8 Answers

  1. A pseudo-intellectual can look and speak very differently, and represent different social strata. In particular, there are quite a lot of pseudo-intellectuals in the scientific and educational hierarchies.

    For me, there are two main signs of a pseudo-intellectual.

    1. There is no real value of the knowledge / view that a person translates. This value is not necessarily practical. It can consist of novelty, freshness, creativity, artistic significance, and so on.
    2. There is no depth of knowledge of the topic. “Abstract” knowledge, or tips that a person has picked up, does not allow him to get into the essence of the phenomenon that he is talking about / writing about. Well, or its intellectual resource does not allow it.

    I note that pseudo-intelligence is not a lifelong diagnosis, although we humans tend to get stuck in roles, states, and statuses. At a certain point in time and in a certain topic, anyone can swim, and I am no exception. At the same time, as noted, a person who is inclined to real intellectual work is usually ready to reconsider their approach or point of view at any time.

  2. An intellectual is a person who knows how to learn correctly and apply the acquired knowledge and skills. On the basis of the information received, he makes his own conclusions and makes up a certain opinion on any issue. Moreover, these very conclusions will be drawn only after a comprehensive study of the essence of the issue. That is, an intellectual can quickly, focusing on a specific aspect, become almost a theoretical specialist in it.

    A pseudo-intellectual is a person who can only retell other people's words. and as a rule, only “convenient” for him. Such a “smart guy” does not know how to make any comprehensive study, any conclusions, opinions and conclusions – it is too difficult for him. In principle, it is not capable of fast and narrowly focused training. He knows the whole world, but he doesn't know anything specific.

  3. It is quite easy to recognize these subscribers. If your opponent starts to argue that you are wrong and have no idea what you are talking about, then you are undoubtedly a pseudo-intellectual. And vice versa – if a person competently and reasonably agrees with your theses, honestly and frankly admits that you are right – he is a real, true intellectual. I always distinguish them like this, and imagine, I haven't made a mistake yet.

  4. In the context of psychoanalysis, such people often have primitive psychological defenses and their behavior can be compared to that of children. As already mentioned, there are problems with maintaining a simple logical discussion.

  5. Here you need to have some experience. But it's usually not that hard.

    Let's start with the definition. A pseudo-intellectual is someone who genuinely thinks they are smart, but they are not, or someone who tries to pass themselves off as smart or competent in a given field. Often both work.

    Ways to distinguish them:

    1. A pseudo-intellectual (hereinafter referred to as PI) does not know how to argue.

    First, he constantly uses demagogic techniques, even if he doesn't know the word.

    You can read more about demagoguery here


    Also here


    Or find material from other sources. The topic is interesting, and knowledge in this area can be useful.

    Secondly, the PI has such features as jumping from topic to topic (in other words, avoiding the answer), selecting only those facts that prove its point of view (one study out of a thousand says that it is right – it will prove only this point of view).

    1. PI doesn't know how to lose. Convincing them is incredibly difficult, and often impossible. He will never say that he may be wrong, do not know any details, and so on. According to him, he is a god, all the others are suckers.

    But here it is important to understand that there are cases when a person can be 100% sure of something, and this is true (for example, that 2*2 = 4). But if a person is completely and irrevocably sure of something that raises doubts, they can be PI.

    1. PI is a creature who likes to believe. And not in religion (although it is also), but in conspiracy theories, young-earth creationism, flat-earth and other obscurantism. If you've met someone who talks seriously about the nuclear war of 1812, they're almost certainly a pseudo – intellectual.
    2. Another feature of PI is the lack of education in the field he is talking about. It does not always work – there are both scientists without education, and sainsfricks with it. But if an accountant claims to know everything about black holes, it makes you think
    3. PI's are extremely emotional. They can easily fall for swearing and make loud statements like ” You don't understand anything, I don't want to explain anything to you!”.

    The rest of the criteria are quite individual, you can't just describe them.

    As you can see, by one of the criteria, it is impossible to clearly understand whether a really smart person is in front of us or just PI. But by studying your opponent and double-checking the information, you can find out if they are really smart people, or if they are just pretending to be them.

  6. pseudo-intellectuals

    These are:�

    1. theorists,�

    antithesis to practices

    1. nerds,�

    everything and everything (not making an attempt, in practice, to repeat or analyze simple things that theorists “invent”)

    1. storage devices,�

    a lot of information. from reference books and other “smart paper”,�

    which now, fuck no one needs

    1. every elite, as it were,�

    see above 3 points, can be combined and budded

  7. Pseudo-intellectuals are those guys who, out of their intellectuality(in quotation marks), arrange a whole cult and show everyone how they read books, you can recognize them by photos of books on Instagram, by public posts in VK with poems, a black coat on the body at any time of the year. Here I am, for example, a real pseudo-intellectual and I am not at all ashamed of this, I think that this is very good, because it is better to be a pseudo-intellectual than an uneducated redneck!

  8. Pseudo-intellectuals are primarily concerned with the frequent use of complex terms and memorized definitions. If you have the desire and the appropriate mood, such a person can be brought to a white heat by constantly clarifying the meaning of the terms he said.

    In turn, a real intellectual often uses simple explanations, analogies with real life and comments (and this is not surprising, because this kind of information is easier to remember and keep in mind).

    An intellectual (as a person who is very, very well versed in a particular field of knowledge) usually does not seek to show this knowledge, thereby establishing himself in your society, because he is well aware of his capabilities and that there are already many things that he still needs to learn, while bragging is an attribute of a pseudo – intellectual (because then he seeks knowledge to show himself in the best light, and

    Often (but not always) a true intellectual tries to downplay the description of his capabilities, but when touching a topic from the area of his competence, he gives information in a language that is understandable to a simple layman and makes many lyrical digressions, explaining his conclusions given in the discussion. The topic does not end in half a minute (as in the cases of a non-intellectual), but drags on for many minutes of discussion/clarification of the information you have heard (and the intellectual is glad, someone is for once interested in the same thing as he is, he does not hate it).

    So in the trail. whenever you come across a person who expresses himself in complex terms and you wonder if he really understands what he says, ask him to explain in a simple way and then, according to the answer, everything will fall into place.

    Related, I recommend reading this article:


Leave a Reply