The Rise of Pseudo-Intellectualism...

Well, I guess it's storytime again: so I was having a bit of a back-and-forth with someone on Facebook who was constantly sending images of Rousseau quotations taken from Google images and ideas they had read from ChatGPT on philosophy in order to argue their point. It was all too clear that they hadn't actually read any philosophy and probably even clearer that they had never read a book before. Be that as it may, they were convinced they were right until I asked them for proof of their claims. Then they never responded to me and backed down. I feel like they accepted their loss and were just too embarrassed to return to the conversation. Say hello to another hellscape that ChatGPT and Social Media have vomitted up: pseudo-intellectualism.

Part 1: Those Who Have 'Read' Philosophy Without Reading Philosophy

This is probably far more true for young men than women, or even older men for that fact. Young men are struggling to read, we know. When I say 'young' I mean under 35 years' old and so, we know who I'm talking about. Those who believe in the 'alpha male' stuff but can't tell you the very flawed study it comes from (not to mention it was done on wolves and not humans). They are those who have seen a couple of quotes by a bunch of people so far back that they didn't know where the sun went at night, suggesting that women should be subservient to men. They often quote these 'revolutionary' philosophers without knowing that they were basically the original incels just existing at a time where 'following a passion' (which was sitting around doing thinking if you were rich enough) was basically a way to push marriage aside because they had more than often offended the very women they were set up with.

Well, it looks like the 'those' in this argument are now pretending that they've read philosophy. I'm not going to lie, I probably haven't read enough philosophy but I've read enough to more than often tie these men into a circle of their own logic or even catch them out entirely. One such instance was a man who was sending me quotes by Rousseau and because I have actually read quite a bit of this guy's stuff, I felt it my place to interject about the arguments Rousseau had about the revolution and religion. I began talking about Rousseau's Calvinism and before you know it: well, of course they blocked me. Though I respect Rousseau, he was not very engaged in the actual plights of the poor and the gender disparities during the revolution and so, these ChatGPT enthusiasts vigorously typing in 'give me quotes by Rousseau' into the search engine shouldn't assume that the person they are speaking to is as ignorant and stupid as they are.

But then again, I continue to encounter men younger than 35 on the internet who try to use philosophy from over 100 years' ago that they haven't read to justify treating other people (whether that be women or minorities) like garbage. Philosophy is useful, but the whole point of it is to challenge the points of view of the previous generations, not to just sit on it without actually reading the book.

Part 2: Letting People Enjoy Things and Other Things Social Media has Destroyed...

I don't care who says it, there is no such thing as performative reading. Some people may be doing it to garner attention but it really is not as frequent as you think it is. First of all, we've got the whole 'men don't read' argument. Men actually do, in fact, read books. I know plenty. For some reason, I actually know a whole host of men who like to read - perhaps more so than I know women who do. Then we've got the 'men who are reading are doing it performatively to get women'. No, no they aren't. Not everything is about the middle class women of Instagram and TikTok. Sometimes men do things because men like to do things as well.

We have to admit that there's a gender divide at the moment but it's rhetoric like this that isn't making it any better. The men can't win. They either aren't doing something or they're doing it to impress women. Here's the thing: maybe they are just doing things because they happen to be other human beings with entire lives that remain unknown to onlookers. I know it's a tough thing for the writers of Vice and Vox to wrap their heads around but that is truly the case. Nobody bats an eyelid when men like Bob Dylan, David Bowie, Sir Daniel Day-Lewis and even yes, Johnny Knoxville - state that they like to read - so why is it only performative when it's men you see out in the real world?

I appreciate seeing people read in public, whether that be man, woman, non-binary or any other gender. It just represents a peace that nobody can break. That there is a resilient person.

And here's the thing: the people who say others are doing performative reading are saying that because that is the only reason they themselves would be doing it. It's very telling.

The chronically online believe it is 'intellectual' to assume everyone is as ignorant and stupid as themselves. Of course, we return to that same point.

Part 3: ...But There is Such Thing as Performative Intelligence...

We've all seen the random idiots arguing in the comments section of a random post on the internet. We've all seen how sometimes, they can become over-boiled with many chronically online folks adding in their 'original' opinions that they've learnt from the Jordan Peterson Podcast. We've all also probably seen how everyone tries to prove something in the comments section of these posts. There are a few types of people I like to laugh at:

1) the pseudo-intellectual who hasn't read a single book (see: Part 1)

2) the religious zealot who thinks it's wise to listen to a bunch of people who wrote some books about how there is a superhuman watching over us all whilst the people in this world who are perhaps the most 'devout' starve to death in some of the most tyrannical countries on the planet

3) the wannabe stoic who believes that commenting things like 'I don't care too much but...' followed by a 500-word essay about why they 'don't care'

4) the professional troll who's only purpose is to go on to pages where they are clearly not welcome and say things that would definitely get them arrested if they did it in real life

5) the dumbo contrarian who seems to think they are a reincarnation of Marcus Aurelius with certain episodes of the Joe Rogan podcast memorised to heart and is ready to discuss anything with anyone who has listened to a single word of Dr Peterson

6) the gossip-magnet onlooker who comments things like 'I'm just here to watch' followed by a gif of Michael Jackson eating popcorn just so they can get back to the comments section and see how things play out (this is me, I am the problem here)

My point is that all of these people make social media a terrible experience for everyone. I think we should create a social media and just leave them there to eat each other, especially the first five.

(*butler walks in*)

(*butler whispers something in my ear*)

Ah, I see.

(*butler exits*)

I've just been informed that there is a social media platform where this already happens called 'Twitter' and that ever since Elon Musk took over, it has devolved into a hellscape of the biggest losers of the internet unless you're just going to look at memes and Marvel news.

Conclusion

I hope we've all learned a valuable lesson about the pseudo-intellectuals of the internet. If there is one thing that social media has taught me is that everyone is a lot more ignorant than I think they are. Especially on Twitter, Instagram and TikTok (the latter two I don't use, but I can assume they are the opposite of Twitter with the same possibility for being a hellscape).