[MBTI General] pseudo intellectuals

[Jaguar]

You should learn to take note of empirical evidence that someone is joking.

And no, you're the one with an obsession. I only have to keep bringing it up because you never seem to take anything seriously without it.

Tell me I did not just read this.
What a goofball.

Of course I knew you were kidding.
I was ALSO kidding you back by accusing you of being obsessed with empirical evidence, since I know you hate empiricism!

Sarcasm goes right over your head, like the rockets red glare.
The bombs bursting in fucking air.

Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

 

[foolish heart]

As many of you correctly show that this question can be branched out in many directions, but many of these strike me as unimportant because the fundamental subject is found in behavior and motivation, not semantics.

Everyone internally agrees about everything. They just don't know it because they express themselves through different means.

I believe this is moving towards the crux of the issue!

We share a common reality and truth, that is why something like the scientific method can function. Knowledge is what one knows about this common reality, and intelligence is the manner by which one knows anything.

Humanity as a whole seeks to increase our tribal knowledge. The greatest contributors to this are often those who are the most intelligent, so we place value on intelligence because from intelligence we expect to receive knowledge. It is somewhat of a fallacy because intelligent people are not omniscient and it is not intelligence but the possible byproducts of it that is valuable.

The offense of pseudo-intellectualism is that, whether highly intelligent or not, the focus is on what one stands to gain through appearing intelligent at all times. Because the person appears intelligent we assume they are conveying knowledge and they become valuable to us. Their goal is to become valuable to others whether they are of actual value to us or not.

Truth is contingent on integrity. In my opinion, the irony of the pseudo-intellectual is what makes them the worst offender of cheaters and deceivers. Our intelligence is a manner we can refine, but knowledge still remains the important product. Considering that, we should convey our relative level of knowledge to others as accurately as we can, this prevents us from replacing greater amounts of knowledge with lesser amounts that simply seem like more. Unfortunately it can be difficult to know relatively how little we know, but we should at least start with a concern for such accountability, no?

For those that have asked, the benefit of discussing this is to understand a problem, become more aware of it in ourselves and others, and attempt to refrain. Lots of interesting points, thank you for the input that has been given (and any yet to come) I will certainly ponder this further.

 

[redsox44344]

I do not think that you have enough knowledge on pseudo-intellectualism to make these assumptions about these so called pseudo-intellectuals. Wouldn't you just be a pseudo-intellectual talking about pseudo-intellectuals then? Knowledge about any given subject is possibly boundless, the only thing needed, in this case, is more. How does one know if they have enough knowledge on a subject to be able to speak about it intellectually? If knowledge can continuously be obtained, and we cannot talk about a topic unless we have every single piece of information possible on this topic, then there would be no intellectualism at all, since nobody would talk.

 

[foolish heart]

I do not think that you have enough knowledge on pseudo-intellectualism to make these assumptions about these so called pseudo-intellectuals. Wouldn't you just be a pseudo-intellectual talking about pseudo-intellectuals then? Knowledge about any given subject is possibly boundless, the only thing needed, in this case, is more.

It is not complicated, just consider what one stands to gain by appearing intelligent and the consequences to everyone else. Whether I "know what I'm talking about" or not is irrelevant because any of you can understand this.

On a side note, will boundless knowledge make any of it true? Maybe we need less of the same thing.

 

[Gewitter27]

Pseudo-intellectualism is commonplace, not restricted to any specific type. Of note, however, is that NTs who aren't actually very smart are especially prone to Pseudo-intellectualism, at least in my experiences.

 

[redsox44344]

Consequences? Even if one has limited knowledge in a subject, there is still a chance that they have a piece of information that you do not. Whether they misrepresent everything else on the subject, doesn't that mean that the person still intellectually presented a piece of information true and not thought about previously? Therefore, they are consequently positively, rather than negatively contributing to the discussion.

 

[foolish heart]

Consequences? Even if one has limited knowledge in a subject, there is still a chance that they have a piece of information that you do not. Whether they misrepresent everything else on the subject, doesn't that mean that the person still intellectually presented a piece of information true and not thought about previously? Therefore, they are consequently positively, rather than negatively contributing to the discussion.

I see. You won't mind if I give you a $20 and all my credit card debt then, it's all I have to give you.

I apologize, ignore me... I can't help but tease sometimes. Reminds me of a story--would you want to eat a cookie made from a batch with just a tiny bit of dog shit mixed in?

 

[redsox44344]

touché. However, we are talking about information, not banking. While the point you make has merit, without these small pieces of truth within large blocks of misinterpretation, we would have never figured out some of the smallest but most important problems and discoveries in history. At times, the most radical sounding thing will actually be the truth.

 

[foolish heart]

touché. However, we are talking about information, not banking. While the point you make has merit, without these small pieces of truth within large blocks of misinterpretation, we would have never figured out some of the smallest but most important problems and discoveries in history. At times, the most radical sounding thing will actually be the truth.

I can't disagree with that!

I suffer from the engineer's burden... "it could be better!"

 

[paperoceans]

Why would anyone admit to being a PI? I'm confused.

 

[Quinlan]

I'm a pseudo sportsman.

 

[Laurie]

I put out there what I have, I'm sure some people don't like or agree with my presentation. I try to be clear and make the points I want to make. If people want to get an attitude about an ENFP trying to make logical points, then they can. It's happened before, I'm sure.

Anyone who posts anything pointed or with strong feeling behind it is going to have people react to them. It's easier to try to be wishy washy about everything, but not everyone has that desire.

Why would anyone admit to being a PI? I'm confused.

It's like asking "How come some people pretend to act so humble!" "I don't!" If you admit to it first, then other people can't label you with it.

 

[Seymour]

I freely admit as an INFP I like splashing around in the shallows of intellectualism, and it's always fun to yank on people's hyper-logical chains. I'm usually on the vague, feeling side, so when I can pin someone like bug on the needle of precise logic it's a fun turn-about.

Do I claim I'm motivated by dispassionate logic? Nope! Do I claim to be well versed in all the facts and have them at my disposal? Nope!

 

[Take Five]

Honest question--am I the only one who sees a lot of them posting on MBTIc?

In my opinion a pseudo-intellectual is someone who attempts to wield arguments beyond the capabilities of their logical facilities.

Beyond logical facilities...meaning truly stupid people trying to appear intelligent?
If you mean this, I can't identify any particular people.

If you mean people ignorant of facts who nonetheless form and argue an opinion...you may be on to something.

Though it is worth mentioning that to me, and probably to others, there isn't really any point in arguing something if you don't really believe your own argument. That is to say--when I argue, of course I think I'm right.

Anything that diverges from the truth is incorrect. But the truth is often so hard to discern for all people, which is why disagreement exists. So I think plain ignorance, rather than stupidity, is what plagues us more.

 

[ygolo]

nah their's a ton. I'm neither an intellectual nor a pseudo one, but I think this site does have a fairly high concentration of them.

and pseudo intellectual is somewhat different then an idiot.and idiot is someone who is a moron but isn't nesserily trying to look intellectually superior. while a pseudo intellectual can be called an idiot, they often don't realize that's what they actually are. an idiot can realize he's an idiot and still be an idiot while as soon as a pseudo intellectual realized he's an idiot can no longer disilluision himself into thinking he knows more then every one else on a subject(s). Shit maybe I am a pseudo intellectual. that probably doesn't make sense.

So a psuedo-intellectual is an idiot who doesn't realize (s)he is an idot?

In a way, wouldn't that make us dumber than normal idots? Wait, did I just become a normal idiot?

Why would anyone admit to being a PI? I'm confused.

Becaue being a Private Investigator is cool!

 

[prplchknz]

So a psuedo-intellectual is an idiot who doesn't realize (s)he is an idot?

In a way, wouldn't that make us dumber than normal idots? Wait, did I just become a normal idiot?



Becaue being a Private Investigator is cool!

perhaps but you know you're a pseudo intellectual so you're not an authentic one in my book which gives you kudos points. like i don't think pseudo intellectual when i see you.

ps-anyone remember kudos bars i want one.

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

pseudo-intellectualism was started by Pope Ronald Reagan $$$ during the first intergallactic war as a diversionary device used to divert the water supply from the dune monsters to the real intellectuals, who were the only ones who knew how to make ice. Pope Ron $$$ loved ice.

 

[Risen]

This thread is such an intellectual boondoggle...

 

[Argus]

To the OP, YES!

We should create a list of times and mock them.

 

[paperoceans]

Becaue being a Private Investigator is cool!

Private investigators always remind me of call girls for some strange reason