Ignoring the fact that it was pointed out elsewhere in the comments that pg has a BA in Philosophy (apparently confirmed by wikipedia), this assumes that someone without training has nothing worthwhile to contribute[1]. While that may end up being true in the majority of cases, I don't think it's valid to apply the term to individuals just because they don't have credentials, in the absence of other evidence. I do like Merriam Webster's definition[2].

1: I'm not trying to argue with you. You plainly qualified it as a clarification, not a position. I just think your definition falls short in some respects, so thought I would clarify your clarification. :)

2: http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/pseudo-intellec...