Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
These are fundamentally different ways of thinking. An intellectual is easily able to combine dialectical opposites, giving a logical, simple and clearly reasoned picture at the output, while a “pseudo-intellectual” will walk through “enfilades of linguistic dead ends”.
But in reality – there are no “pseudo”, and there are just different types of intelligence, ranging from logical or intuitive, up to emotional and religious, and everywhere different algorithms of thinking. Here the question itself is incorrect.
Chernihiv considers this issue in detail at lectures.
Pseudo-intellectual… He wants to be smart and believes that it is enough that you are considered smart by the people around you. We are all pseudo-intellectuals to some extent.
True intelligence is the sum of all our thinking skills, experience, character traits, and intuition. You can distinguish real from pseudo by the results of your work.
Let's decide who an intellectual is. Some people may judge my choice, but I'll use the Wikipedia definition:
Intellectual — a person with a highly developed mind and analytical thinking; a representative of intellectual labor.
A highly developed mind and analytical thinking are things that are quite difficult to fake. If you still doubt the validity of the intellectual status of a particular friend. Then ask yourself two questions:
Is this person engaged in or engaged in mental work?
How successful was his mental work?
If, according to your understanding of mental work, a person did not do it or was not very successful, and moreover has claims to be called an intellectual, congratulations, this is a pseudo-intellectual.
First of all, as Vitaly has already noted, pseudo-intellectuals are given away by 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:
Why did you hate science at school and still find it boring? Because almost all of us were taught incorrectly.
It's not hard to determine. It is necessary to pay attention not so much to the essence of what has been said (for intellectuals can also make mistakes, for example, get confused in terminology), but to the algorithms of thinking. The more non-standard the side from which a person enters, the more developed his intelligence can be considered, because this person does not use a “template” to form an opinion.
Ernest Rutherford
If a person uses a lot of special terms, but can not clearly explain the essence in a simple way, in their own words – you are looking at a typical pseudo-intellectual.