/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17645039]

How can you tell if someone is really an intellectual or just posturing as one?

[Anonymous No.17645056]

>>17645039
Get to know them more and it will be easy to tell

[Anonymous No.17645060]

another garbage thread made by an underage

[Anonymous No.17645062]

>>17645039
>/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17645064]

>>17645039
Ask questions. Posers don't have any depth to their knowledge.

[Anonymous No.17645067]

>>17645056
>>17645064
Elaborate please.

[Anonymous No.17645068]

Ask if they believe in God. If they say no, take everything they're saying as wrong.

[Anonymous No.17645080]

>>17645068
>I don't believe, I know
How does it feel to have been preemptively btfo

[Anonymous No.17645084]

>>17645067
if you can't tell, why would it matter or not. why does it matter if someone is truly intelligent or not if you wouldn't notice. it makes no difference. maybe work on your own intellect before trying to observe others because it seems like you are a bit lacking

[Anonymous No.17645085]

>>17645067
In Philosophy, if all they obsess about is tiny details about Greek words instead of the ideas and if they feel the need to have to insert their anachronistic criticisms all the time because they still cannot comprehend that civilization was different before the 20th century then I would say they are hacks.

[Anonymous No.17645095]

>>17645067
Kek

[Anonymous No.17645100]

>>17645039
If they're normal they'll tell you about what they know
If they're smart they'll tell you about what they don't know, as in where there are gaps in their knowledge

[Anonymous No.17645106]

>>17645100
This is a cope.

[Anonymous No.17645107]

>>17645067
I can't, I'm only posturing.

[Anonymous No.17645116]

>>17645039
An IQ test. That's it.

Nothing else.

[Anonymous No.17645117]

>>17645106
If you don't know what you don't know then how can you seek out the answers to a question that you don't know? Trial and error? Can you really call that intelligence over, say, determination?

[Anonymous No.17645122]

humility. truly intelligent people are humble. it's dunning-krueger

[Anonymous No.17645139]

>>17645039
You can't. It's either obvious or you can't tell at all; there is no magic way.
Some people are better judges than others.

[Anonymous No.17645154]

>>17645039
first step is to kys to prevent you from posting here again

[Anonymous No.17645161]

>>17645122
It's actually the opposite, well almost. You're thinking of midwits.
An example: one of the biggest midwit indicators 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's one of the classic pseud traits in existence, and probably one linked closely to slightly above average but still middling IQ (say, 105, 108). Truly intelligent, knowledgeable people are hyperconfident, self-loving, and a bit pompous. They are of superior genetic stock, and they know it.

[Anonymous No.17645221]

>>17645161
Got a lot of replies last time kek. And it's actually the exact opposite. Smart people literally don't talk.

[Anonymous No.17645228]

>>17645161
kill yourself

[Anonymous No.17645229]

>>17645161
Based

[Anonymous No.17645240]

>>17645117
>If they're smart they'll tell you about what they don't know
That sounds like a lovely conversation.

[Anonymous No.17645265]

>>17645240
He means that they profess their ignorance of certain topics and will prefer to talk about aspects of literature or a philosopher's works they don't fully understand because they aren't insecure about their intelligence and to talk about something they already know would be boring. Whereas a pseud will do everything in his power to appear as if he knows everything and will always steer the conversation to something they are comfortable talking about.

[Anonymous No.17645275]

>>17645039
SHOW THEM YOUR DICK

[Anonymous No.17645284]

>>17645265
I see that I misunderstood him. Thank you for clearing that up.

[Anonymous No.17645289]

>>17645161
you sound like a twat

[Anonymous No.17645293]

>>17645161
This has more to do with personality types than intelligence

[Anonymous No.17645331]

>>17645284
No worries.

[Anonymous No.17645356]

>>17645039
If they understand subtle jokes. The shop is called "Sneed's Feed & Seed", where "feed" and "seed" both end in the sound "-eed", thus rhyming with the name of the owner, Sneed. The sign says that the shop was "Formerly Chuck's", implying that the two words beginning with "F" and "S" would have ended with "-uck", rhyming with "Chuck". So, when Chuck owned the shop, it would have been called "Chuck's Feeduck and Seeduck".

[Anonymous No.17645358]

>>17645161
here's that guy that interrupts lectures

[Anonymous No.17645415]

>>17645161
>Shut the FUCK up!!!!

[Anonymous No.17645593]

>>17645356
I don't get it. Is it suppose to be some hunter shop specialised in duck hunting?

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.17645707]

>>17645039
If one possesses intellect, and virtuously uses it, that one is an intellectual (person), and does not need to pose for this to be evident to others —to those who matter—; if one possesses intellect, and viciously misuses it, that one is an intellectualist/sophist —an a priori poseur—, otherwise known as a: "dickhead"; spiritual deficiency seperates the latter from the former.

[Anonymous No.17645722]

>>17645707
>thinking intellectual =/= intellectualist is a thing
retard

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.17645958]

>>17645722
Why would you think that? the former is a quality; the latter pertains to a practice that viciously misuses this quality, therefore, it implies the former.

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.17646014]

>>17645722
>>17645958
The problem, rather, is that the latter festers in (hyper)intellectualism due to his spiritual deficiency.