What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit? Books, talking points, favorite philosophers/writers, etc.>inb4 people that make threads like thisI just wanna see the biggest stereotypes on /lit/. Nothing personal. Give a newfag his dues.
being 50-100 years latelike Peterson with his boner for Jung
>>17272935Caring whether people think your a pseud/midwit
>>17272935Not appreciating mathematics
anything right wing or overtly christian in its morality/messaging
>>17272956I KNEW SOMEONE WOULD SAY THATargh, and I tried so hard! I even put an inb4 just because...damn...
>>17272935>bigoted against old philosophy>bigoted against new philosophy>bigoted against right-wing philosophy>bigoted against left-wing philosophy>bigoted against religious philosophy>bigoted against secular philosophybefore having read all of them.
The biggest one by far is silence or unwillingness to contribute to discussion, both on the internet or in real life.The person might try to convince themselves that they're doing this because they don't have any expertise in the topic at hand, and thus have nothing to contribute. The heart of this lies in their deep-seated fear of being wrong, as the person won't ever feel comfortable giving an opinion on something without being fully prepared. It is by far one of the biggest pseud traits in existence, and probably one linked closely to slightly above average but still middling IQ (say, 105, 108). Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally. This betrays a severe inferiority complex, most likely stemming from the fact that they never read much as children (and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)Finally, the biggest one I've noticed has to do with textbooks. People who take too many notes while reading a chapter are invariably pseuds. This is especially true if they jot down definitions/examples which they could just look back up in the textbook. Most people I've met who do this don't even refer back to their notes.
>>17272935Worrying about who is a pseud/midwit and how one can spot them
>>17272979This post seems like a cope
>>17272979The first thing reads more like impostor syndrome
>>17272979My IQ is 142 and I'm terrified of speaking when I'm not familiar with a topic. I'd rather listen and absorb as much information as I can rather than provide an uninformed opinion.
>>17273012Imposter syndrome is very much inextricably linked with pseuds. Actually intelligent people are confident in their abilities. t. pseud
>>17272979>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally. This betrays a severe inferiority complex, most likely stemming from the fact that they never read much as children (and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)Oddly specific.
>>17272979> This is especially true if they jot down definitions/examples which they could just look back up in the textbook. Most people I've met who do this don't even refer back to their notes.The act of physically writing information aids memory. You’re a pseud
>>17272935Having a strong political opinion on the left-right spectrumInability to separate one's thoughts from oneself
>>17272935If someone has a pet idea that they aren’t willing to part with in the face of contrary evidence, they’re a pseud.
>>17273050Fascinating article, are you educated in scientific stats and read the zagorsky paper quoted? I'm curious about it
>>17272935plato and aristotle attract a lot of pseuds. anyone that has read heidegger without reading husserl is a pseud. anyone that hasn't read kant is a pseud
>>17272935Started with nietzsche, stirner, and evola, doesn't seem to understand them, still justifies what he does with them, and never continued their thoughts, just accepted them as """true""" because they are recommended sometimes. Has a lot of war books though, and maybe some other books, mainly some esoteric fascism stuff.
>>17272978This, and I would like to add; not attempting to reconcile them even if they are on the surface disparate.
>>17272979That's the opposite of a pseud. A pseud is on the left side of the Dunning-Kruger curve. You're talking about an average person who recognizes their limitations.
>>17272935It all comes back to a desire to appear smart.
>>17272979I've also noticed that people who make blanket statements, either to stroke their own egos or to instigate an argument, are top midwit pseuds.Another thing I've noticed is that such people generally claim all opposition is proof that they are correct.
>>17272935Quoting popscientists. Eg Sagan, neil degrasse tyson, sam harris, jordan peterson. And to a lesser extent dawkins. This can be contrasted by people who quote polymaths are almost never psueds and if they are they are on the right path out of it at least.People overly concerned with projecting an image of intellectualism. They can be seen writing or reading at cafes, wearing tweed ever, looking very manicured and acting glibly.People who talk about science and government as trusted entities, not usually useful processes.edutainment. Ted talks, numberphile for example, documentaries, articles etc.This can be contrasted to reading blogs and watching conferences, presentations, podasts etc.Reads new books without touching any old books ever.
The number one pseud signifier has always been overcomplexity. Pseuds always prefer the needlessly complex over the simple and the elegant. Even if the simple is at best just a good explanation and not perfect, the pseud will always reject it for something more complex that is completely wrong
>>17272979These things make you a pseud (or rather a pseud does these things) but why is that bad?
>>17272935only reading authors who are still alive is peak pseud
Honestly, the largest thing I can accurately and completely pin as complete pseud nonsense is when -- and you'll encounter this a lot, even in circles that are supposed to be "intellectual" and perhaps especially so there -- a person exposes themselves as a complete pseud (although sometimes others don't notice) by critiquing, dismissing, insulting, exalting, aggrandizing, or denouncing authors/thinkers/artists they have quite simply NEVER READ. It really ticks me off. Every fucking undergraduate student thinks they're fucking experts on anything, or everything, because of a very reductionist sketch of whichever field they learn / are introduced to through their still progressing classes... Shout-outs to Comp.Sci., Psych., Physics, and possibly English literature, for being the absolute worst with this.If you want to stop being a pseud, the first thing you can do is ***just stop having opinions on thinkers you know nothing about except something some person or collective, usually very informally, told you!*** ***ACTUALLY READ THE TEXT to judge for yourself!***Apologies for the rant. :/
>>17273219the kind of person who only concerns themselves with what is popular in public intellectual circles? for example treating the 'intellectual dark web' as intellectual gatekeepers, what comes through is approved what stays on the other side isn't deemed relevant kind of thing some of my friends and family fall into these categories.. start on what could be a good discussion and always ends up dead
>>17272962niggers and kikes will die. all of them.Hail Victory
>>17272962Only rightwingers and christians, not also atheists and leftwingers. Pseud detected.
>>17273258>denouncing authors/thinkers/artists they have quite simply NEVER READThis, especially when they dismiss the author on purely ideological grounds, even when the author's ideology has no relation to the work in question (i.e. "So-and-so was a fascist!")
>>17273050Nah, the entire media is just assblasted that internet nazis started using iq data to justify their racism
>>17272979The amount of replies to this post makes me believe that it is correct.Thanks for opening my eyes anon.
You guys are all intelligent! Stop worrying so much about it.
>>17272935Obsessing about being a "pseud" and being insecure about your intelligence. Actual smart people don't do that shit
>>17273221This is true, but also, people who prefer the pithy to the thorough and hide behind that apocryphal "Einstein" quote (which I'm pretty sure was actually by Feynman but I don't care enough to look it up) about being able to say what you know simply or you don't really know it. Which to them means, "distill your entire field into terms I know and like or I'll dismiss you out of hand". Simplicity is good but people who insist on simplicity for its own sake are usually covering up lack of depth knowledge.
>>17272979>vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25someone here got filtered by Joyce or Geoff Hill, and it ain't me!
>>17273258undergrads are basically the embodiment of this image, try to forgive them, for they know not what they do (literally)
>>17273258I used to do this in highschool. Now, when I am asked my opinion on an author I haven't read or when there's a discussion about one I just say "I couldn't know, I haven't read them." and if someone does what you describe, I ask genuine questions about the specific book in question and watch my interlocutor drop all of their spaghetti.
>>17272935The 14 years-old Nietzsche-fags who are only interested in the idea of the death of God because it sounds so cool and alternative, ignoring every other aspect of Nietzsche's thought, which is ridiculously wide
>>17272979Writing notes, i.e. reformulating knowledge in your own words, is proven to be THE best way of learning. It's what all good students do.
>>17272979imagine not being able to recreate the development of language in an instant in order to synthesize the meaning of a word you don't know with nothing but the phonetics of it's root... pleb
>>17272935Thinking they're smart. Worrying about if they're smartJust be a retard. Embrace it. Revel in it. This shit fucking rules
reads nietzche, mishima,watches zizek, thinks marx was smarthates hitler, loves hitleris a leftist
>>17272979honestly if you want to speak on a topic you are only partially informed on just try to make that fact clear, that your only partially aware, than speak your opinion
>>17272979love the asshurt that this post caused
>>17273023Can confirmt. actually intelligent and never felt it in my life
>>17272935People who believe certain emotions are bad, or good. Like for example, if someone hates someone else of another trace/tribe/culture then this is bad and if they ever change their mind then they have been ''reformed'' as if they were villains from a fantasy novel.Its midwittery at its max
>>17272979oh no no no no nO NOO!!!
>>17272979that's not even really "fear" though, what's the fucking point of saying something if you know it's probably gonna be false? nothing. there is no point.
Narcissism is a sign of a pseud. Vulnerable narcissism especially so.
>>17272979>talk about something you don't understand and you risk being called out for a pseud>don't talk about something you don't understand and you also risk being a pseud So what's one to do??
>>17273258This could also go the other way. I wont argue with you because you haven't read all the theory on the subject. I guess that usually implies that the incognito pseud hasn't read any theory either.
>>17272978>using the word bigoted while pretending to be smartIs another good one
>reads exclusively military history>reads exclusively pop-sci books like Sagan, Michio Kaku etc.>reads exclusively penguin classics
>>17272935>his duesdues are something you pay, retard
>attacking strawmen>ad hominem arguments>people making threads criticizing something that they have no actual clue about, stating that "they don't have to read something to know it's bad"Last one in particular apllies to 95% of threads about Marxism, postmodernism or "muh pomo neo marxists"
>>17273258every thread on marx
>>17272960this is the major one
>>17272979Ahem,GR8 B8 M8, I R8 8/8>he's pretty right though, in some ways
>>17273035no it doesn't lol. Notetaking does not help retention
>>17272935>looking down on poetryI have no problem with people not interested in poetry but looking down on it is generally a sign of intellectual dishonesty>looking down on free verse but pretending to like poetrythis is a sign that you only like poetry for the status it procures or that you are not curious of anything produced since the 1850s which is ridiculous >talking about books with opinions and not with tastethis is the worse one, I'd rather have a pleb friend talk to me with passion about the last football match of his team than have to listen someone talk about literature with pre-made conceptions
>>17274360there is no point in reading marx
>>17272979pseuds don't hold their tongue they regurgitate what they've heard and if they haven't heard anything yet they force whatever the subject is into the stupid lens or worldview they read about
>>17274558yes, that’s exactly what a pseud would say
>>17272945Not a fan of peterson but what the fuck do you want him to do? Be born 50 years before he was? retard lmfao
>>17272960I want to be more aware but hardly have more knowledge than basic algebra I blame American public schools
>>17274635Just because there is no point doesn't mean it shouldn't be read.
>>17272935Look in the mirror Rekt
>>17273773Writing worsens memory because you rely on the physical copy that you can look up at any time instead of your natural memory. Why do you think oral traditions survived so long? Why do you think civilizations with writing kept oral traditions at all?
Exclusively reading books from the 'western canon'. Few things are more psude.
>>17272935people that no matter what, WANT to discuss and mansplain any and everything to you based on pop culture. that's the ultimate pseud.
>booksanything by ted k revolt against the modern world>talking pointsIQhaplogroups>philosophers/writersjordan peterson, obviouslystefan molyneux>>17272979holy projection
>>17272978>having read all of them and not becoming deeply pessimistic on formalized school of thought by virtue of its existence
>>17275283;)you have to earn it though
>>17273057>Having a strong political opinion on the left-right spectrum>Inability to separate one's thoughts from oneselfThe Idealism on this fucking post
>>17272979>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally.What do you mean? How should someone learn new words from a book more efficiently than writing them down?
>>17275355https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrKrGkgeww4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teyvcs2S4mIhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVmj8dDx9yYhere, take it from a conservative who actually knows what hes talking about.
>>17275395>OMG a youtube popsci video, case closed! Suck it magatards!
>>17273468Is being smart an inevitable consequence of intelligence? What about absent minded professor types?>Various anecdotes have discussed his absent-minded nature. In one story, Smith took Charles Townshend on a tour of a tanning factory, and while discussing free trade, Smith walked into a huge tanning pit from which he needed help to escape. Another episode records that he put bread and butter into a teapot, drank the concoction, and declared it to be the worst cup of tea he ever had. In another example, Smith went out walking and day-dreaming in his nightgown and ended up 15 miles (24 km) outside town before nearby church bells brought him back to reality.https://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/smitha/about.htm
>>17273219>People who talk about science and government as trusted entities, not usually useful processes.based, science and the government should be trusted on the basis of the value they have been shown to produce, not because they are science and the government. I am so sick of people parroting "trust the science".
>>17272935Copying 4chan posts into a word processor or having a screenshot collection>>17272979(You)
People who read Vonnegut
>>17272935understanding definitions but not meaningsinability to understand polymorphism of phrases
>>17276695Guilty. Then I rearrange them into mosaics and pass it off as my own.
>>17274357>>ad hominem argumentsI have been accused of this frequently. Is it ad hominem if I am debating, and say "Wow you are a dumb bitch. How the hell did you get into this university? [Explanation of why she is wrong]"
>>17272979You've hit them where it hurts.
>>17276989Stop being insel
>>17276974If you separate the personal attack and the argument, you haven't committed an ad hominem.You can continue to make personal attacks without tying them into the main logic of your positions.
>>17272979Based lol at the replies
>>17276974Midwits think that succesful debating is tantamount to using archaic foreign language.
psued = pretending to know things you don'tmidwit = above-average intelligence but not exceptionalit shouldn't have to be explained how these traits manifest
>>17272935Read enough and interact enough and eventually you'll feel comfortable with saying stuff and more importantly with hearing stuff back. Until then you're just acting pleb
People who don't like F. Gardner books.
>>17272979>The biggest one by far is silence or unwillingness to contribute to discussion, both on the internet or in real life.>The person might try to convince themselves that they're doing this because they don't have any expertise in the topic at hand, and thus have nothing to contribute. The heart of this lies in their deep-seated fear of being wrong, as the person won't ever feel comfortable giving an opinion on something without being fully prepared. It is by far one of the biggest pseud traits in existence, and probably one linked closely to slightly above average but still middling IQ (say, 105, 108). this is called humility you projecting pseud.
being a bookworm is the hallmark of a true pseud. it doesn't matter what they read... people who read too much do so because they can't think
>>17277357Humility is definitely a pseud trait. Cockiness and confidence are linked with higher intelligence.
>>17273221wrong. the pseud can't handle complexity or nuance; that two things can be true at once, etc. pseuds love consistency and simplicity, which is why they subscribe to libertarianism or some other retarded ideology.
>>17272979>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a book, and writing them down in some sort of notecard program like anki to memorize, rather than developing their vocabulary naturally. This betrays a severe inferiority complex, most likely stemming from the fact that they never read much as children (and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)t. never learned a second language excellent bait though
>>17273107>starts with the greeks>immediately is a pseud
>>17272935People who exclusively watch youtube video essays and haven't read a book since their public highschool prescribed them one. The particular philosophical and political disposition doesn't matter. If you don't read books you might as well be espousing propaganda, there's mentally no difference. If you read any form of nonfiction you have ascended midwittism by at the very least a small magnitude.
>>17272979This is the best troll in the thread. True insight mixed with bait, the ratio just perfect, its constituent parts perhaps not even known to their author lest he betray them. It has already outed many pseuds of every defect and will continue to until archival.
>>17275392you can'twriting down is a memory aidautistposter implies that chads rely on memorymemory is fallible
>>17276695hey buddy, i only copy my own posts down (so i can revise and submit them later)
>>17277502>If you read any form of nonfiction you have ascended midwittism by at the very least a small magnitude.I should add that I'm not arguing all nonfiction holds equal value, just that they all inherently hold more value than the small micro essays made by amateur internet personalities on youtube who may or may not also read books. Consuming books is a high effort task to the average human being, and putting in that effort to match whatever virtue/vision you align yourself with politically/philosophically to at least some extent proves your sincerity. Those who behave as if their political visions of the world are a matter of life and death who simultaneously do not read books because they are too much effort are completely insincere, and their life and death disposition is possibly a tool for them to project personal hidden angst or anger. I'm not saying emotion invalidates a person, just that when an individual projects emotional angst through something like politics or philosophy without even putting the effort to read a book relating to their vision I cannot take them seriously, nor can I ever understand them since they literally couldn't give me a book that explains their vision since they haven't read any themselves. It feels like a big larp when I listen to people who do not read. I view it as a form of self deception.
>>17276974lmao, i'd be extremely surprised if any girl didn't throw her drink in your face and storm out at that line
>>17277383wrong, but im too lazy to explain why
>What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit? Books, talking points, favorite philosophers/writers, etc.Either all opinions and takes are painfully mainstream and safe, without nuance, or all takes are just contrarian to the mainstream without nuance.Incapable of responding to rebuttals Incapable of interpreting new information without categorizing it as something already known
>>17277680Interesting. So do you think reading non-fiction is in a way a cure to this self-deception?
>>17272960its just tautalogy lmao
>>17277853Which proves how retarded we humans are
like basically, like literally, like unironically everyone. like real scholars and like literally writers would spend their time unironically reading Erasmus and Scaliger and spending time writing in a Ciceronian style instead of spending time on /lit/
>>17272979If you don't take notes then what are you supposed to do?
The most obvious common denominator of the midwits I've met is they've a lack of understanding nuance. Really it's just black and white thinking in general - good vs bad, love vs hate. I think reading books is so valuable because it helps guide you to a place where you can hold sometimes conflicting opinions and come to terms with it.
>>17277853funny how, even though it's tautology, you still don't get it
>>17277797Yes, that's what I'm arguing. Even if your views remain the same, you now have more backing for them. This helps both the initial reader by clarifying his own vision of the world and for conveying that vision to others through those books. Saying, for example, that nonfiction books are not worth the effort because video essays are just as valid without ever having read a nonfiction book is complete mental gymnastics. It's literal nonsense. As it stands the only people I have heard say this are those who have never read any books relating to the things they argue are of extreme importance. I believe these people view politics, philosophy, and history as a tool to reinforce and demonstrate moral, emotional, and/or intellectual superiority over their environment. "Comprehension is secondary" and "what I do not know is not knowledge," are two sentiments which I view as implicit presumptions demonstrated in the actions taken by these types of individuals.Reading books proves you value clarity to at least some extent, or at the very least you are willing to put effort into seeking it. You are capable of thinking about your own view for more than 20 minutes at time in a structured format. In my experience, it's much, much easier to make a nonsensical idea sound convincing in video format. Whether its from hyper rationalization or circular reasoning, the persona talking to the viewer in some way seems to substitute literal comprehension of a particular concept or idea. Regardless of whether or not my accounts of video essays are accurate here, I have consumed both books and video essays, so I can make my conclusion about them from my experiences without deceiving myself through baseless presumptions that lead to easy, convenient conclusions for what I already believe/want.I resent self deception and to a much greater extent I resent apathy. I view people who hold strong visions of philosophy, politics, and/or history who haven't bothered to read about their vision as both self deceptive and extremely apathetic. People who choose to view "ideas" as an avenue to boost their own egos under the pretense of moral/intellectual superiority are pathetic and unhelpful regardless of their disposition, and those that do all this without even bothering to read a fucking book about the idea that upholds their ego are the epitome of apathetic, unfeeling, selfish people. The fact that they often mislead themselves into thinking they are the opposite of these things is a cruel irony.
>>17272935Wielding knowledge as an all-encompassing tool, underestimating direct experience. Living life from books and lording their trivial book-knowledge over well-adjusted people. Always has to be right. Tends to regurgitate 'qualified' opinions from other thinkers as a stand-in for firsthand knowledge. When pressed, they have no clue. Basically, they're frauds.Easy way to identify pseuds:>I've read x, I've read y, don't bother with z>Lol it's like you haven't even read x>Here's my infallible faggy flowchart, read these abstruse tomes in the exact order I did otherwise you're not smart
>>17277685That's why I only say that shit over text. I've got it all figured out.
>>17277397Libertarianism is incredibly nuanced. You have just outed yourself as a pseud, grats.
>>17272956Cute, but this doesn't even warrant a response.
The most obvious common denominator of the midwits I've met is they've a lack of understanding of genuine critical thinking processes. Really it's just ambiguous concepts like nuance, dichotomies, spectrums, or any abstract construction that is fashionable to the individual that obfuscates or supplants literal comprehension of a particular subject that makes clear, simple writing so helpful in contrast. I think reading books is so valuable because it helps guide you to a place where you can learn about ideas/reality and ignore the types of people who think that the practice of comprehension is a matter demonstrating one's wit or """"""""nuance""""""""" by obfuscating an idea with fashionable, pretentious, and nonsensical cliches.
>>17278376>Free market good>Government badIts arguments for free markets, in their slavish devotion to support free market policy, can be very nuanced, but free market = good is axiomatic to the libertarian.
>>17278016But how do I learn/remember the important parts fo a text? Do you read something and it just sticks to your mind forever?
>>17278516>libertarianism is wholly encompassed by economic right wing capitalism Keep diggin that hole brotha it ain’t gonna dig itself!
>>17278582>my brand of libertarianism is special Sure thing pal
>>17278660It actually is though, also look at how North Korea turned out
>>17273804>having political opinions is pseud.explain yourself, nigger.
>>17278816He’s a mental midget who wants to argue against straw men of ghastly and ill formed proportions limited by the scope of his knowledge in an unending pursuit to assuage his ego via a perpetual intellectual mental masturbation that, he, in his vulgarity exposes us all to like Weinsteinesque creature that haunts the nightmares of the literate and intellectually cogent community.
>>17278376>Libertarianism is incredibly nuancedeven if it is, it doesn't seem that way based on it's own adherents
>>17279441Chomsky and Sowell are both libertarians
>>17272979What the fuck. This is literally me. That said, this:>(and vocab size is nearly impossible to increase significantly past 25, anyway, which is why it's a subsection in most IQ tests)is catastrophically wrong. In reality, vocab is literally the *only* facet of IQ testing which improves linearly with age. Can't be bothered digging it up but there's a graph in Ian Geary's book on intelligence which very clearly displays this.
>>17275011Writing things down is worse than memorizing them by rote. But that's not the claim that was being argued. Writing things down after you have read and taken time to understand them certainly aids in remembering them, compared with just reading/understanding them.
>>17279634Once you write it down it becomes harder to remember. It's gives you a said and done mentality. If you keep it in your head your mind puts more effort into remembering it because it knows subconsciously that if the memory leaves it is never coming back.
Caring about the number of books read is a giveaway
>>17274455>Notetaking does not help retentionthere's no way someone could actually believe this
>>17272979>Another trait is jotting down words that they don't know from a bookhaI don't do that, and I don't absorb new words anymore. I'm perfectly content with my simple vocabulary. When I come across a word I don't know I don't even look up the definition. Fuck it.
>>17273107>Reading Plato makes you a pseudThat is an absurd statement to make.
>>17279855It doesn't if you never look at them again. The entire reason you write notes is because you don't have time to remember them so you write them down for later review.This is what the original poster had in mind. If you use notes correctly, i.e. for review, then of course they help memory.
>>17274481lol i am suspicious of you, sir. Are you unaware of the many formalist poets who have worked well after 1850? from Robert frost to Annie finch? I have a distaste for free verse, but thats not for a want of trying. I went free verse so excited, but you can only be beat down by mediocrity so many times and not see the pattern. I love music; I want to sing rather than to mutter around "conversationally". Does this make me a psued?
>>17272935>What are the biggest signs of a pseudo/midwit?This thread
>>17275080Books not written by white people are literally worthless.
>>17275373Care to explain?
>>17276962OI MATE!! You got a loicense for tha sublimity?
Liking Harari, Pinker, Diamond and any other kike.
i don't understand this board's obsession with pseuds.
>>17280788Projection. When you see something spammed so much it's always projection.
>>17272960stuff like "ah mathematics, so elegant, the language of the universe!" is peak midwit
>>17273258as I undergrad I try to always remember thisforgive me bros, I try at least>>17273425midwit response
>>17273258It's the grading system and the incessant belief that the higher the letter grade/percentage = greater knowledge. I just dont think the average undergrad knows how superficial the stuff they're learning is. I blame the fact that learning outside of the class isnt really encouraged beyond doing readings and skimming articles for key words for their papers.
>>17272935Getting really defensive when your opinions are questioned.
>>17272979I dont understand why do you associate bad study techniques/habits with midwitery
Steven Pinker fans
>>17273221like you using the word signifier?
>>17279929I concur. I have never in my life enjoyed reading nor learned anything at all from books written by non-Whites. This goes for fiction and non-fiction.