So I see this posted here every once and awhile and people consistently

File: 1498974457254.jpg (3MB, 3460x3012px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3460x3012px

At least post the real chart

>>9837121
>icycalm
>pseudo-intellectual

>>9837134
Stop posting about yourself

>>9837091
>>9837121
They're just memes meant to bait people into posting. Don't take them seriously. Seriously even if you don't like Chomsky's politics he's obviously not a pseud and he's not on the level of like Alex Jones lmao

>rhetoricians

how can u not spot this as bait

Everyone is a pseudo-intellectual, except me. Aa 4chan user.

>>9837091
It is because no matter whther you agree with someone, you have to acknowledge their position as a true intellectual when they present original, influential, and academically rigorous ideas, which Noam Chomsky has consistently done in both linguistics and political theory. By this same standard, Bill Buckley, Reza Aslan, Slavov Zizek, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Jordan Peterson and (arguably) Christopher Hitchens should not be on this list. It appears as if someone just wrote down everyone they disagreed with. Besides, if you weren't to listen to any pseudo -intellectuals, you should ignore everyone on 4chan.

>>9837121
This chart is even worse. Socrates, Nietzsche, and Sartre (among others) are some of the most important philosophers ever, let alone intellectuals.

IGNORE THE FREE THINKERS, JUST WATCH THE NEWS, GOYIM

>>9837385
>Noam Chomsky
>influential

lol

>>9837121
Now add Shakespeare and Kant and it's perfect.

>>9837553
and how exactly is he not?

>>9837553
Edgy

>>9837121
The point of this is to be subtle. The bottom row makes it obvious bait dummy

>>9837091
>But to me he just seems like a quasi marxist?
explain, lad.

>>9837634
he only talks to Marxists and seems to like coops and socialist shit quite a lot.

>>9837091
>boogie
>h3h3
>Sam Hyde
Why are these guys on the picture? They don't claim to be intellectuals. They're just for lulz.

File: pretty much pol.jpg (162KB, 499x279px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 499x279px

>>9838123

>>9837121
Stop posting this fake one RIGHT NOW.

>>9838523
do not post this again

>>9837605
It's not even edgy really. It's just moronic.

>>9837091
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbjnje-Bxmo

>>9838123
You'd be surprised how many people form their opinions by parroting their favorite Youtube personalities as if they were people who knew what they are talking about

>>9837121
Fake chart.

>>9837385
THATS THE JOKE

>>9837261
First one is genuine but this >>9837121 one is legitimate intellectuals mixed in with pseuds.

>>9837121
what's so bad about vonnegut?

>>9837121

that fag with the bleached hair, worst idiot ive ever come across. ridiculous how someone like Tim Heidecker, who isn't even an "intellectual celebrity" is infinitely more essential to the human species than someone who makes their identity that of a "thinker of great ideas and politics"

>>9839042

I didnt notice him on there at first, but i think its just because he's "entry-level" according to /lit/ and generally doesnt fall into the threshold of super-ironic 800 pages of bullshit.

to me, he's like the Mickey Mouse of lit. you can grow out of being a fan but he will stay with you probably forever

>>9839077
>>9839042

for example, in my defense of Vonnegut, he drew an asterisk in his book. then claims its a drawing of an asshole. point proven

>>9837091
>>9837121

Why is lindybege or whatever is name is in this chart? His content has nothing to do with everyone else that's there.

>>9839107

the same reason Ted Nugent isn't on there

>>9838970
He's not relevant though. It's fun to listen him speaking, but what has really come of his "work"? Nothing.

>>9839626
He is one of the most important linguists of the 20th century.