1. "Fake it till' you make it"
The most important thing to realize here is that faking is considered as the logical path towards 'making' it; there is no way around it (at least to some extent, it is suggested). PhD students become true experts in this. They thus know less than they pretend; so does other academic personnel, by the way. There is a solution for this theater. You can stop faking and start reading the books you say you know. These texts are probably going to help you escaping your sorry state. Another option is to keep on faking and to gain true expertise in it. You end up being an expert faker, along with the man or the woman who is sitting next to you at the PhD conference you are attending.
2. "Choose your enemies wisely"
The subtext of this advice is that you should not critique anyone who could be helpful on the rocky and uncertain paths of your academic career. It's the network, stupid! The result is that one ends up critiquing those academics who are very far away - geographically or epistemologically. The academics from another discipline, or who are dead, or who live on the other side of the Atlantic can be critiqued at will. Tear their work apart, kill their arguments! This gives a critical edge to your work, without having to worry too much that this will affect you. Those academics who are near to you, no matter how mediocre they truly are, are to be treated with the utmost caution. Your future job may depend on them. If you do launch a critique to those of the same field or country, make sure that the person in question is at least a competitor for the same job.
3. "Don't pretend you are a Big Shot; You're Still a Little Worm"
Hands down: this is our favorite advice. It's is all about hierarchy and knowing your place, really: the worm is a lowly creature, so that's where you are placed then, at the bottom. The value of your argument or your work is not what makes you a little worm in the end (although it could be just that, if your expert faking breaks down after all). You are a little worm (not a big one, mind you) because you are a PhD student. Your lack of authority derives from that, not from the value of your intellectual endeavor. You can write a daring and convincing piece of academic research, but the stakes are pretty high you can't defend or publish it that way, 'Daring', 'innovative', 'brilliant' are public labels reserved for those long enough in the business. The pecking order is clear on this one: professors know for sure, students think they know. Given all the fakers in the business, it's not that big of a surprise, of course.