LETTER | Pseudo-intellectualism refers to the act of presenting oneself as highly knowledgeable, analytical, or intellectual while lacking a true understanding or depth of knowledge in the subject being discussed.

Pseudo-intellectuals often use complex language, jargon, and superficial references to ideas or theories to appear well-informed and sophisticated, but their arguments are usually shallow, misleading, or based on a limited grasp of the topic.

Let us examine key characteristics of pseudo-intellectualism, which are camouflaged in different shapes, sizes, and illusive substances.

Pseudo-intellectuals often have a cursory and superficial understanding of the topics they discuss. They might be familiar with some terminology or popular ideas but lack the depth of knowledge to truly engage with the subject matter.

They tend to overuse jargon and complex or technical language to appear more knowledgeable. This can make their arguments seem sophisticated, but it often masks a lack of real substance.

Pseudo-intellectuals frequently refer and quote well-known philosophers, thinkers, or texts without fully understanding their works. This is done to give an impression of erudition rather than to contribute meaningful insights.

Instead of making well-reasoned arguments, pseudo-intellectuals often rely on the authority of certain figures or institutions to support their claims without critically engaging with the content.

They may exhibit a sense of superiority or intellectual elitism over others, dismissing differing viewpoints as ignorant or uninformed, rather than engaging in open, constructive dialogue.

Pseudo-intellectualism often involves recycling popular opinions or ideas without adding original analysis or thought.

The focus is more on appearing intellectual than on contributing new perspectives. The knowledge displayed by pseudo-intellectuals is often performative - meant to impress others or gain social status rather than to pursue truth or understanding.

In contrast, true intellectualism involves a genuine pursuit of knowledge, critical thinking, open-mindedness, and the ability to acknowledge and address the complexity of issues. 

True intellectuals are not afraid to admit what they do not know and are open to learning from others, while pseudo-intellectuals often prioritize appearance over substance.

Overcoming the curse of divisive politics fueled by pseudo-intellectualism requires a multifaceted approach, grounded in education, critical thinking, and active civic engagement.

The Malaysian public must taught to sniff or recognise these politician or whoever they may be, so that they may not be hijacked by their antics in thoughts, expressions, and actions.

The following indicators may help the public at large for now to understand before full-blown educational topics are incorporated into our curriculum.

The public must be encouraged to develop critical thinking skills from a young age. This includes teaching people how to evaluate sources, recognise biases, and question assumptions. Critical thinkers are less likely to fall prey to pseudo-intellectual arguments that serve divisive agendas.

In the age of information, media literacy is crucial to be fostered. People need to be equipped with the tools to discern credible information from misinformation. This involves understanding how media operates, recognizing propaganda, and being aware of echo chambers.

Spaces should also be created for open, respectful dialogue that can help bridge divides.

Encouraging conversations between people of different political and intellectual perspectives can foster understanding and reduce the appeal of divisive rhetoric. In advanced democracies, we can observe its usage and utility.

We need to promote a well-rounded education that includes humanities, social sciences, and the arts, alongside STEM which can help individuals appreciate diverse perspectives and the complexity of societal issues.

Education should also emphasise ethical reasoning and the social impact of ideas in the long term, taking examples from past trajectories.

Academia should actively challenge pseudo-intellectualism by exposing flawed arguments and promoting genuine intellectual discourse. This involves highlighting the difference between opinion-based rhetoric and evidence-based reasoning.

Only experts in the respective field can do this and they must have the courage to do so.

Encouraging active participation by strengthening civic engagement in democratic processes can help individuals feel invested in the political system and reduce the appeal of polarising ideologies. This includes voting, community organising, and public discourse.

Teaching empathy and understanding can reduce the polarisation that pseudo-intellectualism often exploits. When people are encouraged to see issues from multiple perspectives, they are less likely to engage in divisive politics.

The government must support independent journalism that holds power accountable and provides well-researched, balanced reporting that is crucial in countering pseudo-intellectualism. Supporting such journalism helps create a more informed public.

By combining these strategies, society can create a more informed, critically engaged citizenry that is less susceptible to the divisive tactics of pseudo-intellectualism by politicians or grassroots leaders in multiple settings.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.