/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6893523]

How can one tell if they are intellectual or pseudo-intellectual?

[Anonymous No.6893525]

>>6893523
intellectuals are between the age of 37-53

everyone older or younger is a pseudo-intellectual

[Anonymous No.6893528]

I don't know but I'm really scared of being a pseud

[Anonymous No.6893537]

>>6893523
By critically evaluating content and deciding whether it's intellectual or pseudo-intellectual.

[Anonymous No.6893540]

>>6893523
The intellectual always feel they are not intellectual enough, the have a quiet aurora of humility about them, whereas the pseudo is conceited, arrogant, and loud.

[Anonymous No.6893541]

>>6893523
The people who believe they are pretentiously smart v. those who are smart but aren't pretentious about it.

[Anonymous No.6893553]

>>6893540
>>6893541

Yeah, this.

[Anonymous No.6893555]

>>6893537
>>6893540
>>6893541
>>6893553


*tips*

[Anonymous No.6893562]

>>6893540
>aurora

[Anonymous No.6893574]

pseudo-intellectuals are more fluff than substance. They're the kind of people who use grandiloquence to fein intelligence, who will speak for long periods of time but never actually say anything substantial or original, and who will parrot opinions or factoids without really understanding their meaning. They're intellectual in the sense that they keep up the appearance and attitude, but lack genuine intellect.

The way I gauge it is, if you can explain what you're talking bout in either specific technical detail or convincing succinct summary then it's a genuine intellectual expression. Otherwise, if you're just sorta generally saying shit that you assume is sorta correct and only have a really loose idea of what you're talking about, but dress it up nice and pretty, then you're being a pseudo.

Not that being a pseud is bad all of the time, sometimes you need to just bs your way through a conversation or feign understanding in order to genuinely understand material (fake it till you make it).

[Anonymous No.6893577]

>>6893523
A pseudo-intellectual wouldn't wonder if they are pseudo-intellectual or not.

This requires a degree of self-reflection and an awareness that what you think may be lacking. That is one of the keys for intellectual growth.

Or thats my opinion anyway.

[Anonymous No.6893582]

>>6893574

so pseudo intellectuals are fun to shoot the shit with and intellectuals are wet blankets?

[Anonymous No.6893587]

You're a pseudo if you post on imageboards frequently.

[Anonymous No.6893589]

>>6893523

All these people are talking about personalities. Being an intellectual has nothing to do with how you behave, but what you know.

I would say an intellectual is someone who is extremely well educated, but beyond that, has some original ideas.

A pseudo-intellectual just acts as if he falls into the above category.

[Anonymous No.6893592]

>>6893587
define frequently

[Anonymous No.6893595]

>>6893582
yes to the first part, an intellectual will give you content in the conversation and things to think about later and that may not be the most fun way to maintain a discussion. One is junk food and the other a nicely balanced salad, some people may even openly prefer the salad but usually you want junk to pass the time.

[Anonymous No.6893599]

>>6893589
can an intellectual exist in a social vacuum or are you arguing for the existence of an objective reality?

[Anonymous No.6893611]

If you can do pic related towards opinions you disagree with, then you're on the right track.

[Anonymous No.6893626]

A pseudo-intellectual would say the world would be a better place without religion by looking at 9/11 and ISIS. An intellectual would look at history and the social sciences and know that it is not that simple. An intellectual doesn't accept simple answers to complex problems, at least not without skepticism.

Not an exact answer but I think its an example that highlights the difference.

[Anonymous No.6893628]

>>6893589
>All these people are talking about personalities.

That's the funny thing, basically everyone is describing how to pretend to be an intellectual, which is of course psuedo behaviour.

[Anonymous No.6893631]

By posting on lit

[Anonymous No.6893634]

Intellectuals combine wisdom and intelligence.
Pseudo-intellectuals only have intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6893640]

Can you be an intellectual if you have an average IQ?

[Anonymous No.6893642]

>>6893634
>wisdom

[Anonymous No.6893651]

>>6893642
Do you not know what wisdom is?

[Anonymous No.6893660]

>>6893651
You believe wisdom exists because it has a definition?

[Anonymous No.6893666]

>>6893660
Yes.
So what is wisdom to you then?

[Anonymous No.6893674]

>>6893640
Yeah didn't Feynman have a relatively average IQ when he was younger?

[Anonymous No.6893679]

>>6893651

Wisdom is realizing nothing matters yet everything matters so enjoy the ride.

[Anonymous No.6893683]

>>6893679
Wow so deep.
Here, I'll post my own laughing anime gif to entertain you.

[Anonymous No.6893685]

>>6893666
an invented conceptual abstraction that exists about as much as Yahweh and his 12 dwarves

[Anonymous No.6893686]

>>6893674
I'm not trying to turn this into another IQ debate but I thought that generally speaking as you age, your IQ stays in the same advanced, average or lower categories relative to everyone you age unless a freak accident happens. Is this wrong? I'm really asking.

[Anonymous No.6893693]

>>6893683
good job on that post
i'm impressed
tell me more

[Anonymous No.6893696]

>>6893686
except it's been proven that if you keep taking IQ tests your score will improve so as you keep taking IQ tests as you age your IQ will make significant improvements

[Anonymous No.6893699]

>>6893685
lol do you know what an abstraction is kevin ?

[Anonymous No.6893700]

>>6893685
>an invented conceptual abstraction

Nigga what the fuk are you talking about
This right here is pseudo-intellectualism.

[Anonymous No.6893701]

>>6893699
WHAT THE FUCK

HOW IN THE HELL DID YOU KNOW MY NAME WAS KEVIN

[Anonymous No.6893706]

>>6893592
At least once in your lifetime.

[Anonymous No.6893707]

>>6893696
or you just get better at iq tests

[Anonymous No.6893709]

>>6893700
>caring about what modernist philosophers belive

[Anonymous No.6893710]

>>6893683

Not realizing wisdom accepts it's meta-retardness. You've qualified yourself as a psuedo intellectual.

>Having anime reaction gifs.

>Posting on a Cantonese father-son fishing tournament forum.

[Anonymous No.6893711]

>>6893696
All that proves is that you'll become better at taking IQ tests, not that your general intelligence goes up.

[Anonymous No.6893714]

>>6893701
I'm a shitposting wizard

[Anonymous No.6893717]

>>6893574
much like your post :^)

[Anonymous No.6893718]

>>6893711
>>6893714
some test huh

[Anonymous No.6893726]

>>6893686
Nah IQ tests can vary as you get older, generally speaking geniuses show a tendency to have development lag. In Feynman's case he only took one IQ test in school and got 125, which is a pretty average score. He then got the highest grade in the country on the Putnam test and had the highest scores on the entry exams for whatever ivy league he went to.

Point being, it's obviously somewhat rare, but in no way impossible to be intelligent with relatively average IQ.

[Anonymous No.6893729]

>>6893674
It's mostly agreed that his 125 IQ was due to the test putting emphasis in language, which wasn't his forte. That's one of the reasons IQ is unreliable. You basically can trust that if someone scores far below average he's not very bright and that someone who scores far beyond the average will be overall pretty bright, but the differences from 110 IQ to 120 IQ aren't the same as the ones from 150 to 160. Past 160 they are basically irrelevant and IQ stops being useful in any way; you just can't measure someone at that level and it's unlikely you'll ever need to, but they still have peculiarities and quirks. It's not like they are made in a genius production line, therefore why Feynman scored so low in that test compared to what he probably could have in another one. It works both ways.

[Anonymous No.6893732]

where is the literature

[Anonymous No.6893733]

>>6893574
>>6893582
but you're both assuming conversation is about honestly exchanging accurate information, it's not, it's just a form of verbal bullying/cock waving almost all of the time. Nobody gives a fuck about anything that isn't reinforcing their views. Some people do I guess. Even I find myself having this bad attitude towards things, only caring about topics as much as they serve my ends

[Anonymous No.6893737]

>>6893685
>wisdom doesn't exist
>its just an invented concept :^)

You can literally say this about all of language.

[Anonymous No.6893743]

>>6893733
>you're both assuming conversation is about honestly exchanging accurate information
no that's just you projecting

a true pseudo intellectual wouldn't care what's coming out of their mouths at all

[Anonymous No.6893744]

>>6893732
>literature
>not related to pseudo-intellectualism
do you even study liberal arts you fucking pleb??

[Anonymous No.6893747]

>>6893726
>and got 125, which is a pretty average score
not even Ashkenazi jews have an average I.Q that high you fool

[Anonymous No.6893748]

>>6893732
I got yer literature right 'ere *grabs crotch*

[Anonymous No.6893752]

>>6893737
I know quite a few linguists that would like a word with you

[Anonymous No.6893753]

>>6893737
hydrogen exists

[Anonymous No.6893758]

>>6893726
An average IQ is between 90 and 110, anything above or below is not average.

[Anonymous No.6893763]

>>6893753
No, it doesn't.

[Anonymous No.6893772]

>>6893763
you're right you win the argument

[Anonymous No.6893777]

>>6893747
It's not even enough to enter MENSA, but then again MENSA or its test didn't even exist in Feynman's childhood. Then again, people tend to forget that only 2% of the population have an IQ high enough to enter MENSA.

[Anonymous No.6893780]

>>6893772
Cool let's shake hands

[Anonymous No.6893785]

>>6893777
What in the flying fuck does mensa actually do? Do they have think tanks or what? Have they produced anything of value ever?

[Anonymous No.6893787]

>>6893780
where do you live?

[Anonymous No.6893790]

>an IQ just barely out of the 2%
>pretty average
Mensa isn't everything.

[Anonymous No.6893791]

>>6893787
bordeaux, france

[Anonymous No.6893793]

i have actually met some legit pseudo-intellectuals and intellectuals

pseudo intellectuals:
- dominate the conversation
- don't listen to you nor consider your ideas
- use big words awkwardly
- say the same thing twice or even three times
- always tell stories where they are the hero/cool guy
- tend to be enthusiasts of video games, the genre of fantasy, blockbuster superhero movies, fast food, conspiracy theories
- esteem themselves as smart, well-read, knowledgeable, clever

intellectuals:
- mode in conversation is inquiry, facilitates discussion for depth
- listens to you/others' ideas
- tends to use short sentences and simple words; ideas are conveyed clearly
- asks for stories of your own life; reticent about their own unless asked
- tend to be enthusiasts of actually reading, fitness or the outdoors, cooking
- view themselves as ignorant, lacking, in many cases there is deep self-loathing

tl;dr i am a pseudo-intellectual, ama

[Anonymous No.6893795]

>>6893785
They are a thing which does a thing. They let people who score in the 98th percentile of their test enter and do stuff. And you also get to tell people you're in MENSA.

[Anonymous No.6893798]

>>6893785
it's a halfway home for people with autism

[Anonymous No.6893808]

>>6893791
cool

let's meet here on September 27th to shake hands: 42B Avenue Thiers
33100 Bordeaux France


that's about as soon as I can arrange travel plans

I'll try to get there around noonish

[Anonymous No.6893809]

>>6893785
>Mensa's constitution lists three purposes: "to identify and to foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity; to encourage research into the nature, characteristics, and uses of intelligence; and to provide a stimulating intellectual and social environment for its members".[12]

[Anonymous No.6893814]

>>6893753
Does it really or is it just, like, a concept, man?

[Anonymous No.6893821]

>>6893809
>encourage research into the nature of intelligence
So how many MENSA members, who actively participate in mensa not just have the card in their wallet, are researching intelligence right now? What a bunch of bullshit

[Anonymous No.6893822]

>>6893809
I've never seen them actually do any of those, but maybe I'm just not informed.

[Anonymous No.6893823]

>>6893747
>>6893758
It's only marginally in the "superior" range and, with consideration to his apparent intellect, a rather mediocre score.It's considerably lower than would be expected from someone who was described as one of the fastest theoretical mathematicians. I'll admit that it's not necessarily an average score, but it certainly doesn't represent a genius of Feynman's caliber.
The point being that you can be intelligent without having the IQ to back it up (because it's not a good representation of intelligence).

[Anonymous No.6893824]

I've never had an IQ test and I will never take one. I fear/know I'll get a score of 40 or something.

[Anonymous No.6893829]

>>6893808
i'll bring coffee and some local specialties

>>6893809
yeah, they do nothing.

[Anonymous No.6893837]

>>6893824
>So how many MENSA members, who actively participate in mensa not just have the card in their wallet, are researching intelligence right now? What a bunch of bullshit
If you're able to post on lit and use pepe memes you're in the average zone at the very least.

[Anonymous No.6893839]

>>6893823
Then again there's my post >>6893729

[Anonymous No.6893840]

>>6893823
>"superior" range
or "moderately above average" by todays standards

[Anonymous No.6893841]

>>6893540
>aurora
Well, seems like I found the pseudo-intellectual.

[Anonymous No.6893842]

>>6893837
Woops.

[Anonymous No.6893845]

>>6893824
I got a 93 on my ASVAB :^) but my math was too weak for the job I wanted I had to take some other test to prove I could do it. I never did join

[Anonymous No.6893874]

There's also the Flynn effect. IQ is adjusted so that the average always is 100, but an average person from this time would have a "gifted" or "genius" score if he took a very old IQ test. Using values from the 90s, an average man from the 30s would be borderline retarded, but obviously we wouldn't all be considered geniuses in the past. On average we've gotten better at some kinds of thought and worse at others, and in many developed nations the Flynn effect has already stopped and the opposite is happening, just slower.

[Anonymous No.6893887]

>>6893874
>the Flynn effect has already stopped and the opposite is happening, just slower.
>le idiocracy is coming true xDDDD
bullshit. no way

[Anonymous No.6893893]

>>6893887
Hyperbole. I never said that, but it is a fact that in some nations the average IQ has dropped a few points during the last decade.

[Anonymous No.6893902]

>>6893523
It could just be a difference in attitude. A pseudo intellectual may have thought alot about something but is hostile to and quick to dismiss new information, that sort of thing.

[Anonymous No.6893921]

>>6893729
>>6893726
That anon asked his question poorly. I think a better way to phrase it would be that, generally speaking, you're always going to be in either the below average, average, or above average quotient in life when it comes to intellectual capability, which I think is true.

[Anonymous No.6893925]

An intellectual always wants to know why. His whys are bottomless. Why is it raining? Because there are clouds in the sky. Why are there clouds? Because water condensed. Why did water condense? Etc. He will never tire of this. If you ask him why he wants to know, he'll stare at you blankly. Because, to him, knowledge itself is the goal. He gets a dopamine rush from knowledge. He doesn't understand phrases like "Why does it matter?" "What's the point?" or "What's the practical application?"

A pseudo-intellectual doesn't ask why? why? why? He only asks about things that signal he's one of the smart set. In fact, he rarely asks. He tells.

An intellectual doesn't care about "smart topics." Depending on the time period and culture, there are certain things "one should know." Nowadays, the main signifier is politics. "Smart people" are "well informed" about politics. An intellectual might happen to be interested in politics. But if he's more interested in pasta, he'll study that instead. He follows his brain wherever it leads him.

A pseudo-intellectual will always be on the lookout for "smart topics." He's very concerned with what books one should read, what movies one should see, and what facts one should know.

[Anonymous No.6893963]

>>6893921
>generally speaking, you're always going to be in either the below average, average, or above average quotient in life
beautiful

[Anonymous No.6893970]

>>6893963
*and never leave whichever one you're in.

[Anonymous No.6894043]

>tfw you're relieved you don't fit into any of these definitions of pseudo-intellectualism

[Anonymous No.6894070]

>>6894043
Is there something sadder than organizing a birthday for your dog ?

[Anonymous No.6894076]

I honestly don't give a fuck about it. For me its good enough if the person is a thinker.
Even if it's angst ridden teenage thinking the thinker will eventually get a powerful thought going on if he never stops thinking.

[Anonymous No.6894092]

>>6894070

I think it's kind of cute! It's not too much effort so it's not sad.

[Anonymous No.6894097]

>>6894070
I don't know why that would be sad. A bit dumb, yes, but not sad. Sad would be organizing a birthday party with your dog as your only guest, and that's only if you have anyone else to invite. If nothing else it's an excuse to take a picture of your dog in a party hat, buy him new stuff and have people come over.

[Anonymous No.6894116]

>>6893893
That's because of all of the immigrants that keep flooding in. It also doesn't help that our food is injected with shit and communism is still on the rise.

[Anonymous No.6894128]

all of these "what makes a person intellectual" responses are pretty fucking cringey.

[Anonymous No.6894129]

>>6894116
Whoa /pol/ careful with that edge
You're not entirely wrong about immigrants, but it's most likely not for the reasons you're thinking.

[Anonymous No.6894172]

>>6894129
Stop defending the third world needlessly. With limited resources its harmful to the entire species for anyone to continue industrializing and consuming motherboards at the point.

[Anonymous No.6894181]

>>6894070
posting on /lit/

[Anonymous No.6894183]

>>6894116
what is our food injected with alex

[Anonymous No.6894192]

>>6894172
The world is still not unsustainable. It will eventually become unsustainable if current trends continue for the rest of human history (they won't. They never have even when people think they will, and they have done so many times before), but not in your lifetime. Besides, without the "third world" the first-world countries would crash and burn and what would remain afterwards would be barely recognizable as what we know today.

[Anonymous No.6894220]

>>6894192
The second half of your post is a completely unrelated bitch in terms of the one you're replying to. Get over your retarded, evolutionarily backwards white guilt, you unparralleled faggot.

[Anonymous No.6894249]

>>6894220
Please, you know absolutely nothing about evolution or biology in general. And you're a retard if you think the second half of my post is false. Do you sincerely believe your lifestyle, which is literally only possible due to a globalized world, would still be there if you destroyed that very same thing and reduced the world's population to a tiny fraction of what it once was?

[Anonymous No.6894256]

>>6894249
Oh, and I see you're conflating "first-world" with "european or white-majority european colony", which is objectively wrong.

[Anonymous No.6894257]

>>6894181
Posting on /lit/ about people posting on /lit/ is sadder

[Anonymous No.6894274]

>>6893752

Borges would agree language is a fabrication to approximate what we supposedly we want to say.

[Anonymous No.6894289]

none of you are "intellectuals"

much less "pseudointellectuals"

[Anonymous No.6894304]

>>6893925
this is really bad

[Anonymous No.6894309]

nigga im dumb as AF lmao ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

we outchea chitpostin on the misc

s/o the pisslord jason genova we getting money

[Anonymous No.6894373]

A pseudo-intellectual is more apt to make perfunctory arguments about complex issues and try to make him/herself sound smart with such sweeping generalizations

[Anonymous No.6894409]

An intellectual is an autistic manchild, a psuedo-intellectual is a retard

[Anonymous No.6894693]

>>6893555
*TRIPS*
(tru sign of profound intellect)

[Anonymous No.6894967]

>>6894070
Look at how happy that dog is though

[Anonymous No.6894980]

>>6894967
You realize dogs don't smile, right ?

[Anonymous No.6895096]

>>6893523
just ask them :^)

[Anonymous No.6895110]

>>6894980
there are other signs of happiness too. like a birthday hat

[Anonymous No.6895129]

>>6895110
ehehe

[Anonymous No.6895138]

>>6893523
pseudo-intellectual usually a dyslexic dumbfuck suffers of unwarranted self-importance due to superiority complex who seeks validation from esoteric image board and calls himself intellectual

[Anonymous No.6895207]

A Pseudo-intellectual is someone who speaks on a topic they aren't particularly well read in. This is difficult to actually measure, but I would say that reading at least five to six books on a topic or related topics is enough for one to be accurately well read on a subject.

That being said. Most intellectuals I've met have been much older. People around my age (20s) can be well read on particular subjects, but have a tendency to overestimate how much knowledge they have actually acquired. This isn't necessarily bad, it just means that we're trying to piece together strings of information. I suppose, on my end, it is from the presumption that all knowledge is interconnected. I'm beginning to think that this is not the case with every subject.

tl;dr Pseudo-intellectuals speak with authority on subjects they know little about. Most people have aspects of that within themselves, at least in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.6895235]

who the fuck cares about such definitions
Literally the most trivial and futile shit can care about.

[Anonymous No.6895245]

>>6895138
>esoteric

[Anonymous No.6895246]

>>6895235
Agreed.
Just read and discuss whatever you want with whomever you want. If you force things into strict, unsatisfactory dichotomies you will never be satisfied with anything you learn and you will never be satisfied with the people you associated yourself with.

[Anonymous No.6895250]

>>6893824
>tfw when your iq is 86

[Anonymous No.6895260]

>>6895246
Absolutely
In this case just b urself would be a legitimate choice
Caring about this is already giving more importance to how you are perceived by others while having a discussion rather than the actual content of a discussion and therefore absurd

[Anonymous No.6895277]

>>6895260
If you are concerned just admit ignorance and always admit when you're wrong, especially if you're caught. Pseudo-intellect is just egotistical pomp. Oscar Wilde was very well-read but he was most definitely a pompous pseudo-intellectual.
But I still love and deeply admire him anyway.

[Anonymous No.6895280]

>>6895250
really?

[Anonymous No.6895309]

>>6893523

I always think I am dumber than most of the people on earth. At conversations, or at debates, I speak autistic/incoherent shit, and later on, I regret that. So, I try to stay best as possible away from debates and conversations. Just think and keep quiet! Keep your shit original and your arguments sound and clear.

[Anonymous No.6895311]

>>6895277
>If you are concerned just admit ignorance and always admit when you're wrong, especially if you're caught

And you get to replace your ignorance with actual knowledge. There's no shame in admitting being wrong, truly. It's way to improve yourself from a logical standpoint

[Anonymous No.6895347]

>>6895309
I'm the same way. I also speak in generalizations because I've already spent so much time debating my own beliefs internally that I forget I have to defend my point of view.

>>6895311
Intellectualism is simply acquiring knowledge.

So yeah, stop worrying you gigantic pussies.

[Anonymous No.6895355]

>>6895347

Better to remain silent :)

[Anonymous No.6895385]

>>6895250
mine is a nice 100

[Anonymous No.6895466]

>>6893829
I'll bring the ketchup
>picture of a handshake in catpcha

[Anonymous No.6895479]

>>6893523
pseuds always try to "prove" themselves, you can just tell by the way they speak or act

[Anonymous No.6895693]

>>6893523
Pseudo-intellectuals are driven by a fear of inferiority and place stock in the collecting of knowledge, but not the understanding of it. Actual intellectuals are driven by legitimate curiosity. Pseudo-intellectuals want to be known as intellectuals, actual intellectuals don't really give a damn. That's how I see it anyway.

[Anonymous No.6895787]

>>6893525
/thread/

[Anonymous No.6896064]

>>6895250
no your iq

[Anonymous No.6896124]

>>6893793
>conspiracy theories
So if I'm green-pilled I can't be intellectual? Actually, that makes perfect sense. But I do think I fit more with your intellectual description than your pseud, and I like to consider myself an idiot

[Anonymous No.6896145]

>>6893523
Intellectuals don't pursue knowledge for social browning points.

[Anonymous No.6896164]

>>6896145
>browning points

Are these Browning points?

[Anonymous No.6896174]

>>6896164
swear to god I always thought that was a man on fire clutching his chest or something

[Anonymous No.6896362]

>>6893525
What a pseudo-intellectual statement

[Anonymous No.6896417]

>>6896164
Good guns, truly a diamond dozen.

[Anonymous No.6896421]

>>6896164

I always see this on trucks where I live.

[Anonymous No.6896531]

>>6894373
Nice