text_original: There similarly exists a real philosophic bias and affection for the whole ascetic ideal; there should be no illusions on this score. Both these feelings, as has been said, belong to the type; if a philosopher lacks both of them, then he is — you may be certain of it — never any  thing but a "pseudo." What does this mean?
text_transcription: THERE SIMILARLY EXISTS THE REAL PHILOSOPHIC BIAS AND AFFECTION FOR THE WHOLE ASCETIC IDEAL THERE SHOULD BE NO ILLUSIONS ON THIS SCORE BOTH THESE FEELINGS AS HAS BEEN SAID BELONG TO THE TYPE IF A PHILOSOPHER LACKS BOTH OF THEM THEN HE IS YOU MAY BE CERTAIN OF IT NEVER ANYTHING BUT A PSEUDO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN
phonemes: ðɛɹ sˈɪmɪlɚli ɛɡzˈɪsts ɐ ɹˈiːəl fˌɪləsˈɑːfɪk bˈaɪəs ænd ɐfˈɛkʃən fɚðə hˈoʊl ɐsˈɛɾɪk aɪdˈiəl; ðɛɹ ʃˌʊd biː nˈoʊ ɪlˈuːʒənz ˌɔn ðɪs skˈɔːɹ. bˈoʊθ ðiːz fˈiːlɪŋz, æz hˈæzbiːn sˈɛd, bᵻlˈɔŋ tə ðə tˈaɪp; ɪf ɐ fɪlˈɑːsəfɚ lˈæks bˈoʊθ ʌv ðˌɛm, ðˈɛn hiː ɪz — juː mˈeɪ biː sˈɜːʔn̩ ʌv ɪt — nˈɛvɚɹ ˌɛni θˈɪŋ bˌʌt ˈeɪ "sˈuːdoʊ." wˌʌt dˈʌz ðɪs mˈiːn?