7 Answers

  1. If I understood the question correctly, the author wanted to ask why those who understand philosophy are considered pseudo-intellectuals. This is a great example of how not to ask questions.�

    • “They consider them pseudo-intellectuals” – who does? Why should we even be interested in the opinion of those who think so?�
    • “Most people” – who exactly, what people are considered “pseudo-intellectuals”? Do they really make up the majority of those who understand philosophy? Do they really understand philosophy, or are we talking about pseudo-philosophy that mimics philosophy – and then a negative assessment is quite justified?
    • In general, on the basis of what statistically significant data does the author assume that “most people who understand philosophy are considered pseudo-intellectuals”?

    In other words, this question implicitly contains more than a dubious statement (in fact, a series of statements), which we need to take on faith in order to begin to answer this question at all.

    In short, come to a philosophy class. We will teach you how to formulate more correct questions than this pseudo-intellectual misunderstanding.

  2. Perhaps the reason is that the majority of pseudo-intellectuals, outnumbering the number of people who study philosophy professionally, believe that they understand philosophy?

  3. Yes, the problem is precisely stating reality, but as the attitude of the profane majority to those who really know, and even from those who reach the philosophical Olympus in that. After all, it can't be any other way, at least in view of how Berhard Shaw stated this problem: “2% of people think, 3% of people think that they think, the remaining 95% agree it's better to die than to think”” And wisely, like nails driven into the tablets of Truth, they teach Parables:”Guide a young man in the beginning of his journey, and he will not turn aside even to death.” And if the situation in the Show takes place, then it means that they are teaching lies and insanity. And it is here that we need a magical philosophical word that conveys the whole meaning of the Tradition of the ancients, with a parting message to follow it. And it is precisely for this ENLIGHTENMENT that the ignorant hate those who Know, just as it is prophesied and cursed against the ignorant and fools, again with needles and nails of Truth in Christ's Parable of the talents, according to the Parables of the Wise Solomon, Chapter 1: 20-33 :

    Wisdom proclaims in the street, raises her voice in the public squares, preaches in the chief places of assembly, speaks at the entrances to the city gates: “How long, you ignorant, will you love ignorance? how long will the violent enjoy their violence? how long will fools hate knowledge? Turn to my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit upon you; I will declare my words to you. I called, and you did not listen; I stretched out my hand, and there was no one to listen; and you rejected all my counsels, and did not receive my reproof. Therefore I will laugh at your destruction; I will rejoice when terror comes upon you; when terror comes upon you like a storm, and trouble comes upon you like a whirlwind; when tribulation and distress come upon you. Then they will call for me, and I will not hear; in the morning they will search for me, and they will not find me. Because they have hated knowledge, and have not chosen the fear of the Lord for themselves, and have not received my counsel, and have despised all my reproof; therefore they will eat of the fruit of their ways, and be filled with their thoughts. For the obstinacy of the ignorant will kill them, and the carelessness of fools will destroy them, and he who listens to me will live in safety and security, without fear of evil.””

    So it was before: the philosophers “Symmachus and Boethius, his son-in-law, both men of ancient culture, among the most authoritative Roman senators were noted for their special nobility. They skillfully applied the results of philosophical research to find fair solutions… both in relation to fellow citizens and foreigners, therefore, they have won not only the recognition of the worthy, but also the envy of nonentities, always ready for treason.”

    So the forecast is unfavorable, but none of the fools and ignoramuses will taste the blessings of the future age, because they are already condemned according to the Parable of Christ about the Talents. Oblivion and utter hell await them:

    An ignorant heart is hell (“Philokalia”, St. Mark the Ascetic-Chapter 53) – – – 62. Hell is ignorance, for both are dark. Destruction is oblivion, for in both of them something of the former is lost. 68. Many advices of one's neighbor are beneficial ,but for everyone there is nothing more beautiful than their own decision. 81. He who despises knowledge and boasts of ignorance is not only ignorant in word, but also in mind.

    Blessed is he who lives in a bloody struggle,

    In the cares of heavy drained!

    Like a lazy and crafty slave

    You didn't bury your talent in the ground!

    The triune Spirit, merged forever,

    People create with the hammer of fate.

    And the anvil on the Milky Way—

    The fate of a blacksmith, despite all deaths.

    May he forge happiness for the immortal fairy tale,

    In the starry world of the infinite universe. [PHEANO's Philosophical Tales]

    And this hammer of creation is REASON, as Poymander declared in Revelation.Hermes Trismegistus Three times the Greatest:

    I am the Mind, your God…, the forerunner of cool nature emerging from the darkness… A radiant Word that comes from the Mind….–“The Son of God…

    «Sapere aude! “have the courage to use your own mind! – this is … the motto of the Enlightenment”, which is what you need to learn from real philosophers, Sounds almost like Sola Fide.

  4. Because their knowledge is incomprehensible to ordinary people, but for educated people it is worthless. This tradition comes from the USSR, during which Marxism-Leninism strangled all people, including thanks to the efforts of philosophers themselves. Especially ridiculous were such sections of philosophy as scientific communism and scientific atheism, which were imposed on all students. Are there any philosophers who would be shown on TV now? No. While representatives of other specialties are a dime a dozen.

  5. The previous “respondent” gave an excellent answer to the question “how not to answer questions if you don't want to be considered a pseudo-intellectual”. “Philosopher and religious scholar” in one glass made self-promotion, what is strange? But the question is asked. In fact, back in golden ancient Greece, there were hundreds of philosophical schools and their methods and views differed radically. The further you go, the more. The development of philosophy did not follow the path of developing knowledge about the world in the light of a modern scientific worldview, but went deeper into detail, specialization, development of methods, and wandered through the undeveloped territories of theoretical sciences. I believe that the state of modern philosophy is critical, philosophy has ceased to be philosophy in the classical sense: – ” Philosophy (other-Greek.It is a special form of cognition of the world that develops a system of knowledge about the most general characteristics, extremely generalizing concepts and fundamental principles of reality (being) and cognition, human being, about the relation of man and the world”, deals with specific particulars that are incomprehensible to MOST people, forgetting about “extremely generalizing” concepts. To summarize the question of the state of philosophy, we can say that anyone can call themselves a philosopher and establish their own school with their own system of worldview. But who can be considered an intellectual (pseudo-intellectual), everyone probably determines for himself, this is a subjective question.

  6. This is probably due to the fact that people who can not act as an interlocutor for someone who is fond of philosophy, it is unpleasant to feel like a philistine, capable only of small talk. That's why they belittle those they can't understand. Also, people are more often imbued with respect for the presence of any visible and tangible results of a person's activity, and deep knowledge of philosophy is rarely able to impress anyone. They say ,” here is a pustoslov-he says something abstruse, but there is nothing material behind his words and there is no use at all, stupidly shtrikhan stands and rubs the game. Scat at all, cum.” And “pseudo-intellectual” is a convenient label that is often hung up when resorting to demagoguery.

  7. There are such typical answers to such a typical question:

    The parable of the full glass. (when tutal came to the Teacher, and the teacher began to pour tea into an overflowing cup. explaining that the newcomer is full of unnecessary knowledge and cannot perceive new things.)

    There is a story from a business guru, Tadao Yamaguchi, who refused to teach the author of the book “ALL ABOUT SALES”

    There are two types of scientists – ” theorists “and” practitioners”, especially in sciences such as philosophy, psychology, and pedagogy. And oi often do not overlap and are incompatible.

Leave a Reply