Another list of sincere insults

 Pseudo-intellectuals first seek to convince themselves that they are true intellectuals, especially when they are unaware of what they are or what they are not, and they usually are not. This theater or performance of appearance begins in the mirror itself.

The problem is not that bad art exists, but that it is elevated to the heights that should be reserved exclusively for high culture.

Ideologically fanatical individuals are at similar levels of insanity to untreated psychotic individuals. Perhaps the biggest difference between them is that, while typical psychosis causes subjective discomfort, atypical psychosis, generated by ideological indoctrination, has the completely opposite effect and, therefore, can perhaps be considered even more dangerous...

Regarding the mimicry of opportunistic or parasitic strategies in nature and extrapolation to the human geopolitical context:

The same situation, of one species deceiving another, posing as itself, invading its living space, usually that of a social species, and taking advantage of this deception to benefit. So, this opportunistic mimicry also occurs in the Western world, where a certain tribe of "chosen ones" poses as "native whites" to do exactly what is perceived in the natural environment...

Deception, usurpation, exploitation, even the destruction of the host species...

But make no mistake, because this type of parasitism has been characteristic of every complex society or civilization...

The example of this tribe was only used because it is an accurate manifestation of this type of mimicry in a human context.

If the right produces constructive shit and the left destructive shit, it is because the right's shit is more moral than structural, while the left, in trying to deconstruct this structure, ends up destroying it—the only structure that exists.

How to think rationally with an example:

First, ask fundamental questions about the topic. For example, "racism."

Who is defining these or those concepts?

(Who is defining the concept of racism? Ans: Ideologically biased individuals and/or groups...)

How objective and precise are these definitions?

(Ans: The concept of racism has not been defined in the most objective way because it has been done so vaguely, leaving room for confusion with other types of behavior or tendencies, for example, the confusion between personal taste and racial prejudice, or between negative opinion and negative generalization.)

But how do we define objectivity when it comes to an abstract construct?

(Ans: Precisely because it is an abstract construct, the concept of racism should be as strict as possible, the most objective way to define an abstraction. For example, my concept of it, as a generalization between behavior and race or ethnicity, "everyone in group X is like that," for example.)

The level of subjectivity in an aesthetic judgment depends on what is being compared. For example, comparing French (standard or Parisian) with Polish will inevitably result in the conclusion that the former is more aesthetically pleasing than the latter, if Polish seems to have a constant hissing sound, while French sounds more elaborate and, therefore, more sophisticated. It would be like comparing a beautiful flower to a blade of grass on the ground...

It seems common for those who define themselves as "independent" to be essentially stingy individualists.

"There is no absolute truth"

The denial of the existence of absolute truths is a declaration of absolute truth...

The vast majority of moral arguments are essentially emotional blackmail. But some blackmail is "better" or fairer and more objective than others.

Those who leave the "flock" of a traditional religion—that is, those who leave a typically religious ideological indoctrination but end up becoming very ideologically biased "progressives"—have merely exchanged one indoctrination or brainwashing for another...

The influence of the environment on human intelligence is only more significant, but never absolute, during the first formative years, of immersion in basic education, while biological or genetic influence becomes progressively significant the higher the level of complexity of knowledge, as it expresses more purely vocational aspects. It's basically the difference between learning to read and write and directing one's own interests at a much more complex and/or specific level.

The right is more about aggression and homicide, and the left is about immolation and suicide. If the traditional right has historically been a force of oppression and destruction, it has been more about attacking those it considers threats, but never, or primarily, itself.

While the left, especially the identitarian left, currently dominant in Western nations, has acted as a self-destructive or implosive force.

Culture is not the cause of human behavior, but one of its effects.

Old-school or classically trained actors (obviously) resemble classical dancers more than modern actors because they are also products of a system that prioritizes (or prioritized) talent over appearance. Currently, the most talented actors tend to be those who work in theater, precisely because it is a remnant of their profession's past, since theater continues to prioritize talent over appearance...

On expressions or statements that have aged poorly

"Class consciousness"

It has progressively become synonymous with hypocrisy and ideological fanaticism.

Indoctrination has a neutral or essential meaning and a pejorative meaning. In a neutral sense, it is any doctrine followed by an individual or group. Every culture has its indoctrination, its modus operandi, if no culture survives without a doctrine. Indoctrination, in a pejorative sense, is the opposite of education, because the former consists of transmitting information according to the wishes of the authorities who hold the power to transmit it, and not based on more objective, impartial, or rational criteria. Education, ideally, is the practice of wisdom itself.

Much of what is commonly called "the left" boils down to emotional blackmail and supposed good intentions.

Those who put "kindness" before knowledge also put ignorance before it.

Kindness without knowledge is no different from evil with knowledge.

The rational artist is a rare bird. Most artists are rationally idiots.

Intellectually pedantic and politically fanatical individuals are literally insufferable.

A narrative is an event, situation, or phenomenon described in the language of feeling. And therefore, it tends to be expressed imprecisely or even as a distortion of the facts.

O pseudo intelectualismo consegue ser pior que o anti intelectualismo/Pseudo-intellectualism can be worse than anti-intellectualism

 Porque o anti intelectualismo, apesar de se decretar como a única ou principal fonte de sabedoria, pelo menos, não se infiltra em espaços de produção de conhecimentos ou das ciências, isto é, não usurpa seus espaços de atuação e os usa para se passar por eles. É só ver a religião que, hoje em dia, raramente se atreve a se passar como ciência até por razões lógicas, por se tratar de uma negação pura da razão, da crença pela fé e não pela evidência, e o completo oposto das pseudociências, em especial as "do bem", ideologicamente enviesadas à esquerda, que estão ocupando amplos espaços nas áreas que deveriam ser de atuação exclusiva da ciência e da filosofia aplicada e usando desse poder para distorcê-las aos seus gostos intelectualmente equivocados ou projetos totalitários (e equivocados) de poder. 

Because anti-intellectualism, despite declaring itself the sole or main source of wisdom, at least does not infiltrate spaces of knowledge production or science, that is, it does not usurp their spaces of action and use them to pass itself off as them. Just look at religion, which nowadays rarely dares to pass itself off as science, even for logical reasons, because it is a pure denial of reason, of belief by faith and not by evidence, and the complete opposite of pseudosciences, especially the "good" ones, ideologically biased to the left, which are occupying large spaces in areas that should be the exclusive domain of science and applied philosophy and using this power to distort them to their intellectually dishonest tastes or totalitarian (and mistaken) projects of power.

Lógica primária e sua relação com anti e pseudo intelectualismos/Primary logic and its relationship with anti and pseudo intellectualisms

Lógica primária é um termo que inventei e se refere a uma ideia ou pensamento que aparenta ser lógico, no sentido de coerente e factual, em um primeiro olhar, e que pode deixar de fazer sentido a partir de um aprofundamento crítico e analítico.

Um exemplo de lógica primária é o simples raciocínio de que, mais tempo de aula resulta em mais conhecimentos absorvidos pelo estudante, que foi a base para a decisão do governo brasileiro de aumentar o tempo de aula nas escolas públicas, isto é, para um modelo mais "integral". É uma lógica primária por também se basear em uma correlação entre o predomínio de escolas em tempo integral e o nível de desenvolvimento socioeconômico de um país. No entanto, existem outros fatores que, não apenas contribuem, mas também são mais relevantes para o desenvolvimento de um país, especialmente aqueles aos quais temos menor poder de controle, como as capacidades cognitivas médias da população, que não são reflexos exclusivos da educação "recebida" (ou alcançada), se, na verdade, é a própria educação que reflete, não de maneira absoluta, nossas inteligências. Essa é uma lógica primária baseada em uma crença de causalidade entre nível educacional e socioeconômico, como se apenas uma "educação de qualidade" que contribuísse para o desenvolvimento de um país, desprezando o fator cognitivo, mais intrínseco ou menos sensível à intervenções sociais. 

Anti e pseudo intelectualismos

A negação explícita (anti) ou implícita (pseudo) da razão ou do pensamento lógico-racional, que geralmente se manifesta, respectivamente, pela religião e por ideologias políticas, tende a ter como característica principal, se aplicando o conceito de lógica primária, justamente um predomínio da mesma na construção de suas bases de argumentos, de afirmações aparentemente lógicas ou que fazem sentido, que são primariamente coerentes, mas que deixam de fazer ou ser a partir de uma análise crítica mais profunda. 

Exemplos: a lógica primária de que, como toda criação tem um criador, então, o universo, que supostamente seria uma "criação", tem que ter um deus "criador";

A lógica primária de que nossa condição humana também nos faz iguais em nossas capacidades cognitivas e são as diferenças do meio em que nascemos e vivemos que, unicamente, nos diferenciam nesse aspecto, tal como as desigualdades socioeconômicas ou de acesso a uma "educação de qualidade".

Além desse termo, outro, que propus em um texto recente, semanticalismo, que se refere a uma ênfase ou importância excessiva na palavra do que no elemento ou fenômeno que simboliza, também está presente em sistemas de crenças ou ideologias baseados em um predomínio de pensamentos ou ideias que poderiam ser classificados como lógicas primárias. O próprio caso das religiões monoteístas e a crença na existência de um único Deus criador do universo, em que a palavra Deus é considerada uma realidade por si mesma, mesmo se está associada a uma crença de existência sem qualquer rastro de evidências de que exista, puramente baseada na lógica primária de que toda "criação" tem que ter um "criador" (as próprias palavras "criação" e "criador" também têm um peso desproporcional aí e até podem ser consideradas inapropriadas nesse contexto, se o ideal seria denominá-las, respectivamente, de causa e efeito).

 Primary logic and its relationship with anti and pseudo intellectualisms

Primary logic is a term I invented and refers to an idea or thought that appears to be logical, in the sense of coherent and factual, at first glance, and that may no longer make sense upon critical and analytical deepening.

An example of primary logic is the simple reasoning that more class time results in more knowledge absorbed by the student, which was the basis for the Brazilian government's decision to increase class time in public schools, that is, for a more ''integral'' model. It is a primary logic because it is also based on a correlation between the predominance of full-time schools and the level of socioeconomic development of a country. However, there are other factors that not only contribute, but are also more relevant to the development of a country, especially those over which we have less power to control, such as the average cognitive abilities of the population, which are not exclusive reflections of education " received" (or achieved), if, in fact, it is education itself that reflects, not in an absolute way, our intelligence. This is a primary logic based on a belief in causality between educational and socioeconomic level, as if only a "quality education" contributed to the development of a country, disregarding the cognitive factor, which is more intrinsic or less sensitive to social interventions.

Anti and pseudo intellectualism

The explicit (anti) or implicit (pseudo) denial of reason or logical-rational thought, which is generally manifested, respectively, by religion and political ideologies, tends to have as its main characteristic, applying the concept of primary logic, precisely a predominance of it in the construction of its bases of arguments, of statements that are apparently logical or that make sense, that are primarily coherent, but that fail to do or be based on a deeper critical analysis.

Examples: the primary logic that, as every creation has a creator, then the universe, which is supposed to be a "creation", must have a "creator";

The primary logic is that our human condition also makes us equal in our cognitive capabilities and it is the differences in the environment in which we are born and live that, uniquely, differentiate us in this aspect, such as socioeconomic inequalities or access to a "quality education ".

In addition to this term, another, which I proposed in a recent text, semanticalism, which refers to an excessive emphasis or importance on the word than on the element or phenomenon it symbolizes, is also present in belief systems or ideologies based on a predominance of thoughts or ideas that could be classified as primary logic. The very case of monotheistic religions and the belief in the existence of a single God who created the universe, in which the word God is considered a reality in itself, even if it is associated with a belief in existence without any trace of evidence that it exists, purely based on the primary logic that every "creation" must have a "creator" (the words "creation" and "creator" themselves also have a disproportionate weight there and can even be considered inappropriate in this context, if the ideal would be called them, respectively, of cause and effect).

More voluntary provocations

 Kindness without rationality is not only stupidity but also insanity

The essence of kindness is still not being polite, as many seem to think, but being fair

Still, the kindest is the one who is the most altruistic and, at the same time, most fair. A rarity...

The rotten essence of capitalism is that anything goes for money

Conservatives love to blame the lack of religion in the Western world today for what they call "moral degeneration." But many of these cultural changes are the fault of capitalist ideological influence, particularly the greed to profit from any opportunity, including those considered the most "immoral"

Moral degeneration is not exclusive to the “left”. Centuries of traditionalist or conservative cultural hegemony, poverty, social inequalities, unfair prejudices, insane dominant ideologies and many wars do not let us lie

Are conservatives, on average, false collectivists?

If it is easy to say you are in favor of a society when its culture mirrors its way of thinking and living

The problem with living with people with low cognitive abilities is that they also tend to have low emotional intelligence.

And the problem with living with more intelligent people is that they also tend to have lower emotional intelligence compared to their cognitive abilities, but they are more implicit in this expression of disability than those with lower abilities, or more concealed.

Who defends an evildoer (objectively determined):

- Do you think you could be in the same situation as him, that you would act the same way (pure speculation)

- Thinks that we are all literally or absolutely equal and that he deserves to have the same rights (even after proving otherwise)

- And/or is equal to him

Much of the current policies of the so-called Western left are based on cheap emotional blackmail

Typically, the leftist looks for complex explanations for what is simpler, while the rightist looks for simple explanations for what is more complex.

Around every tyrant leader, there is a crowd of mercenaries and idiots

A typical way of relativizing basic concepts, such as truth and knowledge, is to produce unrealistic or extreme examples, such as "Sophie's Choice" situations.

Many understand emotional intelligence with empathy, control and charisma. But, emotional intelligence is also feeling sadness, anger or shyness at appropriate times or circumstances, sometimes long term or indefinitely.

Emotional intelligence can also be the option of distance

The most irrational tends to become more "nice" when they realize they are oppressed and the opposite when they realize they are more "empowered"

The most rational tends to become more fierce when they realize that they are objectively oppressed, but more moderate when they are in power (which, in adaptive terms, seems to be less logical)

Parents do not tend to like a child more because he appears to be more 'problematic' than the others, but just because they like him more, without having an explanation beyond that.

Parents who do not set adequate limits on their children are just as problematic as those who set too many limits.

Parents who do not notice conflicts between their children, especially conflicts that generate unfair treatment from one party to the other, are also not demonstrating excellence in this role.

In relation to knowledge about the most basic, true philosophy is sufficient, as it does not need science and its specialization of logic, its generalization is enough. For example, regarding religious belief, a legitimate philosopher does not need the scientific method to doubt its veracity.

The difference between the wisest and the most intelligent is such that it is comparable to the difference between two different species.

It is almost certain to say that the majority of self-declared philosophers are a combination of a failed artist (writer or poet) and a failed scientist, that is, they fail to be one or the other, in a genuine way, and end up becoming neither of the two. the two, rather than seeking to be exactly like a philosopher, a balanced combination between the emotional artist or the existentialist and the analytical scientist or the realist

When you write very well, you are capable, but also very likely to fill a large part of your writing with your disguised ego.

The belief that France is a great philosophical center is a likely symptom of pseudo-intellectualism

Cultural relativism and egalitarianism attract the most naive to the most perverse. But, generally, the most common type is a combination between the two, because every true fanatic is like this

As despicable as fanatics are false moderates

Self-declared left-wing or social justice individuals want to end all privileges, supposedly... But the only way to do so would be through the establishment of a fully meritocratic society, or an intellectocracy.

(my ideal way of society, the government of the wisest)

An exemplary profile of extreme irrationality is that of an individual who believes in God, Marx and Lamarck at the same time.

Believing that capitalism is an ideal model of meritocracy is another symptom

Ideological indoctrination (as opposed to education/philosophy) is a systematization of the fallacy of suppressed evidence

If collectivism is the sacrifice of the individual for the "good of society", is individualism the sacrifice of society for the "good of the individual"?

I have already said in other texts or thoughts that religion, like ideology, is a more intuitive form of self-therapy. However, I can also say that this self-therapy is a type of masking of the disorder that should be correctly treated. Such as, instead of telling a person with a psychotic disorder that their delusional thoughts are delusional, to agree with reality or part of reality that they have decided to distort to accommodate their personal issues divorced from the facts

About a political-cinematic dichotomy: Blanche (left) versus Stanley (right) and with many "spoilers"

 

Text originally published on January 22, 2016 on an old blog and whose main idea I will comment on again here...

Blanche DuBois is the main character in the novel, which was also made into a film, A Streetcar Named Desire, by Tennesse Williams. She is Stella's older sister who is married to Stanley Kowalski, a working-class couple living in New Orleans. Blanche appears to be a fine, educated and somewhat affected woman, in short, a high society lady. The complete opposite of Stanley, a gluttonous, very masculine type, full of muscles, testosterone and rudeness, typical of the lower classes. Stella is the most balanced character in the plot, a typical housewife, young, sensitive, worried about her sister who moved in with her and emotionally dependent on her husband, Stanley. Gradually, the relationship between the three deteriorates, reaching the breaking point, when Blanche's lies are discovered by him and Stella, pregnant, decides to move away from them both, even more so after her sister's admission to a clinic and because she doesn't endure more physical and psychological abuse from Stanley.

Clinically speaking, Blanche represents a case of pathological lying, a psychiatric condition in which the sufferer has an uncontrollable need to lie, to the point of believing their own fantasies. But she is not the only one in this novel who can be diagnosed with a mental disorder, because Stanley also fits, particularly the anti-social personality, because of his very insensitive and sadistic way of being.

So, some time ago, I had the idea of associating these characters and their relationships, in a metaphorical way, with the political-ideological spectrum in force in the Western world, in which Blanche would represent certain types or traits common to the Left, such as an attachment to idealistic fantasies (or unrealisms); Stella would represent the Center, more silent and supporting, even more so in times of ideological polarization, and Stanley would represent certain traits or types of the Extreme Right, excessively sincere and insensitive, to the point of sadism. The first is more feminine, artistically and intellectually inclined, sensitive and more likely to lie to avoid offending, especially towards certain groups and also about herself. And the last, its opposite, more masculine, focused on the physical world rather than the mental one and more prone to offending in order not to lie (or tell the truth about what they think and feel), also due to the simple lack of commitment of not being respectful to others, even more so with those they consider inferior.

The pseudo and the anti-intellectual

Blanche DuBois, as with the left, pretends to be what she is not. She, like a high society lady. The left, as the absolute holder of wisdom and reason. Both, therefore, would fall into a category of anti-intellectualism, of denial of reality, but intending not to do so. Stanley Kowalski, as with the right, makes a point of being faithful to his own authenticity, although or therefore closed to reflections and criticism. In a way, they also end up denying facts that do not corroborate or confirm their self-images. Hence, they would express an anti-intellectualism, of suspending critical thinking in favor of their emotions or instincts.

It is worth remembering that pseudo intellectualism is basically anti-intellectualism, only disguised as sophistry.

In conclusion, both deny realities that do not align with their worldviews. But, while the first, Blanche and the left, pretend to be or think they are what they are not (very insufficiently), Stanley and the right insist on being what they are and only that, disregarding any deviation, regardless of its quality or constructive potential. . Stella would be the third way, although, as with the center on the political-ideological spectrum, she, during the plot, tends to be too tolerant of her husband and sister.

About the "pseudosciences of good", "leftist", and the most serious

 Pseudosciences are scientifically unproven theories and techniques, with remote to zero potential for proof and which aim to pass themselves off as science. Homeopathy, astrology, Freudian theory, the anti-vaccine movement and flat earthism are examples of pseudosciences. Pseudoscience is a common type of pseudo-intellectualism, that is, a false philosophy, a supposed love for wisdom or knowledge, but which, in fact, expresses itself as its falsification.

An example of pseudo-intellectualism, relevant to this text, which is also expressed as pseudoscience is that of radical egalitarianism.

Although individuals from across the political-ideological spectrum adopt pseudosciences or "pseudo-intellectualisms" as primary references for interpreting reality, these types of intellectual deviations seem to have been adopted more frequently by those who declare themselves "on the left".

Finally, there is a third deviation from wisdom, anti-intellectualism, in which, instead of passing itself off as knowledge, it denies it by appealing, generally explicitly, to the emotional, instinctive and subjective. A classic example of anti-intellectualism is religion, especially religious fundamentalism. The latter is adopted more frequently by individuals who declare themselves "right-wing".

Religion, as it has historically developed and constituted, can also be considered a false philosophy.

The difference between anti-intellectualism and pseudo-intellectualism is the same between a religious priest and a priest posing as a scientific authority.

So, despite the unprecedented advances in science/technology in recent centuries, pseudosciences continue to perpetuate themselves through the constant renewal of followers, also because the majority of human beings are more irrational than rational.

And, if thanks to relative secularization, primarily in Western societies, anti-intellectualism, particularly religion, has diminished its cultural influence, it seems that it has only been to replace it with pseudo-intellectualism within the main institutions, as in education, in the media and even in governments, passing off as knowledge and/or legitimate rational/philosophical judgments, being adopted as references for public policies and, from this, causing even more (serious) problems than solving existing ones.

I like to call these pseudosciences that are more ideologically aligned with the "left" "pseudosciences of good" because, in addition to behaving illegitimately like sciences and/or philosophy, they are also based on the prioritization of morality or moral discernment, than if considers as right or wrong, above rationality or intellectual discernment, of what is perceived as true or false, clearly an inversion of the "golden" order of wisdom in which, first, facts or evidence are prioritized and, then, judgment (moral) of how to act based on them. This is the same order of justice in its most appropriate practice, of impartial and objective thinking in search of truth, because the most fair is also what is most true or factual.

An example of the very negative impact of these "good" pseudosciences deeply infiltrated in the most important institutions in Western countries has been the imposition of a policy favorable to mass immigration and "multiculturalism" because it has altered the ethnic-racial composition of these countries, in addition also cause a large increase in crime and cultural conflicts. This policy has been based on the following assumptions*: the belief that the environment has a more determining influence on human beings than biology, informally called the "blank slate"; that human races do not exist and/or that their differences in behavior and intelligence are absolute reflections of their cultures and not also or mainly of their biology, that is, that they are only superficial; the same denialism also applied to differences between the sexes; and the adoption of anti-racist fallacies, particularly the narrative of "white guilt" as the dominant moral code, in which only white people of European origin who, in general, should be held morally responsible for the social and historical ills of other ethnic-racial groups, especially black people of African origin, which consists of a highly biased or distorted interpretation of historical facts and with implications that are opposed to true social justice, by placing all the blame on a vaguely defined group category and which, in fact, is of a "scapegoat", for not being the group most directly responsible for human ills throughout our history, the political-economic "elites".