Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
If you hear someone using big words and complicated concepts that make them sound smart, the chances are you will think of them highly. And while it’s indeed true that there are quite a few intellectual people in your social circle, the opposite is true as well.
You see, many people don’t quite have a sensitive radar when determining if a person is actually a pseudo-intellectual. Described by Merriam Webster dictionary, a pseudo-intellectual is “a person who wants to be thought of as having a lot of intelligence and knowledge but who is not really intelligent or knowledgeable.” That means they can be very, very annoying.
So when someone asked “What's a sign someone is a pseudo-intellectual?” on Ask Reddit, it resonated with people big time. Below we wrapped up some of the most interesting and illuminating answers, so scroll down!
This post may include affiliate links.
#1
They say "educate yourself" but don't know the difference between blind peer reviewed studies and YouTube nonsense.
RELATED:
#2
They hyper-focus on a single source of wisdom or completely ignore their opponent's perspective.
Actual intellectuals read broadly, and the best intellectuals read things they disagree with.
Edit: Talking about "read things they disagree with"... There is a difference between reading the influential works of opposing movements and browsing social media cesspools. I am disappointed that I have to clutter this post by clarifying.
Sasha 2 years ago
Its actually fantastic when you find an opinion or point of view that is contrary to what you know/believe and it looks like it actually may be right. Thats new knowledge. Something that just agrees with what you already know is generally of no use. I kinda have an attitude of "prove me wrong" not as in, youre not gonna change my mind, but as in, please try to poke holes in my theory, it can either help find weak spots in it or, allow me to get rid of something i erroneously though correct.
#3
For me, it's seeing people who can't shift their beliefs/biases based on evidence
According to Alex Wang, the marketing expert and book author who is better known as the “Hijack” Copywriter, a pseudo-intellectual is someone who pretends they are highly intelligent and knowledgeable but who isn’t. “They’re good at faking it and convincing others they’re this amazing smart person when they don’t have the knowledge or skills to back it up,” he added.
Wong who has been on a mission to help small and corporate businesses “hijack” their client’s minds and help them to grow their businesses and sales, shared a couple of insights into pseudo-intellectualism.
#4
They like to "debate" but shut down and get angry the second they get an unexpected question or have to think about their answer.
#5
They can't say they don't know something. When pressed, they will deflect or fake their way through it. Somebody actually knowledgeable (no matter in what area) will also know the limits of their knowledge, and have the confidence to identify it when they reach it.
Laura Ketteridge 2 years ago
It's really important to let children know that it's normal, and okay not to know everything. When my children were little, and they asked a question I didn't know the answer to, we'd pause and think about how we could find out. It might be asking someone, reading a book, searching on the web etc. Then we'd talk about what we had learned.
#6
Really intelligent people are very secure in their intelligence but fakers will most likely be trying to put others down to seem smarter.
When asked why some people pretend like they are better than others and know more than they actually do, Wong said that they may be doing this to make themselves feel better and that they have an advantage over others in some way. “As humans, we are always judging ourselves and comparing ourselves to others.”
“By thinking that we are smarter or better than others, we feel more important. It gives us a sense of importance. When someone overestimates their skills and abilities, this is known as illusory superiority,” the marketing expert explained.
#7
When they tell you their IQ. And it's always suspiciously high.
Crease Almighty 2 years ago
I took an IQ test when I was high once and it was 114. I was proud. I took another one sober and it was 110… 😂😂😂
#8
They repeat what you already said, in a slightly different way, and act as if they're adding to the discussion.
They defensively tell people to "read a book" instead of answering a question.
Sasha 2 years ago
Hahaha lol ive had this told to me recently. The funniest part was, we were discussing video game related tech stuff and it was actually "you should play less video games and read instead" but the thing is, my health is c**p, im often too tired even to play and i pretty much spend my entire day reading in bed. It was so funny i didn't even bother getting annoyed at the dumb remark.
#9
They talk constantly and say nothing.
Wong believes that the biggest difference between an intellectual and a pseudo-intellectual is that the former actually knows their stuff. “They’ve spent years building their craft and attaining their specific set of skills and knowledge.”
#10
Citing "countless examples";
Can't name one of them.
#11
an intellectual entertains his opponent's views without accepting them, he puts himself in the other's shoes, and from there he figures out where it doesn't make sense, the fake intellectual doesn't seem to have that flexibility of thought.
SirWriteALot 2 years ago
This! Sometimes it totally defuses a situation or argument if you're able to identify where the anger is coming from. Then you can address that. And sometimes through understanding you can actually relate to their point of view. If you're talking to a dumbass, though, they will claim victory and go on being dumbasses.
#12
Using a Ben Shapiro style structure to arguing a point
* Speak fast
* Construct straw men as fast as they get taken down
* Win through endurance over intellect
* Deflect, obfuscate, infuriate - Just get the other person to stop debating
InvincibleRodent 2 years ago
Basically, filibuster a conversation until the "opponent" gets tired and gives up.
“In today’s society, knowledge is power. However, attaining this knowledge to become an expert at something takes lots of work, effort, and time. It takes approximately 10,000 hours to become a true expert at something,” Wong argues. Wong concluded that “Most people just aren’t willing to make the sacrifice to reach that level so it’s easier to just pretend instead.”
#13
Intelligent people don't have to tell you they are. They probably don't even think they are. There's a reason that "all I know is I know nothing" is such a big quote in studying philosophy.
#14
They refuse to explain something in an easier/more understandable way when asked
Kevin Garren 2 years ago
Not totally fair, I can show people how to do stuff but if they ask me to explain it I just shut down inside lol Not everybody has excellent verbal skills or does well with people. Unless the kind of person this is about just WON'T do anything to be a jerk.
#15
Showing off about knowledge. As we say in French:
"Culture is like marmalade, the less you have the more you spread it"
Kathryn Baylis 2 years ago (edited)
And the thinner it spreads—-but the b******t that comes with it is so much thicker and deeper.
#16
They debate and don't let anyone else speak, and when someone does try to speak, the other person just talks louder and faster.
#17
Being a contrarian. Automatically disagreeing with everything you hear isn’t any smarter than than believing everything.
#18
Pseudo-intellectuals **love** to drop names of famous experts in the field, and will often do that in lieu of a real explanation when challenged to explain themselves.
For example, "If you're not familiar with the research of Lawrence and Krasden in this field, then it's not worth my time to educate you".
In general, pseudo-intellectuals don't like explaining concepts, because they're afraid that they'll explain the concept incorrectly and get shown up by somebody else. So they use all sorts of tactics to establish dominance, try to belittle you, and avoid giving a clearly worded explanation of their argument.
#19
They absolutely cannot fess up to their own mistakes.
Stephanie Did It 2 years ago
No, you misunderstood what I was trying not to say because you don't know what you're talking about. You always do that.
#20
They're unwilling to provide sources/read your sources. They put more emphasis on how you said something, than the facts.
Kathryn Baylis 2 years ago
Because they can’t back it up with verifiable and scholarly sources. Because what they’re saying—-or rather, parroting without thinking or understanding—-is merely belief, hearsay, or the repeated opinion of some loud bloviating imbecile that confirms their own bias.
#22
They parrot talking points without being able to discuss or understand the details of their arguments. Seen it all across the political spectrum. If all you are able to communicate are Twitter-length bullet points, then there is something wrong. I’ve tried to talk with people who are like a NPC in a video game, all they can do is repeat the same 3 generic statements on a topic.
Similar to above the other sign is that their opinions are 100% exactly the same as either some person, movement, or religion. No nuance, no “shades of grey”, not even a slight disagreement on a particular point or two. Basically you have turned off your brain and someone else is thinking for you.
#23
They also talk endlessly, using word salad. True experts are direct and to the point. They summarize initially and then can dive into details as needed.
Sasha 2 years ago
Or theyre just bad at communicating. You can be an expert but absolute garbage at explaining honestly. Richard Feynman was a genius man in general but in a way, his even more amazing ability was to explain things, basically to anyone. Its actually something most people are c**p at period. Teaching is hard.
#24
In internet debates, the trend in the past few years was just to just say, 'I'm not reading all that' when they encounter an argument they can't counter.
Ryan-James O'Driscoll 2 years ago
Depends on the context. If it's a long rambling essay that could have been a few sentences, I think tl;dr applies.
#25
They don't validate the experiences of others, which are often backed by science or data, if they haven't been through it themselves.
Kathryn Baylis 2 years ago (edited)
You don’t always have to directly experience something to understand it. The best minds are able to think beyond what is physically experienceable (if that’s a word) to them or anyone else (at least at present).
#26
They rarely have an original thought or original contribution to discussions. Mostly regurgitating someone else's idea or view. Pop-intellectualism like Joe Rogan.
James Steinmetz 2 years ago
Tai ta patį gali pasakyt ir apie save bei mane śiaip jau Orginalios idejos retas dalykas gražute
#27
If they listen to the usual Incel Mentors: Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, or any other online troll that sees differing opinions as a debate challenge and an affront to society.
#28
If the only way they can explain complex or “high brow” topics (especially if they call them high brow) is using big words and not being able to use simple and concise language to make it understandable to the person they’re explaining to.
Also having to put down anything they see as “lesser” than them and their interests. I always think of Hawking talking about teenage girls who love one direction and speaking with as much fondness as his assisted communication device could portray.
#29
Making a series of discussion-worthy points about a topic. When responded to, selects one of three responses for an "auto victory" in their eyes:
1) (RARE) They see that of 6 points they raised, you only directly addressed 5, they declare you couldn't handle that extra point (even if it rested on the other 5 points being all perfectly true) and therefor they win the conversation. [This is rare because it requires them to read longer than the few words it takes to realize you disagree.]
2) (Average) They repeat what they said the first time and claim you didn't address any of their points because there is no response to them, they are objectively correct.
3) (Frequent) "Post too long bro. Not gonna read it. Clearly I'm right if you can't refute what I said in only a few words."
#30
Going out of their way to not use contractions when they talk. Also identifying as "sapiosexual." I also find that pseudo-intellectuals will write messages that read more like a college essay than a casual conversation. I can see you read books, you don't have to talk to me like you're a 19th century novelist.
What do you think ?
Lord pretzell 2 years ago
One time I was arguing with a man about women being funny. He said “name one good female comedian”. I named around 20. He said “ nope not funny” I said “have you ever watched/listened to any of them?” He said no. I said “ well how do you know if they’re funny or not?” It’s so annoying when someone goes into an argument, asks for proof, gets provided proof, then refuses to acknowledge it
Pirates of Zen Pants 2 years ago
I feel for this man. Imagine not knowing Wanda Sykes, Aisling Bea, Tiffany Haddish, Kate McKinnon, Tina Fey, Fortune Feimster, Michelle Buteau, or Betty freakin' White. My life is enriched by how funny these women are.
Load More Replies...
Sanne Van Buuren 2 years ago
This list is silly. It seems ironically written by people pretending to be smart 😅
Lord pretzell 2 years ago
One time I was arguing with a man about women being funny. He said “name one good female comedian”. I named around 20. He said “ nope not funny” I said “have you ever watched/listened to any of them?” He said no. I said “ well how do you know if they’re funny or not?” It’s so annoying when someone goes into an argument, asks for proof, gets provided proof, then refuses to acknowledge it
Pirates of Zen Pants 2 years ago
I feel for this man. Imagine not knowing Wanda Sykes, Aisling Bea, Tiffany Haddish, Kate McKinnon, Tina Fey, Fortune Feimster, Michelle Buteau, or Betty freakin' White. My life is enriched by how funny these women are.
Load More Replies... Sanne Van Buuren 2 years ago
This list is silly. It seems ironically written by people pretending to be smart 😅
Related on Bored Panda
