What's a word for an instance in which one has an opinion about something without having tried it?












10















What do you call it when someone has a strong opinion about something without having any experience with that thing? For example, if someone writes an entire newspaper article about how disgusting pie is without having ever eaten pie.



The word lodged in my brain is "hypocritical", but I know that's not correct.










share|improve this question

























  • On the disgusting nature of pie: there's a famous (although possibly apocryphal) epitaph on the subject. "Pie is a detestable / American comestible. / That's why I lie here undone / So far from my dear London." As a proud American and a lover of pie, I resent that.

    – MT_Head
    May 17 '11 at 16:26











  • Possibly also helpful to you: A polite substitution for “lamer”

    – user1579
    May 17 '11 at 16:37











  • Ted Cruz

    – Hot Licks
    Mar 8 '16 at 20:07











  • I’d call that ignorant

    – Jim
    Jul 12 '16 at 23:57
















10















What do you call it when someone has a strong opinion about something without having any experience with that thing? For example, if someone writes an entire newspaper article about how disgusting pie is without having ever eaten pie.



The word lodged in my brain is "hypocritical", but I know that's not correct.










share|improve this question

























  • On the disgusting nature of pie: there's a famous (although possibly apocryphal) epitaph on the subject. "Pie is a detestable / American comestible. / That's why I lie here undone / So far from my dear London." As a proud American and a lover of pie, I resent that.

    – MT_Head
    May 17 '11 at 16:26











  • Possibly also helpful to you: A polite substitution for “lamer”

    – user1579
    May 17 '11 at 16:37











  • Ted Cruz

    – Hot Licks
    Mar 8 '16 at 20:07











  • I’d call that ignorant

    – Jim
    Jul 12 '16 at 23:57














10












10








10








What do you call it when someone has a strong opinion about something without having any experience with that thing? For example, if someone writes an entire newspaper article about how disgusting pie is without having ever eaten pie.



The word lodged in my brain is "hypocritical", but I know that's not correct.










share|improve this question
















What do you call it when someone has a strong opinion about something without having any experience with that thing? For example, if someone writes an entire newspaper article about how disgusting pie is without having ever eaten pie.



The word lodged in my brain is "hypocritical", but I know that's not correct.







vocabulary single-word-requests






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Feb 25 '11 at 21:17









Marthaª

27.2k1087145




27.2k1087145










asked Feb 25 '11 at 19:13









mipadimipadi

1,29321315




1,29321315













  • On the disgusting nature of pie: there's a famous (although possibly apocryphal) epitaph on the subject. "Pie is a detestable / American comestible. / That's why I lie here undone / So far from my dear London." As a proud American and a lover of pie, I resent that.

    – MT_Head
    May 17 '11 at 16:26











  • Possibly also helpful to you: A polite substitution for “lamer”

    – user1579
    May 17 '11 at 16:37











  • Ted Cruz

    – Hot Licks
    Mar 8 '16 at 20:07











  • I’d call that ignorant

    – Jim
    Jul 12 '16 at 23:57



















  • On the disgusting nature of pie: there's a famous (although possibly apocryphal) epitaph on the subject. "Pie is a detestable / American comestible. / That's why I lie here undone / So far from my dear London." As a proud American and a lover of pie, I resent that.

    – MT_Head
    May 17 '11 at 16:26











  • Possibly also helpful to you: A polite substitution for “lamer”

    – user1579
    May 17 '11 at 16:37











  • Ted Cruz

    – Hot Licks
    Mar 8 '16 at 20:07











  • I’d call that ignorant

    – Jim
    Jul 12 '16 at 23:57

















On the disgusting nature of pie: there's a famous (although possibly apocryphal) epitaph on the subject. "Pie is a detestable / American comestible. / That's why I lie here undone / So far from my dear London." As a proud American and a lover of pie, I resent that.

– MT_Head
May 17 '11 at 16:26





On the disgusting nature of pie: there's a famous (although possibly apocryphal) epitaph on the subject. "Pie is a detestable / American comestible. / That's why I lie here undone / So far from my dear London." As a proud American and a lover of pie, I resent that.

– MT_Head
May 17 '11 at 16:26













Possibly also helpful to you: A polite substitution for “lamer”

– user1579
May 17 '11 at 16:37





Possibly also helpful to you: A polite substitution for “lamer”

– user1579
May 17 '11 at 16:37













Ted Cruz

– Hot Licks
Mar 8 '16 at 20:07





Ted Cruz

– Hot Licks
Mar 8 '16 at 20:07













I’d call that ignorant

– Jim
Jul 12 '16 at 23:57





I’d call that ignorant

– Jim
Jul 12 '16 at 23:57










13 Answers
13






active

oldest

votes


















7














Are you thinking of "prejudiced"?






share|improve this answer
























  • Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

    – mipadi
    Feb 25 '11 at 19:21






  • 7





    Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

    – PaulRein
    Feb 25 '11 at 19:23






  • 2





    @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

    – bye
    Feb 25 '11 at 19:30






  • 1





    They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

    – thursdaysgeek
    Feb 25 '11 at 21:20






  • 1





    I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

    – Lee Kowalkowski
    Feb 26 '11 at 1:53



















5














You might go with "closed-minded" or "small-minded" for the sense of not being interested in learning anything that might change their opinion, or perhaps "willfully ignorant" if you believe they've made a conscious decision not to educate themselves further about the matter.



I would describe what such a person is doing in that case as "speaking from ignorance" (in opposition to speaking from experience), but I can't come up with an existing word or phrase to describe someone as a person who routinely speaks from ignorance. To coin a phrase for it, I might go with "an oral flatulator."



Edit:



The speaker has a preconceived bias.






share|improve this answer


























  • +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

    – Adam
    Feb 25 '11 at 22:16



















3














My answers:




  • prejudice

  • ignorance

  • naïveté


I voted up prejudice, I think it fits. In your comments you stated you want to emphasize the fact the prejudice is uniformed. In that case, I think you could just qualify the prejudice:




  • naive prejudice

  • ignorant prejudice

  • unfounded prejudice

  • groundless prejudice

  • uninformed prejudice


etc.






share|improve this answer































    3














    Pharisaical




    Hypocritically self-righteous and
    condemnatory.




    Sanctimonious




    Feigning piety or righteousness




    As in A sanctimonious smug bastard



    Self-righteous






    share|improve this answer

































      2














      Charlatan; fraud; counterfeit expert. My own invention is "instant expert: just add water!"



      Poseur (poser).






      share|improve this answer
























      • Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

        – mipadi
        Feb 25 '11 at 19:28











      • +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

        – Ernie
        Feb 25 '11 at 19:34











      • @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

        – horatio
        Feb 25 '11 at 20:35



















      2














      Someone mentioned it in a comment, but I'll put it into an answer: the person is "speaking from preconceived notions".



      Prejudiced is based on pre-judging, but I think it's not what you want. You can be, for example, racially prejudiced and yet have met people of the other race. The pre-judgement is not on a racial basis, but on an individual basis: you are judging an individual without having met that individual, based on what you perceive about the race to which they belong.



      Another option that hasn't been mentioned -- but I also think it does not work in your situation -- is opinionated. Opinionated has the connotation of strong opinions not based on facts, but also does not imply this is because of a lack of exposure.






      share|improve this answer

































        1














        I would call that person a blowhard, possibly an ignorant blowhard if I didn't mind the arguable redundancy.






        share|improve this answer
























        • Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

          – Ernie
          Feb 25 '11 at 20:36











        • @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

          – chaos
          Feb 25 '11 at 20:54



















        1














        It's probably not what you are looking for, but confabulator is worth a mention. One who confabulates makes up incredibly detailed fantasies that they believe are entirely true, usually based on some very small piece of real information. For instance, you might show them a picture of sand and ask them to describe it. They'll start with sand and then tell you about the palm trees and the blue ocean, and the two people drinking Coronas under a rainbow colored umbrella. The important thing is that this is reality to them. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon.






        share|improve this answer
























        • confabulator = born advertising copywriter

          – Andy Dent
          Nov 27 '11 at 19:08



















        0















        ultracrepidarianism



        the habit of giving opinions and advice on matters outside of one’s
        knowledge or competence







        share|improve this answer

































          0














          You might say that person has an unfounded opinion. Baseless also works, as well as unsupported - although the last one is a bit more general, and could refer to lack of support from outside sources.






          share|improve this answer































            0














            The term "armchair" is used a lot. An armchair critic gives opinions on subjects they haven't directly experienced. An armchair mechanic might say something won't work from a mathematical standpoint despite people doing it in their garages all the time. An armchair activist yells at the TV about how we all need to get up and do something about whatever political situation they don't like, but who never gets up to do anything themselves (this case also qualifies as hypocritical).



            This isn't quite the same as your example though. In your example, you're talking about a purely subjective thing, while the use of "armchair" tends to be more objective. I'm not sure that "armchair pie-taster" works as well.



            Of note, just because someone hasn't tried something doesn't mean they can't objectively determine that they would subjectively hate it. As an extreme example, I can be pretty confident that I would dislike getting shot with a gun without getting shot first. Similarly, I can use my experience in other fields of study to make a pretty good argument for a field of study I don't have experience with.






            share|improve this answer































              0














              hubris



              Merriam-Webster



              exaggerated pride or self-confidence



              "He exhibited a fair amount of hubris by ignoring his generals."






              share|improve this answer































                -1














                Jumping to conclusions


                Example:

                Jumper: "I have a strong opinion about X."

                Clear thinker: "Can you give a definition of X?"

                Jumper: "No. I've reached a conclusion without knowing the basics."






                share|improve this answer
























                • Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                  – SuperBiasedMan
                  Mar 8 '16 at 20:50










                protected by user140086 Jul 13 '16 at 7:39



                Thank you for your interest in this question.
                Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



                Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?














                13 Answers
                13






                active

                oldest

                votes








                13 Answers
                13






                active

                oldest

                votes









                active

                oldest

                votes






                active

                oldest

                votes









                7














                Are you thinking of "prejudiced"?






                share|improve this answer
























                • Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

                  – mipadi
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:21






                • 7





                  Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

                  – PaulRein
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:23






                • 2





                  @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

                  – bye
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:30






                • 1





                  They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

                  – thursdaysgeek
                  Feb 25 '11 at 21:20






                • 1





                  I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

                  – Lee Kowalkowski
                  Feb 26 '11 at 1:53
















                7














                Are you thinking of "prejudiced"?






                share|improve this answer
























                • Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

                  – mipadi
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:21






                • 7





                  Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

                  – PaulRein
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:23






                • 2





                  @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

                  – bye
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:30






                • 1





                  They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

                  – thursdaysgeek
                  Feb 25 '11 at 21:20






                • 1





                  I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

                  – Lee Kowalkowski
                  Feb 26 '11 at 1:53














                7












                7








                7







                Are you thinking of "prejudiced"?






                share|improve this answer













                Are you thinking of "prejudiced"?







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Feb 25 '11 at 19:15









                PaulReinPaulRein

                71456




                71456













                • Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

                  – mipadi
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:21






                • 7





                  Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

                  – PaulRein
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:23






                • 2





                  @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

                  – bye
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:30






                • 1





                  They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

                  – thursdaysgeek
                  Feb 25 '11 at 21:20






                • 1





                  I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

                  – Lee Kowalkowski
                  Feb 26 '11 at 1:53



















                • Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

                  – mipadi
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:21






                • 7





                  Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

                  – PaulRein
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:23






                • 2





                  @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

                  – bye
                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:30






                • 1





                  They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

                  – thursdaysgeek
                  Feb 25 '11 at 21:20






                • 1





                  I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

                  – Lee Kowalkowski
                  Feb 26 '11 at 1:53

















                Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

                – mipadi
                Feb 25 '11 at 19:21





                Possibly...but that has a connotation that one's opinion stems from a bias. I'm looking more for a case in which a person maybe thinks something is stupid/bad/whatever without having actually experienced it (maybe because it's "trendy" or "contrarian" to hold that opinion).

                – mipadi
                Feb 25 '11 at 19:21




                7




                7





                Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

                – PaulRein
                Feb 25 '11 at 19:23





                Ok, maybe "preconceived" is better then.

                – PaulRein
                Feb 25 '11 at 19:23




                2




                2





                @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

                – bye
                Feb 25 '11 at 19:30





                @mipaldi: The word prejudice(d) (pre-judging) is the correct one -- racial prejudice is only one form of this disease of thought. Bias, by the way, is an essential part of what you are describing. An unbiased opinion would preclude contempt prior to investigation.

                – bye
                Feb 25 '11 at 19:30




                1




                1





                They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

                – thursdaysgeek
                Feb 25 '11 at 21:20





                They have an opinion without information, they are pre-judging. He says pie is disgusting without ever eating pie: he is pre-judging. Pie may or may not be disgusting to him, but he is judging that before trying it. And for a racial bigot, they may claim they have knowledge, but they are still making assumptions based on ignorance and incomplete knowledge.

                – thursdaysgeek
                Feb 25 '11 at 21:20




                1




                1





                I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

                – Lee Kowalkowski
                Feb 26 '11 at 1:53





                I agree with the first answer, a strong opinion is a judgement, and to have such an opinion without trying is prejudiced.

                – Lee Kowalkowski
                Feb 26 '11 at 1:53













                5














                You might go with "closed-minded" or "small-minded" for the sense of not being interested in learning anything that might change their opinion, or perhaps "willfully ignorant" if you believe they've made a conscious decision not to educate themselves further about the matter.



                I would describe what such a person is doing in that case as "speaking from ignorance" (in opposition to speaking from experience), but I can't come up with an existing word or phrase to describe someone as a person who routinely speaks from ignorance. To coin a phrase for it, I might go with "an oral flatulator."



                Edit:



                The speaker has a preconceived bias.






                share|improve this answer


























                • +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

                  – Adam
                  Feb 25 '11 at 22:16
















                5














                You might go with "closed-minded" or "small-minded" for the sense of not being interested in learning anything that might change their opinion, or perhaps "willfully ignorant" if you believe they've made a conscious decision not to educate themselves further about the matter.



                I would describe what such a person is doing in that case as "speaking from ignorance" (in opposition to speaking from experience), but I can't come up with an existing word or phrase to describe someone as a person who routinely speaks from ignorance. To coin a phrase for it, I might go with "an oral flatulator."



                Edit:



                The speaker has a preconceived bias.






                share|improve this answer


























                • +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

                  – Adam
                  Feb 25 '11 at 22:16














                5












                5








                5







                You might go with "closed-minded" or "small-minded" for the sense of not being interested in learning anything that might change their opinion, or perhaps "willfully ignorant" if you believe they've made a conscious decision not to educate themselves further about the matter.



                I would describe what such a person is doing in that case as "speaking from ignorance" (in opposition to speaking from experience), but I can't come up with an existing word or phrase to describe someone as a person who routinely speaks from ignorance. To coin a phrase for it, I might go with "an oral flatulator."



                Edit:



                The speaker has a preconceived bias.






                share|improve this answer















                You might go with "closed-minded" or "small-minded" for the sense of not being interested in learning anything that might change their opinion, or perhaps "willfully ignorant" if you believe they've made a conscious decision not to educate themselves further about the matter.



                I would describe what such a person is doing in that case as "speaking from ignorance" (in opposition to speaking from experience), but I can't come up with an existing word or phrase to describe someone as a person who routinely speaks from ignorance. To coin a phrase for it, I might go with "an oral flatulator."



                Edit:



                The speaker has a preconceived bias.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited Feb 25 '11 at 22:11

























                answered Feb 25 '11 at 21:14









                HellionHellion

                53k13108196




                53k13108196













                • +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

                  – Adam
                  Feb 25 '11 at 22:16



















                • +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

                  – Adam
                  Feb 25 '11 at 22:16

















                +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

                – Adam
                Feb 25 '11 at 22:16





                +1: I think "preconceived bias" is the best answer to the question.

                – Adam
                Feb 25 '11 at 22:16











                3














                My answers:




                • prejudice

                • ignorance

                • naïveté


                I voted up prejudice, I think it fits. In your comments you stated you want to emphasize the fact the prejudice is uniformed. In that case, I think you could just qualify the prejudice:




                • naive prejudice

                • ignorant prejudice

                • unfounded prejudice

                • groundless prejudice

                • uninformed prejudice


                etc.






                share|improve this answer




























                  3














                  My answers:




                  • prejudice

                  • ignorance

                  • naïveté


                  I voted up prejudice, I think it fits. In your comments you stated you want to emphasize the fact the prejudice is uniformed. In that case, I think you could just qualify the prejudice:




                  • naive prejudice

                  • ignorant prejudice

                  • unfounded prejudice

                  • groundless prejudice

                  • uninformed prejudice


                  etc.






                  share|improve this answer


























                    3












                    3








                    3







                    My answers:




                    • prejudice

                    • ignorance

                    • naïveté


                    I voted up prejudice, I think it fits. In your comments you stated you want to emphasize the fact the prejudice is uniformed. In that case, I think you could just qualify the prejudice:




                    • naive prejudice

                    • ignorant prejudice

                    • unfounded prejudice

                    • groundless prejudice

                    • uninformed prejudice


                    etc.






                    share|improve this answer













                    My answers:




                    • prejudice

                    • ignorance

                    • naïveté


                    I voted up prejudice, I think it fits. In your comments you stated you want to emphasize the fact the prejudice is uniformed. In that case, I think you could just qualify the prejudice:




                    • naive prejudice

                    • ignorant prejudice

                    • unfounded prejudice

                    • groundless prejudice

                    • uninformed prejudice


                    etc.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Feb 25 '11 at 21:14









                    ghoppeghoppe

                    13.5k13059




                    13.5k13059























                        3














                        Pharisaical




                        Hypocritically self-righteous and
                        condemnatory.




                        Sanctimonious




                        Feigning piety or righteousness




                        As in A sanctimonious smug bastard



                        Self-righteous






                        share|improve this answer






























                          3














                          Pharisaical




                          Hypocritically self-righteous and
                          condemnatory.




                          Sanctimonious




                          Feigning piety or righteousness




                          As in A sanctimonious smug bastard



                          Self-righteous






                          share|improve this answer




























                            3












                            3








                            3







                            Pharisaical




                            Hypocritically self-righteous and
                            condemnatory.




                            Sanctimonious




                            Feigning piety or righteousness




                            As in A sanctimonious smug bastard



                            Self-righteous






                            share|improve this answer















                            Pharisaical




                            Hypocritically self-righteous and
                            condemnatory.




                            Sanctimonious




                            Feigning piety or righteousness




                            As in A sanctimonious smug bastard



                            Self-righteous







                            share|improve this answer














                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer








                            edited May 17 '11 at 18:43

























                            answered May 17 '11 at 18:38









                            mplungjanmplungjan

                            27.5k471108




                            27.5k471108























                                2














                                Charlatan; fraud; counterfeit expert. My own invention is "instant expert: just add water!"



                                Poseur (poser).






                                share|improve this answer
























                                • Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

                                  – mipadi
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:28











                                • +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

                                  – Ernie
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:34











                                • @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

                                  – horatio
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 20:35
















                                2














                                Charlatan; fraud; counterfeit expert. My own invention is "instant expert: just add water!"



                                Poseur (poser).






                                share|improve this answer
























                                • Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

                                  – mipadi
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:28











                                • +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

                                  – Ernie
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:34











                                • @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

                                  – horatio
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 20:35














                                2












                                2








                                2







                                Charlatan; fraud; counterfeit expert. My own invention is "instant expert: just add water!"



                                Poseur (poser).






                                share|improve this answer













                                Charlatan; fraud; counterfeit expert. My own invention is "instant expert: just add water!"



                                Poseur (poser).







                                share|improve this answer












                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer










                                answered Feb 25 '11 at 19:27









                                horatiohoratio

                                3,4501116




                                3,4501116













                                • Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

                                  – mipadi
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:28











                                • +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

                                  – Ernie
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:34











                                • @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

                                  – horatio
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 20:35



















                                • Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

                                  – mipadi
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:28











                                • +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

                                  – Ernie
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 19:34











                                • @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

                                  – horatio
                                  Feb 25 '11 at 20:35

















                                Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

                                – mipadi
                                Feb 25 '11 at 19:28





                                Any words for the instance of the act itself (like hypocrisy instead of hypocrite?)

                                – mipadi
                                Feb 25 '11 at 19:28













                                +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

                                – Ernie
                                Feb 25 '11 at 19:34





                                +1 for poseur. Although "reporter" might also be an excellent substitute as well. ;)

                                – Ernie
                                Feb 25 '11 at 19:34













                                @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

                                – horatio
                                Feb 25 '11 at 20:35





                                @mipadi: can you offer context? Maybe someone can fill in the word or help restructure your sentence.

                                – horatio
                                Feb 25 '11 at 20:35











                                2














                                Someone mentioned it in a comment, but I'll put it into an answer: the person is "speaking from preconceived notions".



                                Prejudiced is based on pre-judging, but I think it's not what you want. You can be, for example, racially prejudiced and yet have met people of the other race. The pre-judgement is not on a racial basis, but on an individual basis: you are judging an individual without having met that individual, based on what you perceive about the race to which they belong.



                                Another option that hasn't been mentioned -- but I also think it does not work in your situation -- is opinionated. Opinionated has the connotation of strong opinions not based on facts, but also does not imply this is because of a lack of exposure.






                                share|improve this answer






























                                  2














                                  Someone mentioned it in a comment, but I'll put it into an answer: the person is "speaking from preconceived notions".



                                  Prejudiced is based on pre-judging, but I think it's not what you want. You can be, for example, racially prejudiced and yet have met people of the other race. The pre-judgement is not on a racial basis, but on an individual basis: you are judging an individual without having met that individual, based on what you perceive about the race to which they belong.



                                  Another option that hasn't been mentioned -- but I also think it does not work in your situation -- is opinionated. Opinionated has the connotation of strong opinions not based on facts, but also does not imply this is because of a lack of exposure.






                                  share|improve this answer




























                                    2












                                    2








                                    2







                                    Someone mentioned it in a comment, but I'll put it into an answer: the person is "speaking from preconceived notions".



                                    Prejudiced is based on pre-judging, but I think it's not what you want. You can be, for example, racially prejudiced and yet have met people of the other race. The pre-judgement is not on a racial basis, but on an individual basis: you are judging an individual without having met that individual, based on what you perceive about the race to which they belong.



                                    Another option that hasn't been mentioned -- but I also think it does not work in your situation -- is opinionated. Opinionated has the connotation of strong opinions not based on facts, but also does not imply this is because of a lack of exposure.






                                    share|improve this answer















                                    Someone mentioned it in a comment, but I'll put it into an answer: the person is "speaking from preconceived notions".



                                    Prejudiced is based on pre-judging, but I think it's not what you want. You can be, for example, racially prejudiced and yet have met people of the other race. The pre-judgement is not on a racial basis, but on an individual basis: you are judging an individual without having met that individual, based on what you perceive about the race to which they belong.



                                    Another option that hasn't been mentioned -- but I also think it does not work in your situation -- is opinionated. Opinionated has the connotation of strong opinions not based on facts, but also does not imply this is because of a lack of exposure.







                                    share|improve this answer














                                    share|improve this answer



                                    share|improve this answer








                                    edited May 17 '11 at 16:24

























                                    answered May 17 '11 at 15:52









                                    WayneWayne

                                    53647




                                    53647























                                        1














                                        I would call that person a blowhard, possibly an ignorant blowhard if I didn't mind the arguable redundancy.






                                        share|improve this answer
























                                        • Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

                                          – Ernie
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:36











                                        • @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

                                          – chaos
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:54
















                                        1














                                        I would call that person a blowhard, possibly an ignorant blowhard if I didn't mind the arguable redundancy.






                                        share|improve this answer
























                                        • Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

                                          – Ernie
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:36











                                        • @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

                                          – chaos
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:54














                                        1












                                        1








                                        1







                                        I would call that person a blowhard, possibly an ignorant blowhard if I didn't mind the arguable redundancy.






                                        share|improve this answer













                                        I would call that person a blowhard, possibly an ignorant blowhard if I didn't mind the arguable redundancy.







                                        share|improve this answer












                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer










                                        answered Feb 25 '11 at 19:53









                                        chaoschaos

                                        17.9k45584




                                        17.9k45584













                                        • Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

                                          – Ernie
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:36











                                        • @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

                                          – chaos
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:54



















                                        • Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

                                          – Ernie
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:36











                                        • @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

                                          – chaos
                                          Feb 25 '11 at 20:54

















                                        Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

                                        – Ernie
                                        Feb 25 '11 at 20:36





                                        Blowhard doesn't really fit the bill, since it's more about arrogance and bragging than anything. This term is better defined as "all talk and no action".

                                        – Ernie
                                        Feb 25 '11 at 20:36













                                        @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

                                        – chaos
                                        Feb 25 '11 at 20:54





                                        @Ernie: I can see that, but it's always meant to me more something along the lines of "somebody who talks a lot to distract from how they have no actual knowledge to back it up", which is more in line with the question.

                                        – chaos
                                        Feb 25 '11 at 20:54











                                        1














                                        It's probably not what you are looking for, but confabulator is worth a mention. One who confabulates makes up incredibly detailed fantasies that they believe are entirely true, usually based on some very small piece of real information. For instance, you might show them a picture of sand and ask them to describe it. They'll start with sand and then tell you about the palm trees and the blue ocean, and the two people drinking Coronas under a rainbow colored umbrella. The important thing is that this is reality to them. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon.






                                        share|improve this answer
























                                        • confabulator = born advertising copywriter

                                          – Andy Dent
                                          Nov 27 '11 at 19:08
















                                        1














                                        It's probably not what you are looking for, but confabulator is worth a mention. One who confabulates makes up incredibly detailed fantasies that they believe are entirely true, usually based on some very small piece of real information. For instance, you might show them a picture of sand and ask them to describe it. They'll start with sand and then tell you about the palm trees and the blue ocean, and the two people drinking Coronas under a rainbow colored umbrella. The important thing is that this is reality to them. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon.






                                        share|improve this answer
























                                        • confabulator = born advertising copywriter

                                          – Andy Dent
                                          Nov 27 '11 at 19:08














                                        1












                                        1








                                        1







                                        It's probably not what you are looking for, but confabulator is worth a mention. One who confabulates makes up incredibly detailed fantasies that they believe are entirely true, usually based on some very small piece of real information. For instance, you might show them a picture of sand and ask them to describe it. They'll start with sand and then tell you about the palm trees and the blue ocean, and the two people drinking Coronas under a rainbow colored umbrella. The important thing is that this is reality to them. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon.






                                        share|improve this answer













                                        It's probably not what you are looking for, but confabulator is worth a mention. One who confabulates makes up incredibly detailed fantasies that they believe are entirely true, usually based on some very small piece of real information. For instance, you might show them a picture of sand and ask them to describe it. They'll start with sand and then tell you about the palm trees and the blue ocean, and the two people drinking Coronas under a rainbow colored umbrella. The important thing is that this is reality to them. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon.







                                        share|improve this answer












                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer










                                        answered May 17 '11 at 18:21









                                        Kit Z. FoxKit Z. Fox

                                        23.4k1993180




                                        23.4k1993180













                                        • confabulator = born advertising copywriter

                                          – Andy Dent
                                          Nov 27 '11 at 19:08



















                                        • confabulator = born advertising copywriter

                                          – Andy Dent
                                          Nov 27 '11 at 19:08

















                                        confabulator = born advertising copywriter

                                        – Andy Dent
                                        Nov 27 '11 at 19:08





                                        confabulator = born advertising copywriter

                                        – Andy Dent
                                        Nov 27 '11 at 19:08











                                        0















                                        ultracrepidarianism



                                        the habit of giving opinions and advice on matters outside of one’s
                                        knowledge or competence







                                        share|improve this answer






























                                          0















                                          ultracrepidarianism



                                          the habit of giving opinions and advice on matters outside of one’s
                                          knowledge or competence







                                          share|improve this answer




























                                            0












                                            0








                                            0








                                            ultracrepidarianism



                                            the habit of giving opinions and advice on matters outside of one’s
                                            knowledge or competence







                                            share|improve this answer
















                                            ultracrepidarianism



                                            the habit of giving opinions and advice on matters outside of one’s
                                            knowledge or competence








                                            share|improve this answer














                                            share|improve this answer



                                            share|improve this answer








                                            edited Jul 18 '15 at 6:49









                                            Dog Lover

                                            4,87153062




                                            4,87153062










                                            answered Jul 17 '15 at 6:29









                                            MorganMorgan

                                            11




                                            11























                                                0














                                                You might say that person has an unfounded opinion. Baseless also works, as well as unsupported - although the last one is a bit more general, and could refer to lack of support from outside sources.






                                                share|improve this answer




























                                                  0














                                                  You might say that person has an unfounded opinion. Baseless also works, as well as unsupported - although the last one is a bit more general, and could refer to lack of support from outside sources.






                                                  share|improve this answer


























                                                    0












                                                    0








                                                    0







                                                    You might say that person has an unfounded opinion. Baseless also works, as well as unsupported - although the last one is a bit more general, and could refer to lack of support from outside sources.






                                                    share|improve this answer













                                                    You might say that person has an unfounded opinion. Baseless also works, as well as unsupported - although the last one is a bit more general, and could refer to lack of support from outside sources.







                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    share|improve this answer



                                                    share|improve this answer










                                                    answered Jul 18 '15 at 7:03









                                                    Misha RMisha R

                                                    58347




                                                    58347























                                                        0














                                                        The term "armchair" is used a lot. An armchair critic gives opinions on subjects they haven't directly experienced. An armchair mechanic might say something won't work from a mathematical standpoint despite people doing it in their garages all the time. An armchair activist yells at the TV about how we all need to get up and do something about whatever political situation they don't like, but who never gets up to do anything themselves (this case also qualifies as hypocritical).



                                                        This isn't quite the same as your example though. In your example, you're talking about a purely subjective thing, while the use of "armchair" tends to be more objective. I'm not sure that "armchair pie-taster" works as well.



                                                        Of note, just because someone hasn't tried something doesn't mean they can't objectively determine that they would subjectively hate it. As an extreme example, I can be pretty confident that I would dislike getting shot with a gun without getting shot first. Similarly, I can use my experience in other fields of study to make a pretty good argument for a field of study I don't have experience with.






                                                        share|improve this answer




























                                                          0














                                                          The term "armchair" is used a lot. An armchair critic gives opinions on subjects they haven't directly experienced. An armchair mechanic might say something won't work from a mathematical standpoint despite people doing it in their garages all the time. An armchair activist yells at the TV about how we all need to get up and do something about whatever political situation they don't like, but who never gets up to do anything themselves (this case also qualifies as hypocritical).



                                                          This isn't quite the same as your example though. In your example, you're talking about a purely subjective thing, while the use of "armchair" tends to be more objective. I'm not sure that "armchair pie-taster" works as well.



                                                          Of note, just because someone hasn't tried something doesn't mean they can't objectively determine that they would subjectively hate it. As an extreme example, I can be pretty confident that I would dislike getting shot with a gun without getting shot first. Similarly, I can use my experience in other fields of study to make a pretty good argument for a field of study I don't have experience with.






                                                          share|improve this answer


























                                                            0












                                                            0








                                                            0







                                                            The term "armchair" is used a lot. An armchair critic gives opinions on subjects they haven't directly experienced. An armchair mechanic might say something won't work from a mathematical standpoint despite people doing it in their garages all the time. An armchair activist yells at the TV about how we all need to get up and do something about whatever political situation they don't like, but who never gets up to do anything themselves (this case also qualifies as hypocritical).



                                                            This isn't quite the same as your example though. In your example, you're talking about a purely subjective thing, while the use of "armchair" tends to be more objective. I'm not sure that "armchair pie-taster" works as well.



                                                            Of note, just because someone hasn't tried something doesn't mean they can't objectively determine that they would subjectively hate it. As an extreme example, I can be pretty confident that I would dislike getting shot with a gun without getting shot first. Similarly, I can use my experience in other fields of study to make a pretty good argument for a field of study I don't have experience with.






                                                            share|improve this answer













                                                            The term "armchair" is used a lot. An armchair critic gives opinions on subjects they haven't directly experienced. An armchair mechanic might say something won't work from a mathematical standpoint despite people doing it in their garages all the time. An armchair activist yells at the TV about how we all need to get up and do something about whatever political situation they don't like, but who never gets up to do anything themselves (this case also qualifies as hypocritical).



                                                            This isn't quite the same as your example though. In your example, you're talking about a purely subjective thing, while the use of "armchair" tends to be more objective. I'm not sure that "armchair pie-taster" works as well.



                                                            Of note, just because someone hasn't tried something doesn't mean they can't objectively determine that they would subjectively hate it. As an extreme example, I can be pretty confident that I would dislike getting shot with a gun without getting shot first. Similarly, I can use my experience in other fields of study to make a pretty good argument for a field of study I don't have experience with.







                                                            share|improve this answer












                                                            share|improve this answer



                                                            share|improve this answer










                                                            answered Sep 25 '15 at 21:12









                                                            MichaelSMichaelS

                                                            40929




                                                            40929























                                                                0














                                                                hubris



                                                                Merriam-Webster



                                                                exaggerated pride or self-confidence



                                                                "He exhibited a fair amount of hubris by ignoring his generals."






                                                                share|improve this answer




























                                                                  0














                                                                  hubris



                                                                  Merriam-Webster



                                                                  exaggerated pride or self-confidence



                                                                  "He exhibited a fair amount of hubris by ignoring his generals."






                                                                  share|improve this answer


























                                                                    0












                                                                    0








                                                                    0







                                                                    hubris



                                                                    Merriam-Webster



                                                                    exaggerated pride or self-confidence



                                                                    "He exhibited a fair amount of hubris by ignoring his generals."






                                                                    share|improve this answer













                                                                    hubris



                                                                    Merriam-Webster



                                                                    exaggerated pride or self-confidence



                                                                    "He exhibited a fair amount of hubris by ignoring his generals."







                                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                                    share|improve this answer



                                                                    share|improve this answer










                                                                    answered 10 mins ago









                                                                    JackspaceJackspace

                                                                    1656




                                                                    1656























                                                                        -1














                                                                        Jumping to conclusions


                                                                        Example:

                                                                        Jumper: "I have a strong opinion about X."

                                                                        Clear thinker: "Can you give a definition of X?"

                                                                        Jumper: "No. I've reached a conclusion without knowing the basics."






                                                                        share|improve this answer
























                                                                        • Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                                                                          – SuperBiasedMan
                                                                          Mar 8 '16 at 20:50
















                                                                        -1














                                                                        Jumping to conclusions


                                                                        Example:

                                                                        Jumper: "I have a strong opinion about X."

                                                                        Clear thinker: "Can you give a definition of X?"

                                                                        Jumper: "No. I've reached a conclusion without knowing the basics."






                                                                        share|improve this answer
























                                                                        • Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                                                                          – SuperBiasedMan
                                                                          Mar 8 '16 at 20:50














                                                                        -1












                                                                        -1








                                                                        -1







                                                                        Jumping to conclusions


                                                                        Example:

                                                                        Jumper: "I have a strong opinion about X."

                                                                        Clear thinker: "Can you give a definition of X?"

                                                                        Jumper: "No. I've reached a conclusion without knowing the basics."






                                                                        share|improve this answer













                                                                        Jumping to conclusions


                                                                        Example:

                                                                        Jumper: "I have a strong opinion about X."

                                                                        Clear thinker: "Can you give a definition of X?"

                                                                        Jumper: "No. I've reached a conclusion without knowing the basics."







                                                                        share|improve this answer












                                                                        share|improve this answer



                                                                        share|improve this answer










                                                                        answered Mar 8 '16 at 19:12









                                                                        Diego MoralesDiego Morales

                                                                        1




                                                                        1













                                                                        • Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                                                                          – SuperBiasedMan
                                                                          Mar 8 '16 at 20:50



















                                                                        • Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                                                                          – SuperBiasedMan
                                                                          Mar 8 '16 at 20:50

















                                                                        Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                                                                        – SuperBiasedMan
                                                                        Mar 8 '16 at 20:50





                                                                        Adding some more information to answers like quoting and citing sources makes them much better.

                                                                        – SuperBiasedMan
                                                                        Mar 8 '16 at 20:50





                                                                        protected by user140086 Jul 13 '16 at 7:39



                                                                        Thank you for your interest in this question.
                                                                        Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



                                                                        Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?



                                                                        Popular posts from this blog

                                                                        How did Captain America manage to do this?

                                                                        迪纳利

                                                                        南乌拉尔铁路局