So because people have been wrong for a long time, you should continue the process?

To consider Buddhism to be anti intellectual is... interesting. And revealing as to your own personal biases about what you consider to be intellectual or not.

To me, it looks like you are too caught up in dualistic thought to understand what Buddhism is ultimately about. Making ideas compete against each other, saying this is right, and this is wrong, you would have no shot at grasping Buddhism's teachings on a deep level. There is no need to blame a philosophy for your misunderstanding of it. Or to confuse your version of truth for a universal truth. "Basic truth" mmmhmmm haha

and to compare human consciousness to a tree being blown by wind is.... interesting lol I just think it's clear that you define self a particular way and are projecting your disbelief on Buddhism and Greek philosophies by calling them "anti intellectual" and "anti human".

If who you are is constantly changing, then who are you? Is not this "you" becoming a different "you" everytime you change? Humans are infinitely malleable depending on your environment and outside circumstances. If who you are depends on what goes on outside and around you, how can you say you have a permanent self? You're simply a created player, conforming based on what you were told was right and what you were told was wrong, and what you believed. Saying a permanent self isn't "real" isn't saying that change equals unreality, it's saying that in reality there is no "permanent" self, because that "self" is just a constantly changing story being told depending on what environment you're in during that present moment.

I'm no Buddha or anything, and not a "PHD" person, but pretty sure there are clear writings and words from the Buddha about this exact topic, and I'd think a "PHD" person would be able to understand what was being said very easily.