An Erudite Know-It-All Engaging in Virtue Signaling and Purity Testing

[DISCLAIMER]

For this post, a number of definitions are required. The term “erudite” is an adjective relating to having or showing knowledge that is gained by studying: possessing or displaying erudition (extensive knowledge acquired chiefly from books: profound, recondite, or bookish learning).

In the ‘80s and ‘90s, the term used for erudite scholars was “nerd,” which is a noun relating to a person devoted to intellectual, academic, or technical pursuits or interests. This wasn’t the same as a “dork,” which is a noun relating to an odd, socially awkward, unstylish person.

Whereas a dork was merely inelegant in one’s social interactions, a nerd generally behaved as a “know-it-all,” which is a noun relating to one who claims to know everything (or just about everything). In my youth and during early adulthood, there was no short supply of know-it-alls.

Typically, these people engaged in “virtue signaling,” which is a noun relating to the act or practice of conspicuously displaying one’s awareness of and attentiveness to political issues, matters of social and racial justice, etc., especially instead of taking effective action.

For example, a nerdy know-it-all may’ve extolled the virtues of science fiction media franchise Star Trek in comparison with science fiction media franchise Battlestar Galactica. Forbid that a person simply like either television series without devoting time toward study of these series!

An erudite know-it-all engaging in virtue signaling may’ve berated an individual who merely enjoyed these programs without having dogmatically studied canon (official, verified stories which are accepted within a fictional universe) and lore (all stories, backstories, and world-building information that gives context to a fictional world).

It wasn’t an uncommon experience for these nerds to self-disturb (the process of upsetting oneself when using unfavorable beliefs). Reflecting upon such behavior, I laugh at how acting in that unhelpful manner was obviously irrational (not in accordance with both logic and reason).

Here, “logic” is the interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable, and “reason” is a statement offered in explanation or justification. For instance, a modus tollens syllogism uses the following logical form: If p, then q; not q; therefore, not p.

As an example, if you’re an authentic Trekkie (p), then you’re able to elaborate on esoteric practices addressed in the Star Trek franchise (q). You’re unable to elaborate on esoteric practices addressed in the Star Trek franchise (q). Therefore, you’re not an authentic Trekkie (p).

This proposition follows logical form. However, I argue that it isn’t reasonable. I state this, because one can be an authentic Trekkie (fan of the Star Trek franchise) without dogmatic devotion to the canon and lore related to the series. Thus, the proposition is irrational.

Presuming you comprehend how an erudite know-it-all engaging in virtue signaling functions from a cognitive position of irrationality, it may be worth expanding upon the description of virtue signaling. According to one source:

Virtue signaling is the act of expressing opinions or stances that align with popular moral values, often through social media, with the intent of demonstrating one’s good character. The term virtue signaling is frequently used pejoratively to suggest that the person is more concerned with appearing virtuous than with actually supporting the cause or belief in question. An accusation of virtue signaling can be applied to both individuals and companies.

Critics argue that virtue signaling is often meant to gain social approval without taking meaningful action, such as in greenwashing, where companies exaggerate their environmental commitments. On social media, large movements such as Blackout Tuesday were accused of lacking substance, and celebrities or public figures are frequently charged with virtue signaling when their actions seem disconnected from their public stances.

However, some argue that these expressions of outrage or moral alignment may reflect genuine concern, and that accusing others of virtue signaling can itself be a form of signaling. This inverse concept has been described as vice signaling and refers to the public promotion of negative or controversial views to appear tough, pragmatic, or rebellious, often for political or social capital.

I’m open to the critique of my view within this blogpost as perhaps relating to vice signaling. If credible evidence is offered to refute the rational case outlined herein, then I’ll be willing to consider changing my mind. Until then, my stance remains unaffected by mere criticism.

The nerds up with which I grew virtue-signaled to one another based on their erudite know-it-all positions of supposed ideological purity (the quality or state of being pure—containing nothing that does not properly belong). Based on irrationality, they signaled who was or wasn’t pure.

As an example, if a person was unable to elaborate on esoteric practices addressed in the Star Trek franchise, then the individual was wasn’t considered an authentic Trekkie. Thus, know-it-alls tended toward activities involving purity tests. Regarding this term, one source states:

A purity test is a self-graded survey that assesses the participants’ supposed degree of innocence in worldly matters (sex, drugs, deceit, and other activities assumed to be vices), generally on a percentage scale with 100% being the most and 0% being the least pure.

Online purity tests were among the earliest of Internet memes, popular on Usenet beginning in the early 1980s. However, similar types of tests circulated under various names long before the existence of the Internet.

Two matters of irrationality are obvious me regarding an erudite know-it-all engaging in virtue signaling and purity testing, as I invite you to consider my critiques of such behavior—yet, not of the individuals. After all, these people are merely fallible human beings. Nobody’s perfect!

First, virtue signaling operates under the irrational function of denying the antecedent. Also known as the “no true Scotsman” fallacy, one source thusly elaborates:

No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informal fallacy in which one modifies a prior claim in response to a counterexample by asserting the counterexample is excluded by definition. Rather than admitting error or providing evidence to disprove the counterexample, the original claim is changed by using a non-substantive modifier such as “true”, “pure”, “genuine”, “authentic”, “real”, or other similar terms.

Philosopher Bradley Dowden explains the fallacy as an “ad hoc rescue” of a refuted generalization attempt. The following is a simplified rendition of the fallacy:

Person A: “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”

Person B: “But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge.”

Person A: “But no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”

When irrational beliefs of erudite know-it-alls are defied (e.g., I like Star Trek and I don’t have to know about esoteric practices addressed in the franchise), then it isn’t rare for these people to use the no true Scotsman fallacy (e.g., no authentic Trekkie would say such a thing).

Second, purity testing operates under the irrational function of argumentum ad populum. One source states of this unhelpful rhetorical practice:

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for ‘appeal to the people’) is a fallacious argument that asserts a claim is true, or good or correct because many people allegedly think so. […]

The fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the “justification” of a belief and its “widespread acceptance” by a given group of people.

When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority; if the appeal relates to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one’s community over a long time, then it takes on the form of an appeal to tradition.

When irrational beliefs of erudite know-it-alls are defied (e.g., there doesn’t need to be any piousness involved in my appreciation of the Star Trek series), then it isn’t uncommon for these people to use argumentum ad populum (e.g., no Trekkies I know would approve of you).

What I didn’t understand in the ‘80s and ‘90s is that erudite nerds who functioned on irrationality described herein were engaging in a form of gatekeeping (an attempt to control or influence access). Now, I know better. When further thinking about this matter, I’m reminded of a book.

As Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) is informed by Stoic philosophy, this blog entry is part of an ongoing series regarding a book entitled The Daily Stoic: 366 Meditations on Wisdom, Perseverance, and the Art of Living by Ryan Holiday and Stephen Hanselman.

Seneca once stated, “What’s the point of having countless books and libraries, whose titles could hardly be read through in a lifetime. The learner is not taught, but burdened by the sheer volume, and it’s better to plant the seeds of a few authors than to be scattered about by many” (page 160).

In view of this quote, shifting from Trekkies to fellow providers for care in the field of mental, emotional, and behavioral health (collectively “mental health”), I’m reminded of the COVID-19 lockdown. I participated in many virtual conference calls at that time, as you may also have.

Photo credit, fair use

It was sometimes difficult for me not to literally laugh out loud when an erudite know-it-all engaging in virtue signaling and purity testing would present online with an elaborate bookshelf in the background that contained many books. What message was being conveyed?

“Only true mental health care providers would be well-read. Look at me and the books displayed in my background. I’m an authentic clinician. In fact, I have more books displayed than you do!”

I deliberately refrained from displaying anything other than a white wall behind me, because I refused to engage in virtue signaling and purity testing. “Aha! Gotcha, Deric,” you may say, “see? You’re engaging in vice signaling in this blogpost!”

On the contrary, I’m merely suggesting that the irrational in- versus out-group distinction in which the no true Scotsman fallacy and argumentum ad populum are used isn’t directly correlated with improved mental health treatment or management outcomes. It’s just nerdy!

While there’s nothing inherently wrong, bad, or otherwise regarding such actions—as I don’t unhelpfully appraise individuals exhibiting this nerdy behavior—I offer that I’m not that kind of mental health care provider. Although I read from time to time, I’m not an erudite know-it-all.

Still, I realize that some clients apparently value an irrational appeal to authority. They ostensibly seek mental health clinicians who present a well-manicured online presence, appear to have read many books, and who virtue-signal and purity-test as a matter of pompous gatekeeping.

If you’re in search of such a professional practitioner of REBT, allow me to disabuse you of the notion that I’ll behave as an erudite know-it-all engaging in virtue signaling and purity testing. I’m little more than a flawed individual who’s trying to help people get better, not feel better.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

Daily Stoic. (n.d.). Translating the Stoics: An interview with “The Daily Stoic” co-author Stephen Hanselman. Retrieved from https://dailystoic.com/stephen-hanselman-interview/

Holiday, R. and Hanselman, S. (2016). The daily stoic: 366 meditations on wisdom, perseverance, and the art of living. Penguin Random House LLC. Retrieved from https://www.pdfdrive.com/the-daily-stoic-366-meditations-on-wisdom-perseverance-and-the-art-of-living-d61378067.html

Hollings, D. (2023, October 21). Appeal to authority. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/appeal-to-authority

Hollings, D. (2024, November 15). Assumptions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/assumptions

Hollings, D. (2024, November 24). Automatic thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/automatic-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, December 24). Changing beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/changing-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2022, May 17). Circle of concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/circle-of-concern

Hollings, D. (2023, May 15). Cognitive reframing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/cognitive-reframing

Hollings, D. (2024, October 27). Correlation does not imply causation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/correlation-does-not-imply-causation

Hollings, D. (2023, July 18). Denying the antecedent. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/denying-the-antecedent

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2024, January 3). Expertise. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/expertise

Hollings, D. (2025, March 9). Factual and counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/factual-and-counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 11). Fallible human being. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fallible-human-being

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2024, August 2). Gatekeeping. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/gatekeeping

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2025, September 7). Have to. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/have-to

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2024, August 21). In-group and out-group distinction. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/in-group-and-out-group-distinction

Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals

Hollings, D. (2025, March 4). Justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/justification

Hollings, D. (2025, October 13). Knowledge, wisdom, understanding. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/knowledge-wisdom-understanding

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2024, March 4). Mental, emotional, and behavioral health. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mental-emotional-and-behavioral-health

Hollings, D. (2025, November 16). Mental health, mental illness, and mental disorder. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mental-health-mental-illness-and-mental-disorder

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus tollens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-tollens

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, May 30). Nobody’s perfect. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/nobody-s-perfect

Hollings, D. (2024, July 7). Non-dogmatic preferences. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/non-dogmatic-preferences

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2024, June 16). On virtue. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-virtue

Hollings, D. (2024, November 18). Opinions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/opinions

Hollings, D. (2025, April 9). Perception, action, and will. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/perception-action-and-will

Hollings, D. (2025, May 3). Predictability of logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/predictability-of-logic

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, March 24). Smartphone and social media addiction. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/smartphone-and-social-media-addiction

Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Stoicism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/stoicism

Hollings, D. (2024, February 6). This ride inevitably ends. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/this-ride-inevitably-ends

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2024, June 19). Treatment vs. management. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/treatment-vs-management

Hollings, D. (2025, May 12). Unjustified generalization. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unjustified-generalization

Hollings, D. (2024, November 24). Values. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/values

Hollings, D. (2025, October 20). You need to stop. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/ you-need-to-stop

TFM. (2020, August 17). Meta treks 98: Geordi’s pedagogically esoteric PowerPoint presentations. Trek.fm. Retrieved from http://www.trek.fm/meta-treks/98

Vecstock. (n.d.). Abundant collection of antique books on wooden shelves generated by ai [Image]. Freepik. Retrieved from https://www.freepik.com/free-ai-image/abundant-collection-antique-books-wooden-shelves-generated-by-ai_42138866.htm#fromView=search&page=1&position=0&uuid=016ec0e0-60d0-4af0-b57e-f60fa55a6aa0&query=library

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Ad hoc hypothesis. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hoc_hypothesis

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Appeal to tradition. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Argumentum ad populum. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Battlestar Galactica. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlestar_Galactica

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Blackout Tuesday. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackout_Tuesday

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Bradley Dowden. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Dowden

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Greenwashing. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Informal fallacy. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy

Wikipedia. (n.d.). No true Scotsman. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Purity test. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_test

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Ryan Holiday. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Holiday

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Seneca the Younger. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_the_Younger

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Start Trek. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Trekkie. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trekkie

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Virtue signaling. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling