Theo, verbosity and eloquence are two different things.
Theo, verbosity and eloquence are two different things.
"Firstly, a person with an IQ of 60 is defined as retarded if I am not wrong."
<70
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Re: Is there any real benefit in having a high intelligence?
Sir, do the concepts in this article apply to you?Originally Posted by Heimdallr
I guess I could throw in my experience of this. Perhaps someone finds it worth the read. Firstly, a person with an IQ of 60 is defined as retarded if I am not wrong. A person with this little intelligence will be hard pressed to find a job that is suitable. In fact, I do not think that you can truly be a secretary with an IQ of 60. The jobs that is suitable for a retard is essentially of the "move these stones and put them there" variety. The idea of a person like this managing to get through medical school (or infact any form of education on a university)is laughable. Of course, you do not have to be a genius, but I would not allow anyone with an IQ below 115 to even think of attending medical school or studying higher levels of math, physics or chemistry on a decent university, because frankly, you do not belong there. Even then, you will have to prepared work your ass off. Other educations on university might be more managable. This can be illustrated by the fact that it is not uncommon that engineering students have to work 12 hours+ a day, particularily in math, and still a lot of them fail the exams. My class mates in medical school probably do not have to put in that much time , but this might be because we do not have any bad students, and everyone is, if not highly intelligent, at least very motivated. This can be compared with some educations where people only have to study 20 hours a week including lectures, and with mediocre students...
To adress your point of why I believe that the education is relevant, as this point is the thing that prevents a 60IQ person from becoming a doctor. Firstly, at least in Sweden, a farily large amount of the doctors will be involved in research. To get a more qualifying work on a hospital that is linked to a university, it is essentially required to get a phD , and then spend part of the time in research of some sort. To be able to do this, you need a thourough education in medicine. You must also be able to handle more unexpected situations, and to solve these, you need to have more knowledge than the bare minimum required to perform the aspects of the job that you see on TV. Even if you do not remember everything from your education, it is often necessary to have heard of a very extensive amount of material, as you can then react in a completely different way. Instead of having no idea of what to do, you have a vague understanding of what you just encountered, and know where to look if you have to refresh your understanding. Not to mention that you can put it in a greater context, as what you just encountered can be fitted in a context just because you know a lot more than what is being asked of you. Lastly, it is also a part of the job to read about, and understand, the results of future research. This is connected to the point I made above, as you need a farily extensive base of knowledge to be able to truly understand it.
This took a bit more time than expected, so I guess I will have to save my reply to the original subject of this thread until the next time I am hit by an overwhelming urge to procrastinate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egolessness
I realized the other day that narcissism/megalomania (a side effect of crossed E and I) were akin to maintained exhaultation of the ego. The object is confused with the subject, and vice-versa. After some thought, I considered the possibility that a cross of sensation with intuition would emphasize the superego over the ego and the id. Ditto for the id and thinking crossed with feeling. After some brief consideration of Freud's work, I came upon the concept of Egolessness, described in the article above. I believe Egolessness is side effect of judgment crossed with perception, the trait of genius.
I hadn't noticed it before, but yes I see it now. I'm even feeling that reactionary quality that wells up in me when I interact with a person of your type. You are not an INTJ, Heimdallr. You are an INTx.
I'd like to see a portrait of you, because I'm quite certain you bear a curious resemblance to Einstein.
...LOL, I even called you "sir". Yep, definitely INTx. It's as if just reading your text took me to a supernatural plane where you're a guru of sorts...? The same effect as reading Einstein's work. The constancy of perspective is just baffling....
smart people are boring.
I think smart people are easily bored. I am never bored.
Actually, I don't think they are very happy in general. Not the ones I know anyway.
<--- Me pouring out all my love on you!
Some days its just not worth chewing through the restraints.
Sorry for misinterpreting you. It's just that people all too often use the "hiding from your own insecurities" clause to counter and completely dissolve your obloquies (new word I just learned today!) As if only insecure and unhappy people criticize and argue...I was actually being genuineLet's stop here with the insults and forget about what I had said.
High intelligence won't get you popularity and the like. That's not what it's used for.
My communication skills evidently leave much to be desired.
*kicks vehemently at semantics*
(edited because I messed up the quote.... d'oh!)
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
thiuowhkjs
The saying "Ignorance is a bliss" certainly contains some truth. A less intelligent person will not be less likely to discern the troubles in the world. The very same person will also be unable to end up in an existensial depression, as that requires a certain level of intelligence and that you read the wrong litterature... Not to mention that our society do not exactly reward intelligence above the level that makes you a skilled worker. I once stumbled across an interesting article on this on the net.
http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/optimum_intelligence.htm
The idea of that the income becomes higher as the IQ increase is a blatant lie, or more accurately, a half truth. This is true, but only up to a certain level. I think I saw a number on this once. If I am not wrong, the income in fact began to drop as soon as you began to approach genius levels (The limit is betwen about 148 and 160 depending on whose criteria you use). The Jung quote on the bottom is brilliant.
However, this is in many ways an unneeded discussion. An intelligent person can not find happiness in any other way than by being intelligent and using it. The only way to become happy is to be who you are. Why should I care if the majority of humanity can find happiness in being a nothing more than a consumer of entertainment and junk food? I can't, and I can't change the way my mind works with anything less than lobotomy. As that does not sound particualirly appealing, the only way to move on is to accept who you are. There is nothing worse than worrying about things that you can not change.
tcaudilllg:
Yes and no. I see myself, and all other humans, as parts of the whole, that is entire universe. Our minds are separated, I can't know what another person is thinking or see this persons perspective of reality, or to precise, this persons intepretation of reality, but we are all part of the same world and subject to its laws. That does not mean that we can easily do away with the border between the mind and the world. I know that I can't do this. I might sometimes experience a feeling of it while listening to certain types of music at night, or when taking a walk at night when it's pitch dark and the cold wind is blowing in my face though. I am a vehement opponent of solipsism, which states that the the world is a part and creation of my mind. I believe in the complete opposite, partly of the same reasons that make me dislike the modern idea of "individualism", that is the bizarre urge for the modern man to have an "image" and a "unique" "identity".
I can not but help to believe that your post was ironic though... There are also some holes in the reasoning that makes it hard to follow if it is in fact serious. Lately I have actually considered if I should post a photo though
The more intelligent you are, the less likely you are to be a chick-magnet and so on ...
Yea, unless its finals week and your in their group, and the projects are due. You'll be the fucking man.
thing.
Edited for gayness.
I can't be with anyone who isn't intelligent.
you know what, i only skimmed the post the first time, and i just read the whole thing. I am actually touched because you display the loneliness that is not uncommon to many. whatever differences exist between yourself and others (this being a greatly simplified statement not meaning to imply a dichotomy) may cause frustration and anger but it would not really be pertinent or sensible to direct the anger toward anyone else, if not because we have no agency of what we are given at birth, then because the potential of humanity would be lessened by the redirection of your efforts.dude i thought you were working on completing your own language. isnt that stimulating?
overachievers....
I would like to know what you mean by "What's important in how to let humanity realize its ultimate purpose in the universe."
I will keep that in mind when responding.OK.. thanks, THAT sure explained it well. Rolling Eyes I need more than a dictionary to read your posts. I think you're the only on here who makes me want to wack my head against the monitor, or study for my chemistry test...IN simple temrs: "General and omnified utility."I would like to know what you mean by "What's important in how to let humanity realize its ultimate purpose in the universe."It is not challenging for me.dude i thought you were working on completing your own language. isnt that stimulating?
A portion of it is BS.Well, I hate to say it. But the post makes little to no sense.
I never claimed to being a good speller, ostensibly I am a horrible speller(and English is not my first language).
I shall try to expatiate understanding of my views, das heißt, by simplifying my vocabulary.
The fundamental question posed here is whether exemplary Intelligence is beneficiary to the race of oikofugic dunces (not referring to everyone just the people that have a below average IQ say 80-90?) that inhabit the earth. This question is prone to an answer that leads itself to internal inaccuracies, because the answer would tend to be merely an opinion. In layman's terms: It depends on what you find important. Sure this is a simplified approach to the matter but it is very useful. For do the vast majority of humans really want to understand the universe in a completely fundamental way? Most of the aptitudes that come with high intelligence (150 +) are not things that the "normal" person would care about. I can not say that ones ability to create beautiful music is not any less "genius" then say Einstein's works.
The one thing that I can think of as being beneficiary is that one with exemplary intelligence has the ability to comprehend much more, and understand the most esoteric things in this world. I am no longer certain whether higher thinking abilities are gifts as much as they are curses.
For all I know, the ant I see on my computer table before me could be more...how should I say..."efficient in living" than I. I say "efficient in living", because "more intelligent", "more coherent" and the likes, do not make sense.
Sorry, but are you kidding? This is a forum. Ultimately, the aim of all postings here is to communicate something. What exactly do you wish to communicate? That you know a lot of difficult words? And what is your issue with normal language? An overuse of difficult words and esoteric expressions is the distinguishing mark of the pseudoscientist, the quack and the intellectual peacock; and by talking like them you risk being taken for one of them. Personally, I give you the benefit of the doubt.I shall not compromise my views by using duckspeak...
"To have petulance"?! And don't get me started on "sb. tends to have a petulance of some sort in believing something". Do you mean that since most people are irritable anyway they end up believing certain things? It's not even clear whether you mean that "most people" do or don't believe in whatever you're getting at in the next few words. Which seems to be more or less this:Most people tend to have this ... petulance of some sort in believing that...
...which means what?...that data explaining how knowledge of a subject could be obtained occurs at the same time as a variety of objects to which a single general word (such as dog) applies, but which have nothing in common but the name.
If you are indeed an overachiever, then you deserve our commiseration; a lack of intellectual stimulation can be painful. Many of my friends have been there. It can make people defensive. Such a view as yours is excusable in someone very, very, VERY young. In case you're under 25, skip the following paragraph.and their failure to process data holistically truely amazes me ad misericordiam (compassion and hence sympathy for their stupidity that is)
Oh GET off your plinth. So you get to decide whether other people are stupid or not?
So you mean this: When people deal with logical paradoxes, they talk at great length about untruthfulness? That would amaze me too, I admit.... Even more amazing is the mendacity that people expatiate on when dealing with logical paradoxes.
Which problems? You haven't made this clear.What human beings need right now is a language that can circumvent such problems.
And then you promise to simplify your vocabulary, only to go on and use the words "oikofugic". Now you cannot tell me that this was an accident. Where on earth did you dig that word up? Oikofugic? Hello? This is NOT normal language. And again you talk of humanity in general as "dunces"... so again, if you're over 25, read the paragraph I told you to skip if you're younger than that.
I liked the last paragraph. Clear, logical, poignant.
Aha! Got it! You've probably read this: http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/tac/tac43/uselesse.htm.
But your sentence makes even less sense now. "Oikofugic dunces"? So you think that mankind is a race of idiots given to obsessive wanderings? I take it then that you hate travelling?
and once again a conglomeration of souls try to abolish raison d'être
*sigh*
The word "conglomeration" doesn't make you sound smart, Pedro. "Congregation" would have been a better choice.
Aha! Got it! You've probably read this: http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/tac/tac43/uselesse.htm.
But your sentence makes even less sense now. "Oikofugic dunces"? So you think that mankind is a race of idiots given to obsessive wanderings? I take it then that you hate travelling?You would likely consider what I think to be my NORMAL vocabulary as not normal language... I do not see any problems with the use of oikofugic, and no I have never read that website. When I said "oikofugic dunces" I meant the lower potion of society, drunks (not to infer that drunks are idiots but just act like such), et cetera.And then you promise to simplify your vocabulary, only to go on and use the words "oikofugic". Now you cannot tell me that this was an accident. Where on earth did you dig that word up? Oikofugic? Hello? This is NOT normal language. And again you talk of humanity in general as "dunces"... so again, if you're over 25, read the paragraph I told you to skip if you're younger than that.Only after having to revise it a number of times.I liked the last paragraph. Clear, logical, poignant.
I just looked at that site and thought it was quite humourous.
But I make no apology. There are still people setting off into the hills who cannot utter a single word of more than seven syllables. This, despite the now well-established fact that one or two big words, uttered quietly and rhythmically, can abolish fatigue, rewarm the extremities, and raise the blood sugar by an amount equivalent to 300g of Kendal Mint Cake. Not to mention the effect on the knees. Why, only last week I encountered a Young Person, sheltering in an isolated bothy, who was close to collapse as a result of simple lack of vocabulary. Had I not been at hand to teach her the meaning of 'meupareunia', heaven alone knows what might have become of her.
Crepuscule is not an uncommon word. I use words as a means to describe something better, not to display some pretentious egotism that I have.'crepuscular'
These monstrosities are quite pulchritudinous, Theodosis. Concordantly, the probability of yours already being cognizant of them is significant (My own pathetic shot at verbosity):
pneumonoultramicroscopic-silicovolcanoconiosis
hippopotomonstrosesquipedalianism (Ironically, the participle of an adjective pertaining to a long word)
floccinaucinihilipilification
One (or more) thing(s) is(/are) for sure, Theodosis. You don't suffer from hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia, epistemophobia, gnosiophobia, graphophobia, kainophobia, kathisophobia, logophobia, panophobia, phronemophobia, sophophobia, thaasophobia or verbophobia.
(Yes, I had to look that up. I usually suffer from encyclopediindigeophobia)
Yes, I like long words :wink: .
Beware! Nerd genes on the prowl.
INFj - The Holy CPU Saint
Dishonorary INFp
Baah
(Very good place for emoticons. Right-click on the one you want and select "properties" for direct link)
Edited for gayness.
Re: Is there any real benefit in having a high intelligence?
Benefit may come if you make yourself aware of how to use your high intelligence for your own benefit. Heh. A rock alone means nothing, but a rock in the hand of a soldier charges warfare. That is, intelligence is a tool, so if it is higher than average, and you know how to use it as well or better than the average guy, then you may be better off.
thing.
I only said that intelligence correlates positively with income. Not specified anything in relation to the linearity or whatever of the corresponding function.
Really? Please explain. I am an INTJ, but your view of the world is drastically different from mine. You seem to border between J and P, if only because you seem to have no need to rush to conclusion. (which is in my experience a defining theme in INTJs)There are also some holes in the reasoning that makes it hard to follow if it is in fact serious. Lately I have actually considered if I should post a photo though
I'll have to think about what you said though. I wish you could make the case for socionics to other people whom you are most like, though.
But I guess in that case we'd need a mathematics for it, wouldn't we...?
EDIT: Is socionics described by math? I have relatively little understanding about the symbology end that Rocky knows so well.
OK, but what information do you want to convey with the word "oikofugic"? That is what I'm getting at. Nobody understands the word: therefore its use hinders rather than aids communication: therefore its use is highly questionable. And what's more, even once you know what it means it's still hard to understand what you mean. This is me giving you the benefit of the doubt, BTW, because my first impression was that this sentence doesn't actually make any sense at all. Why do you call drunks and the lower portion of society "oikofugic"? In what sense are the poor "given to obsessively wander around"? The part of society that is oikofugic is the part that has money. Children are oikofugic. Cats are. Dogs are. Sparrows and houseflies are. But the poor?
And even if this point were clear, then what exactly is the point you're trying to make in the context of this thread? The only one that comes to mind is this: "If only the drunk, the poor and the illiterate were content with sitting still in their own rooms, dammit, then they'd read a few books and smarten up."
And what's with "the lower portion of society"? Are you aware that this sounds just a tiny little bit snobbish?
Well, all that work paid off.Only after having to revise it a number of times.
Glad you liked the website. I liked "Zumbooruk (n): A small cannon fired from the back of a camel" and "Gynotikolobomassophilia (n): A love of nibbling women's earlobes".
That was me. Forgot to log in.(thank you, Rocky).
A rock alone does have the same value (non-monetary value) as the rock in the hand of the soldier. One cannot judge an item’s value based completely on the use of that item, compared to its potential use.Benefit may come if you make yourself aware of how to use your high intelligence for your own benefit. Heh. A rock alone means nothing, but a rock in the hand of a soldier charges warfare. That is, intelligence is a tool, so if it is higher than average, and you know how to use it as well or better than the average guy, then you may be better off.
I doubt that you know what the hell you are talking about.These monstrosities are quite pulchritudinous, Theodosis.(My own pathetic shot at verbosity):Concordantly, the probability of yours already being cognizant of them is significant
pneumonoultramicroscopic-silicovolcanoconiosis
hippopotomonstrosesquipedalianism (Ironically, the participle of an adjective pertaining to a long word)
floccinaucinihilipilification
One (or more) thing(s) is(/are) for sure, Theodosis. You don't suffer from hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia, epistemophobia, gnosiophobia, graphophobia, kainophobia, kathisophobia, logophobia, panophobia, phronemophobia, sophophobia, thaasophobia or verbophobia.
(Yes, I had to look that up. I usually suffer from encyclopediindigeophobia)
Yes, I like long words Wink .That is illogical... It would be better to word it like: The pulchritudinous monstrocities....These monstrosities are quite pulchritudinousVERY AWKWARD....Concordantly, the probability of yours already being cognizant of them is significantStop quoting the dictionary, it is more like an omnibus then a logical and meaningful sentence.You don't suffer from hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia, epistemophobia, gnosiophobia, graphophobia, kainophobia, kathisophobia, logophobia, panophobia, phronemophobia, sophophobia, thaasophobia or verbophobia.
The lower potion of society is the nice way of calling them stupid... unless you think calling them retards is more polite? I was stereotyping intellectually deficient people as people that are just obambulating around without goals to aim for or morals to adhere to. I was not referring to their economic status. The point I was trying to make was that "these" people (with low levels of intelligence) do not and would not care about the "gifts" of having a high intelligence.OK, but what information do you want to convey with the word "oikofugic"? That is what I'm getting at. Nobody understands the word: therefore its use hinders rather than aids communication: therefore its use is highly questionable. And what's more, even once you know what it means it's still hard to understand what you mean. This is me giving you the benefit of the doubt, BTW, because my first impression was that this sentence doesn't actually make any sense at all. Why do you call drunks and the lower portion of society "oikofugic"? In what sense are the poor "given to obsessively wander around"? The part of society that is oikofugic is the part that has money. Children are oikofugic. Cats are. Dogs are. Sparrows and houseflies are. But the poor?
And even if this point were clear, then what exactly is the point you're trying to make in the context of this thread? The only one that comes to mind is this: "If only the drunk, the poor and the illiterate were content with sitting still in their own rooms, dammit, then they'd read a few books and smarten up."
And what's with "the lower portion of society"? Are you aware that this sounds just a tiny little bit snobbish?
shouldn't a guy with a 170+ IQ be advanced enough to not resort to such sterotypes?
That is a stereotype itself. It is the pattern I found to be fairly accurate... so I had no problem using it.shouldn't a guy with a 170+ IQ be advanced enough to not resort to such sterotypes?
I doubt you understood the point of my post at all, Theodosis.
My hypothesis was correct, as proven by Theodosis's response to my post.
Just because you are unable to percieve their motivations does not mean that they are nonexistent. I have yet to meet a person without some kind of goal or moral standard. Even if the goal is "Build social connections and have fun" and the morals "Don't do anything I don't want to".
Beware! Nerd genes on the prowl.
INFj - The Holy CPU Saint
Dishonorary INFp
Baah
(Very good place for emoticons. Right-click on the one you want and select "properties" for direct link)
I do not consider those to be true goals, or moral standards.Just because you are unable to percieve their motivations does not mean that they are nonexistent. I have yet to meet a person without some kind of goal or moral standard. Even if the goal is "Build social connections and have fun" and the morals "Don't do anything I don't want to".
Define "true".
He was pulling your leg. Your calling his sentences awkward is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black. EDIT: I re-read those postings again and I correct myself. Your sentences are awkward, his aren't.
No, it isn't.
Calling anyone a retard is offensive.
So "intelligent" people are the ones with goals and morals? And people with low levels of intelligence are stupid, amoral retards who aimlessly wander around? And even if they could be intelligent they wouldn't want to?
Now I just wonder what portion of society you think you belong to.
Agree. Define what you think are "true goals, or moral standards".Define "true".
I throw that idea out. Damn cacophrenia screwing with my head.So "intelligent" people are the ones with goals and morals? And people with low levels of intelligence are stupid, amoral retards who aimlessly wander around? And even if they could be intelligent they wouldn't want to?
I am not going to do that.Agree. Define what you think are "true goals, or moral standards".If you want me to be completely honest and not censure it then the following is my response:Now I just wonder what portion of society you think you belong to.
I do not belong to any potion of society... I consider myself to be a complete and fundamental entity separate of the human race.
rteuihgdks
It's a trap. A double-edged sword, so to speak.
/Cone rudely butting in on conversations
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote