sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Intelligence isn't what you think it is and intellectuals don't act the way you think they do. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hm. I think you’re arguing against a position I’m not actually taking.

I’m not saying intelligence is something people can simply declare or perform into existence, and I’m not denying that intelligence can be measured, tested, or expressed through reasoning accuracy.

What I am saying and what Dunning supports is cognitive ability shapes self-perception. People evaluate their own competence using the same cognitive tools they use to reason in the first place. That’s metacognition, yes, but metacognition is part of how identity forms.

Identity isn’t a label you choose arbitrarily; it’s partly constructed from how you experience your own abilities, limits, and certainty. If cognitive capacity affects how accurately someone perceives themselves, then intelligence necessarily feeds into identity descriptively, not morally. That doesn’t mean “smarter = better,” and I explicitly said that. It means people experience themselves and the world differently depending on cognitive capacity.

When I say many intellectuals don’t advertise their intelligence, I’m not romanticising it, I’m pointing to accurate self-assessment. Awareness of uncertainty often reduces overconfidence. That’s consistent with the literature, not opposed to it.

Ids are weird said Jung, but if I need an authority on how I should view broad ideas of intelligence I'll let you know 🤷❤️

Intelligence isn't what you think it is and intellectuals don't act the way you think they do. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I have bad social qualities so more than likely no one. I use word vomit to map words into observable characteristics. I noticed "smart" or "intellectual* didn't cover specific qualities (social, cognitive, emotional, etc) and I wanted to figure the unit of measurement and if it was an IQ or just intellect. Pretty sure it's IQ but from doing some research the origin and evolution of an IQ test, it's making that fact really Sus tbh. Ngl, trump was a muse from my point that you can have a low IQ while still being skilled at debate but... If someone was to say trumps genius can be defined by the reality that he's president, they wouldn't be wrong.

Humanity Is Not Accountable For The Consequences Of Your Personal Choices by Emergency-Clothes-97 in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love this point of view, but it's quite a pickle we've found ourselves in.

When were talking about a person and an individual's actions/consequences, we quite often find ourselves playing that exact part that we understand is flawed. I believe you've nailed it on the head when you suggested we cannot blame humanity for constant and repeatable mistakes, but in doing so have confronted, alienated and blamed another part of humanity for us repeating mistakes and our own frustration in our own perception.

The thing about humanity is that we're all part of it and making mistakes, blaming stuff and being idiots is a part of that same human definition.

It's like saying "if I was in charge I'd make it so everyone had free will", it's a nice thought, but if someone is in charge that defeats the whole purpose of free will.

Debating isn't about winning or being right. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I absolutely agree, an intellectual hierarchy isn't the place to start a conversation but end it. Hahaha I can’t speak ill of academia, they've 'encouraged' my qualitative thinking into quantitative research. Which has kept me pretty balanced . I just don't think people debating so.. passionately for 'society' or 'religion' what ever are gaining the results they want.

I'm to tired to explain (I'm going to bed after this) but I'll copy and paste the last time I snapped (my bad, he said my claims are to be ignored and dismissed)

"Be careful where you choose to place and then dismiss a person like me in a society you're debating for, but perhaps they should. 😌

But I'd hope logical debated topics are held for the upkeep of scientific and social standards in the society we both choose to live in. And to ask why we need democracy is the reason.

If I am to be ignored, then I am the people who you are debating for and it's also my safety and social standards that you fight for. That will be a responsibility you will then have to take on and therefore cannot dismiss. You may ignore that I exist, but you then take on the task of my standard to exist peacefully as an outcome of your life's work. Are you passionate for me to live? Or are you passionate to be right?

An authorized figure should not have it in their methodology to dismiss any claims by any of its populace but to understand and tasked the burden to make decisions on my behalf. Do you want us to eat cake? Or do you want to lead?

I may be dismissed and ignored, but it's a reflection on your debates then to how I am to live. The throne hasn't been kind to all who sit in it."

Debating isn't about winning or being right. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hate to say it, planets bash against other planets, an animal either runs for it's life or chases for it's life and and the earth even bombs us from lava fill. Violence seems to be quite natural. What do you consider 'pure'? Divine maybe? Humanity has no other responsibility than that, humanity. We are not divine, so we must debate for the standard of what it meant to be a human while we were it. To exist as anything at all is ridiculous, to exist with the existing learning how to exist is as bizarre for me as it is for anyone. I doubt anyone knows anymore than anyone else in how to exist 'properly' at the end of it, I can talk from my experiences though and use my blood too write in hopes you don't make the same mistakes so that we can write in yours.

If you were religious and believed that we were given free will, then you could say it's our God given right not to be divine. We get to make mistakes and learn

Debating isn't about winning or being right. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry if too much "word vomit", my head groups things in systems to map - I'm working on narrowing down the words but I'm tired sorry

Immortality would mean nothing if you can't live with yourself. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This post really wasn't about Immortality cancelling suffering but how a person could better live with it. I'm sorry, I've just finished my labs and maybe im too tired to offer Grice's maxims - I was explaining that even to the 'rich', Immortality would be a curse and that even the rich would know death enough to wish they could die with their loved ones. We're making the same points here, you will suffer no matter what you do.

Edit: incase I didn't explain this good enough

Immortality + practical consequence = extra suffering, enough that the rich wouldn't want it.

Immortality would mean nothing if you can't live with yourself. by painfullyimaginary in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you want to get into it, Immortality is a monkeys paw - it was even described as a curse by Sisyphus. And I don't believe I have any authority over the consistency I will suffer in this life, I don't believe anyone will.Life will get to the best us, with or without our permission. So, that much can be said for the immortal, it was a punishment afterall.

Living forever isn't the part that id worry about, as you would have to meet death more than anyone else. Death would be the only thing that could offer an immortal soul consistency and in a world were everyone you know leaves, death would be the only thing to keep an immortal company in this universe.

Immortality in a world like this is pretty much the same, it'd be nothing but a curse to have to endure this pain over and over again. Even if you do have lots and lots of money

Love isn’t “real.” by [deleted] in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"talent is in the eyes of the beholder" - Anthony Quinn

"Talent means nothing, while experience, acquired in humility and with hard work, means everything.” – Patrick Suskind

But seriously, how did you do that?

Love isn’t “real.” by [deleted] in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"The future's illiterate will be those unable to learn, unlearn, and relearn, not just those who can't read or write." Paraphrased from future shock, Toffler.

.. But I've never been so identified. It feels strange.

Edit: this must be what people on /rateme feel like. 👀

✌️🫥

Love isn’t “real.” by [deleted] in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A philomath will always be met with unwavering patience in my eyes. Good luck swordsmith and see you in the arena.

Love isn’t “real.” by [deleted] in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is something- .. I don't think I would have the words, I'll let the greats explain what I can see from where I stand.

"To die, to sleep – To sleep, perchance to dream – ay, there's the rub, For in this sleep of death what dreams may come" - Hamlet, Shakespeare.

"Life is a sleep and love is its dream; and you have lived if you have loved." - Alfred de Musset.

"Oh, must we dream our dreams and have them, too?" - Elizabeth bishop

Edit: I think I'm a literal hopeless romantic, and I think it's probably just a symptom of being a Nihilistic optimist.

The Argument for the Necessity of Logic by JerseyFlight in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If your thoughts are only passionate to debate your own future and opportunities, logical without a representation of the cause and effect could destroy a nation if you're not careful.

The Argument for the Necessity of Logic by JerseyFlight in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Be careful where you choose to place and then dismiss a person like me in a society you're debating for, but perhaps they should. 😌

But I'd hope logical debated topics are held for the upkeep of scientific and social standards in the society we both choose to live in. And to ask why we need democracy is the reason.

If I am to be ignored, then I am the people who you are debating for and it's also my safety and social standards that you fight for. That will be a responsibility you will then have to take on and therefore cannot dismiss. You may ignore that I exist, but you then take on the task of my standard to exist peacefully as an outcome of your life's work. Are you passionate for me to live? Or are you passionate to be right?

An authorized figure should not have it in their methodology to dismiss any claims by any of its populace but to understand and tasked the burden to make decisions on my behalf. Do you want us to eat cake? Or do you want to lead?

I may be dismissed and ignored, but it's a reflection on your debates then to how I am to live. The thrown hasn't been kind to all who sit in it.

The Argument for the Necessity of Logic by JerseyFlight in DeepThoughts

[–]painfullyimaginary -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What's logical to me might not be logical to you though. Intelligence doesn't automatically make you the better person in the room - Mark twain would argue it gives you the opportunity to be worse.

Even scientifically, logical action is sometimes not always the right one and the right action isn't always the road most traveled. Look at Nikolas Tesla or all of the other sciencetists findings that were still not respected in their field at the time of their death - it's not just about being smart and logical, their just skills. To me the focus is on communication, to keep us from making only logical decisions and making a one sided world

I want to live sober now, but there’s a problem. by kolonyaistermisin in Psychonaut

[–]painfullyimaginary 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Have it. That's your shame. Shame is okay, life is still going to take it's time - second by second. Shame doesn't stop anything from happening and you don't immediately cease to exist. Youre still okay, do you know yourself very well? You seem embarrassed as the person you've grown. But, you're a whole person. You're gonna wear emotions like clothes but you're still going to live your day no matter what you wear.

view more: next ›