.17277680

>>17277502
>If you read any form of nonfiction you have ascended midwittism by at the very least a small magnitude.
I should add that I'm not arguing all nonfiction holds equal value, just that they all inherently hold more value than the small micro essays made by amateur internet personalities on youtube who may or may not also read books. Consuming books is a high effort task to the average human being, and putting in that effort to match whatever virtue/vision you align yourself with politically/philosophically to at least some extent proves your sincerity. Those who behave as if their political visions of the world are a matter of life and death who simultaneously do not read books because they are too much effort are completely insincere, and their life and death disposition is possibly a tool for them to project personal hidden angst or anger. I'm not saying emotion invalidates a person, just that when an individual projects emotional angst through something like politics or philosophy without even putting the effort to read a book relating to their vision I cannot take them seriously, nor can I ever understand them since they literally couldn't give me a book that explains their vision since they haven't read any themselves. It feels like a big larp when I listen to people who do not read. I view it as a form of self deception.

>> No.17277685

>>17276974
lmao, i'd be extremely surprised if any girl didn't throw her drink in your face and storm out at that line

>> No.17277692

>>17272979
Based

>> No.17277697

>>17277383
wrong, but im too lazy to explain why

>> No.17277729

>What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit? Books, talking points, favorite philosophers/writers, etc.
Either all opinions and takes are painfully mainstream and safe, without nuance, or all takes are just contrarian to the mainstream without nuance.
Incapable of responding to rebuttals
Incapable of interpreting new information without categorizing it as something already known

>> No.17277797

>>17277680
Interesting. So do you think reading non-fiction is in a way a cure to this self-deception?

>> No.17277853

>>17272960
its just tautalogy lmao

>> No.17277870

>>17277853
Which proves how retarded we humans are

>> No.17277898

like basically, like literally, like unironically everyone.

like real scholars and like literally writers would spend their time unironically reading Erasmus and Scaliger and spending time writing in a Ciceronian style instead of spending time on /lit/

>> No.17277899

>>17272979
If you don't take notes then what are you supposed to do?

>> No.17278016

>>17277899
Read

>> No.17278033

The most obvious common denominator of the midwits I've met is they've a lack of understanding nuance. Really it's just black and white thinking in general - good vs bad, love vs hate. I think reading books is so valuable because it helps guide you to a place where you can hold sometimes conflicting opinions and come to terms with it.

>> No.17278066

>>17277853
funny how, even though it's tautology, you still don't get it

>> No.17278280
File: 105 KB, 640x954, bc39b4aba557f38569dff0773a90bd9c8226576042071122b492e537ee24df84_1~01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17278280

>>17277797
Yes, that's what I'm arguing. Even if your views remain the same, you now have more backing for them. This helps both the initial reader by clarifying his own vision of the world and for conveying that vision to others through those books.

Saying, for example, that nonfiction books are not worth the effort because video essays are just as valid without ever having read a nonfiction book is complete mental gymnastics. It's literal nonsense. As it stands the only people I have heard say this are those who have never read any books relating to the things they argue are of extreme importance.

I believe these people view politics, philosophy, and history as a tool to reinforce and demonstrate moral, emotional, and/or intellectual superiority over their environment. "Comprehension is secondary" and "what I do not know is not knowledge," are two sentiments which I view as implicit presumptions demonstrated in the actions taken by these types of individuals.

Reading books proves you value clarity to at least some extent, or at the very least you are willing to put effort into seeking it. You are capable of thinking about your own view for more than 20 minutes at time in a structured format. In my experience, it's much, much easier to make a nonsensical idea sound convincing in video format. Whether its from hyper rationalization or circular reasoning, the persona talking to the viewer in some way seems to substitute literal comprehension of a particular concept or idea.

Regardless of whether or not my accounts of video essays are accurate here, I have consumed both books and video essays, so I can make my conclusion about them from my experiences without deceiving myself through baseless presumptions that lead to easy, convenient conclusions for what I already believe/want.

I resent self deception and to a much greater extent I resent apathy. I view people who hold strong visions of philosophy, politics, and/or history who haven't bothered to read about their vision as both self deceptive and extremely apathetic. People who choose to view "ideas" as an avenue to boost their own egos under the pretense of moral/intellectual superiority are pathetic and unhelpful regardless of their disposition, and those that do all this without even bothering to read a fucking book about the idea that upholds their ego are the epitome of apathetic, unfeeling, selfish people. The fact that they often mislead themselves into thinking they are the opposite of these things is a cruel irony.

>> No.17278283

>>17272935
Wielding knowledge as an all-encompassing tool, underestimating direct experience. Living life from books and lording their trivial book-knowledge over well-adjusted people. Always has to be right. Tends to regurgitate 'qualified' opinions from other thinkers as a stand-in for firsthand knowledge. When pressed, they have no clue. Basically, they're frauds.
Easy way to identify pseuds:
>I've read x, I've read y, don't bother with z
>Lol it's like you haven't even read x
>Here's my infallible faggy flowchart, read these abstruse tomes in the exact order I did otherwise you're not smart

>> No.17278339
File: 34 KB, 699x485, 430.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17278339

>>17277685
That's why I only say that shit over text. I've got it all figured out.

>> No.17278376

>>17277397
Libertarianism is incredibly nuanced. You have just outed yourself as a pseud, grats.

>> No.17278472

>>17272956
Cute, but this doesn't even warrant a response.

>> No.17278477
File: 16 KB, 578x433, 9D885EC258024897A863E7790AB2DB1E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17278477

The most obvious common denominator of the midwits I've met is they've a lack of understanding of genuine critical thinking processes. Really it's just ambiguous concepts like nuance, dichotomies, spectrums, or any abstract construction that is fashionable to the individual that obfuscates or supplants literal comprehension of a particular subject that makes clear, simple writing so helpful in contrast. I think reading books is so valuable because it helps guide you to a place where you can learn about ideas/reality and ignore the types of people who think that the practice of comprehension is a matter demonstrating one's wit or """"""""nuance""""""""" by obfuscating an idea with fashionable, pretentious, and nonsensical cliches.

>> No.17278516

>>17278376
>Free market good
>Government bad
Its arguments for free markets, in their slavish devotion to support free market policy, can be very nuanced, but free market = good is axiomatic to the libertarian.

>> No.17278523

>>17278016
But how do I learn/remember the important parts fo a text? Do you read something and it just sticks to your mind forever?

>> No.17278582

>>17278516
>libertarianism is wholly encompassed by economic right wing capitalism
Keep diggin that hole brotha it ain’t gonna dig itself!

>> No.17278660

>>17278582
>my brand of libertarianism is special
Sure thing pal

>> No.17278816

>>17278660
It actually is though, also look at how North Korea turned out

>> No.17278826

>>17273804
>having political opinions is pseud.
explain yourself, nigger.

>> No.17278843

>>17278816
He’s a mental midget who wants to argue against straw men of ghastly and ill formed proportions limited by the scope of his knowledge in an unending pursuit to assuage his ego via a perpetual intellectual mental masturbation that, he, in his vulgarity exposes us all to like Weinsteinesque creature that haunts the nightmares of the literate and intellectually cogent community.

>> No.17279441

>>17278376
>Libertarianism is incredibly nuanced

even if it is, it doesn't seem that way based on it's own adherents

>> No.17279455

>>17279441
Chomsky and Sowell are both libertarians

>> No.17279566

>>17272979
What the fuck. This is literally me. That said, this:
>(and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)
is catastrophically wrong. In reality, vocab is literally the *only* facet of IQ testing which improves linearly with age. Can't be bothered digging it up but there's a graph in Ian Geary's book on intelligence which very clearly displays this.

>> No.17279634

>>17275011
Writing things down is worse than memorizing them by rote. But that's not the claim that was being argued. Writing things down after you have read and taken time to understand them certainly aids in remembering them, compared with just reading/understanding them.

>> No.17279666

>>17279634
Once you write it down it becomes harder to remember. It's gives you a said and done mentality. If you keep it in your head your mind puts more effort into remembering it because it knows subconsciously that if the memory leaves it is never coming back.

>> No.17279775

Caring about the number of books read is a giveaway

>> No.17279855

>>17274455
>Notetaking does not help retention
there's no way someone could actually believe this

>> No.17279893

>>17272979
>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book
ha
I don't do that, and I don't absorb new words anymore. I'm perfectly content with my simple vocabulary. When I come across a word I don't know I don't even look up the definition. Fuck it.

>> No.17279910

>>17273107

>Reading Plato makes you a pseud

That is an absurd statement to make.

>> No.17279913

>>17279855
It doesn't if you never look at them again. The entire reason you write notes is because you don't have time to remember them so you write them down for later review.
This is what the original poster had in mind. If you use notes correctly, i.e. for review, then of course they help memory.

>> No.17279916

>>17274481
lol i am suspicious of you, sir. Are you unaware of the many formalist poets who have worked well after 1850? from Robert frost to Annie finch? I have a distaste for free verse, but thats not for a want of trying. I went free verse so excited, but you can only be beat down by mediocrity so many times and not see the pattern. I love music; I want to sing rather than to mutter around "conversationally". Does this make me a psued?

>> No.17279920

>>17272935
>What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit?
This thread

>> No.17279929

>>17275080
Books not written by white people are literally worthless.

>> No.17279932

>>17275373
Care to explain?

>> No.17280657

>>17276962
OI MATE!! You got a loicense for tha sublimity?

>> No.17280675

>>17272935
me

>> No.17280694

Liking Harari, Pinker, Diamond and any other kike.

>> No.17280788

i don't understand this board's obsession with pseuds.

>> No.17280794

>>17280788
Projection. When you see something spammed so much it's always projection.

>> No.17280861

>>17272960
stuff like "ah mathematics, so elegant, the language of the universe!" is peak midwit

>> No.17280873

>>17273258
as I undergrad I try to always remember this
forgive me bros, I try at least
>>17273425
midwit response

>> No.17280902

>>17273258
It's the grading system and the incessant belief that the higher the letter grade/percentage = greater knowledge. I just dont think the average undergrad knows how superficial the stuff they're learning is. I blame the fact that learning outside of the class isnt really encouraged beyond doing readings and skimming articles for key words for their papers.

>> No.17280905

>>17272935
Getting really defensive when your opinions are questioned.

>> No.17280915

>>17279893
Based

>> No.17280924

>>17272979
I dont understand why do you associate bad study techniques/habits with midwitery

>> No.17281026

Steven Pinker fans

>> No.17281119

>>17273221
like you using the word signifier?

>> No.17281134

>>17279929
I concur. I have never in my life enjoyed reading nor learned anything at all from books written by non-Whites. This goes for fiction and non-fiction.