"

Candidate for deletion
This seems like a serious article with some serious problems. The lead ""Pseudophilosophy is a term..."" has no sourcing. The lead, and especially the first paragraphy of an article, is like a definition and therefore requires sourcing. The body of the article is sourced, but it's just a list of where ""pseudo-philosophy"" has been used before, but does not justify the lead. I tried myself to quickly find some reliable source that would justify the lead, but couldn't find anything. The section ""Accusations against popular philosophers"" should probably be removed the way it is now. Two of the entries are un-cited and the Rand citation is by a writer of unknown qualifications. Also, I can see this section degenerating into a ""philosophy I hate"" list. The article seems to me, the way it is now, to be a candidate for deletion.   "