This sounds like how I would write when I was on adderall. I mean, what the hell is this statement?

"I love questions that seem naughty in some way — for example, by seeming counterintuitive or overambitious or heterodox. Ideally all three. This essay is an example. Writing about the best essay implies there is such a thing, which pseudo-intellectuals will dismiss as reductive, though it follows necessarily from the possibility of one essay being better than another."

That's not what "follows necessarily" means Mr. Graham. Are these pseudo-intellectual spectres literally just you strawmanning your own counterfactual? I can't imagine you actually listening to anyone you would call a pseudo-intellectual.