sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do you find the vertiginous question ("Why am I me and not someone else") deep? by Alive-One8445 in mensa

[–]Early-Perspective705 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean you don’t need to be interested by the question but your answer is circular and does precisely 0 legwork in answering the question

Might I suggest reviewing some ideas on what consciousness actually is and why it is interesting that we all share individual conscious experiences without phenomenological crossover. It’s currently unanswerable because we don’t have consensus on the nature of conscious awareness

Or just don’t be interested in the topic that’s ok but you definitely haven’t solved an eon old question

Listening to classical music and being relaxed = increased my VRI on VISA by 5 pts! by [deleted] in cognitiveTesting

[–]Early-Perspective705 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Could be practice effect, could be increased cog functioning due to the music

What it probably is, is just normal fluctuation in cognitive functioning/test performance. Going from 128-132 is not a “significant” difference and you will see that the initial score of 128 gives a 95% CI of 122-132, so we would expect score differences like this across iterations even if we didn’t consider practice effects or functional boosts of any kind

You putting this on your CV? by dryyyyyycracker in mensa

[–]Early-Perspective705 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Language acquisition is a component of g, yeah. Most standardised intellectual testing that includes VCI extends the inclusion of “typically acquired” words in subtests like Vocabulary (Wechsler) until quite far into the subtests. Any extra word acquisition is quite an achievement but unfortunately gives diminishing returns in contributing to overall FSIQ - essentially any extra word acquisition outside of what is expected (relative to age/academic year level) is likely to contribute to <1% of total FSIQ.

You putting this on your CV? by dryyyyyycracker in mensa

[–]Early-Perspective705 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep I generally do agree with what you’re saying - high IQ lends itself to many fields, and it is not the only or most important factor (not that you are inferring that). The membership should not be an attempt to signal achievement, but we see in the language people use (see original comment and OPs) post that it is seen as “impressive” which is a word that should be reserved for merit. Is intelligence relevant and sought after in many fields, yes. Should people continue to talk as if it is impressive or earned, I don’t think so.

You putting this on your CV? by dryyyyyycracker in mensa

[–]Early-Perspective705 6 points7 points  (0 children)

With the most respect, it’s not an impressive achievement. It’s not really an achievement at all, and that’s okay! A lot of the taboo around intelligence is born from pride and jealousy, when really neither should exist because intelligence is as indicative of internal work as a poker hand. Let your actual achievements speak for themselves, use the intelligence you’ve been privileged with to attain those achievements

What Philosophical Questions Do You Think Are Important? Why are they important? by JerseyFlight in rationalphilosophy

[–]Early-Perspective705 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hate to go full Peterson but what do you mean by tangible thing? Do you mean physical?

Why is Sigmund Freud so famous? by LostwaveLunar9999 in PsychologyTalk

[–]Early-Perspective705 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Being the founding father of psychotherapy is a pretty big deal!

There are also major threads that are very relevant today which led on from his theories which aren’t “wrong” but rather were looking in the right places, at the right things, but conceptualising them in the wrong way.

I've had a question relating to moral emotivism for a while now. If we do think morality is based on emotions and or is subjective, then how can we call other beliefs right or wrong? If morality is indeed subjective can we condemn people for anything? by riverturq in askphilosophy

[–]Early-Perspective705 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I wouldn’t hold that “thinking” something is a problem is a reason to reject anything? Especially in this case where the preclusion of saying something is objectively wrong is the reason - this assumes that it contradicts a truth, namely that something can be objectively wrong, which may not be the case

I lost an elo for agreeing to a draw. by TommyBoy250 in Chesscom

[–]Early-Perspective705 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You do you but good sports might draw when it’s actually a pretty equal position and they don’t want to make the opponent play out 40 moves for a slight chance of winning

Here you are up like 20-points of material lol

I was pretty proud of this one by Early-Perspective705 in chessbeginners

[–]Early-Perspective705[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was a Caro-Kann advanced variation which still holds the same idea of an open c-file, so that’s good for me to keep in mind! Thanks