/sci/ - Science & Math

Well, many of the advantages are outweighed by loneliness, especially when you have character and stand up for truth. One thing you can do that no one else can though is create new knowledge if you are dedicated to your cause. That potentially outweighs any negatives as creating new knowledge is the most important thing a man can do other than create new life. But, that doesn't apply to every person with such a high IQ. If you are high IQ but are lazy, life isn't so good. The sheer amount of realizations about the inconsistencies and fallacies of your surrounding world might keep one in a state of logical paralysis for long periods of time. So I don't know anon. It seems to me that all of it comes down to being strong. The smarter you are - the stronger you have to be mentally. Didn't really answer your question and my IQ is only 105.

>>14572729
>create new life
Objectively it will be unethical. And also counterproductive because of finanical losses. Childfree + antinatalism are real red pills

>>14572711
The sheer horrifying realization that however incompetent you see yourself to be, everyone else is in the abstract far worse off.

Advantages? Uhhh I'm really good at coming up with unique ideas that get shot down by the status quo, and very bad at finding reason to give enough of a shit to try circumventing it beyond my own benefit. That's kind of like an advantage. "blessed with suck" comes to mind.

>>14572748
Objectively living your life on this planet is unethical and you should commit suicide to spare all the life around you.

>>14572757
My HR director after I tried telling her about existing policies that are rotting the company long term "We don't care about your ideas, policy is policy". I quit right there.

>>14572766
It was ad hom anyway but it was wrong. I have parents. Think about their feelings. Psy-al pain, tears etc. After their death yeah, maybe i will do it.

>>14572775
Hahaha christ do I know that feeling. Honestly once you get old enough I think your whole life just becomes one long winded list of examples of this. You'd think it gets better if you're higher up some chain, but you're always met with some brand new cthulian nightmare of broken shit that someone somehow thought was a good idea.

If there's a lesson to be had there, I would definitely say it is "Never do anything without equivalent compensation". And be a right fuckin asshole about it because "thank yous" don't do shit.

>>14572757
what's your IQ, anon

>>14572757
>The sheer horrifying realization that however incompetent you see yourself to be, everyone else is in the abstract far worse off.
I get that and I'm only 133.

>>14572711
They changed the image again

>>14572817
High enough that I suspect I am the subject of the world's largest prank show on TV. Because I don't fucking believe it. Also it doesn't matter, because nothing is determined by that anyway, even when it would probably be better off to be so to some degree. Worse, we play coy and determine that obliquely for positions it has no fucking relevance to (barring mental dysfunction probably).
>>14572832
Some studies suggest, and I don't care if it's true it's for sake of argument, that certain fields or universities have a median IQ around that point. Most of my conversations take place with people around that point in real life. Compared to how I can talk with someone of a similar level of mental ability and energy (the energy part does matter), well, I can only infer it's like someone with an IQ around 130 trying to have a conversation with someone whose IQ is 85.

The real problem in relating something like that is people get hung up on personalizing it. I don't mean it that way, couldn't care less, 95% of the time it does not matter, and at the end of the day shit gets done well enough that the lights stay on. I never have, and damn well never will, let anyone ever know how high it is for a whole lot of reasons. Primarily, that it doesn't matter for every day tasks and if it really mattered at some point someone has to come crying to have you fix it. Whether that's a math problem, a model issue, figuring out how the fuck you're going to fix this cross-threaded thing without proper tools, or troubleshooting grandma's computer. The guy who cleans the gutters can clean the gutters just fine, having a galaxy brain wouldn't really help improve that much (yes yes automate everything I know moving on).

My opinion on people who are obsessed with it is pretty obvious. If you are a galaxy brain, well, I've never met one all that caught up in appearances. Hell they always seem to agree with me about how it doesn't really help. It just makes you really fucking bored.

>>14572854
>The real problem in relating something like that is people get hung up on personalizing it
I get that, too.

Well, starting from a brainlet perspective, in high school it just meant I was able to get straight As in the highest classes available while still having time to play WoW.

In college it meant that I could get all my work done and spend literally 90% of my time getting stoned. this honestly wasnt good as it was very socially isolating and depressing.

in grad school it really kicked in though as i was able to go to festivals and do sheetloads of acid and still managed to graduate, only failed a couple fucking PDE classes.

The ACTUAL advantage is in the philosophical perspective though, for 130iq midwits they can see how society is bullshit and money isnt real and all that but they can't really connect the abstract idea to the practical implications in their own life, and will still participate in the rat race lacking self awareness. while it's so obvious society is a bunch of monkeys in a habitat trading pieces of paper around that i feel self conscious of the absurdity even doing basic things like go shopping.

this has led to me not giving a single fuck about societys expectations, having no anxiety about being worth less than people who have more money/higher iq/better research or whatever, not sacrificing happiness for money, and having a very satisfying life with minimal work, enough income to get by, and ample free time for keeping fit and independent study.

Also, OP pic is true and most chicks are retarded so i can talk to them fine just treat them as you would a dog or cat, theyre also not very interesting, id rather lift and read than deal with one.

>>14572951
> for 130iq midwits they can see how society is bullshit and money isnt real and all that but they can't really connect the abstract idea to the practical implications in their own life, and will still participate in the rat race lacking self awareness
>most chicks are retarded so i can talk to them fine just treat them as you would a dog or cat, theyre also not very interesting, id rather lift and read than deal with one.
Literally drowning in irony. Thanks for the laugh anon. The advatange is that the world isn't an opaque abstraction and it gives the person who is able to perceive that a tremendous advantage. The challenge is self-reflection and humility. A lot of these dumbfucks can only rev up their brain rpm without coming closer to any truth and would much rather larp as superior beings because their brain vrooms faster than average.

>>14572711
Introducing Marilyn Vos Savant (IQ - 228)

>>14572775
HR is full of power tripping mini dictators that exist to keep employees from suing the company.

>>14573140
go to work and get money so you can spend your time listening to a female talk goy, thats how you break free of the rat race

>>14572711
loneliness

>>14573169
That wasn't my point. Your larping is cucking your own ability to see the full picture and you won't be able to see it until you learn humility a notion you just scoffed that, because I think you're that predictable. Good luck with your lift and read journey I am sure you won't end up screaming at pigeons at the local park at the end of that journey.

I had my iq tested by actual psychologists on two separate occasions and my iq was above 160 so I am qualified to answer this question though it is only my own perspective. Through being tested I ended up in academic communities for high iq individuals so I have a sense of how people at different high iq levels operate. And to answer your question having an iq over two standard deviations higher than the average can be an advantage or a disadvantage compared to being someone who is just highly intelligent and I would say in most cases is actually a disadvantage. See there is a misunderstanding of how exceptionally high iq people must see the world because people who are smart but are not geniuses can see how fucked go society and the world and in there experience the smarter the person the more ways or the more Depth to the fucked upness in society they can see. So they assume that extremely high iq people continue on this spectrum focused on how fucked people and society are and are completely tortured by this and overall I have not found this to be true. I would say from my experience that starting at an iq level around 145-150 and above that the human mind starts to become detached from society other people and the constraints that they bring. I and many of the people I have known seem to perceive life in a very unusual way (and I am not here to say it is a better or more enlightened way just that it is different). For me personally life itself does not feel as different from dreaming as I believe it to be for most people. All of these societal constructs that most people get caught up in seem rather silly and surreal to me so therefore they do not negatively affect me much at all. I guess one could say that having a really high degree of understanding makes it so that the perceived injustices of the world or the fact that most people are stupid and live there life in auto pilot does not bother you because you understand it does not matter.

>>14572711
>what are the advantages of having an IQ 3+ SDs above the mean?
Not feeling loved for who you are

Furthermore starting around a 150 IQ as well the majority of the people I knew had major neurological problems or were majorly autistic and were geniuses mentally but could not really function in the world. Even those who did not were mostly so lost in there kind that they had brilliant minds but were never able to express them because they don’t understand how the world works and wouldn’t know how to start communicating these ideas. In summation super iq people tend to be either blissfully ignorant of society, smart enough to realize one shouldn’t be bothered by society, or are so fucked up that they can’t really function, so it’s pretty hard to compare to people who are just highly intelligent but not genius. On average highly interagency people will accomplish more in the world, but geniuses that can function in the world have a higher chance of changing the world.

>>14572775
Funny, where I live a company hires Mathematicians to fix whatever is costing money to the company and can be saved. I guess if you live in a poor country you can't afford to powertrip like in 'Murica

>>14573252
If you're an autist you aren't 150IQ

>>14573246
This, but learn to use the enter key you dumb fucking nigger jesus christ.

t. 142 IQ

>>14573256
I've no idea why that meme persists but just because you're in genius territory doesn't mean you jerk off to the blackboard all day every day. Sure, maybe you're better at it than most and could be among the best with religious dedication... or maybe you'd rather do anything else.

>>14573262
https://embrace-autism.com/autism-and-high-iq/

https://www.iidc.indiana.edu/irca/articles/genius-may-be-an-abnormality-educating-students-with-aspergers-syndrome-or-high-functioning-autism.html

>>14573252
Funnily enough I'm not. It may also be the particular interest you have self-selects for others like you. "Self selection" is probably the single most important, and often overlooked, cause of our perceptions about the world. Often wrong ones.

>>14573276
I would be interested in your perception as well, I was part of the mathematical community which of course probably has a higher percentage of fucked up people in it at the higher academic levels than in other fields.

I function pretty well in the world to be clear but almost every other person I knew with a high iq in the math/science community was fucked up.

I always assumed that most normal functioning geniuses lived normal lives never telling anyone how strange they felt and most people would never realize that they are actually that smart. Or maybe they became serial killers like Ted K. I don’t know

>>14573262
Source: Appendix of "Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence"

>>14573286
Eh, I hide it, definitely. I am definitely more asocial than average, and I've long used the internet even since baud modems. The benefit of anonymity to being in different communities, under different pseudonyms, jobs, personas, never with ill intent or anything mind you. I've been a physicist, I've been a retail worker, I've been an alcoholic, sometimes I've been on voice recordings. I've been a self-made man without a degree with the worst luck in the world, or a silver spooned harvard brat. I've been a mathematician or a "struggling wannabe psych researcher". Everyone has this perception that voice changing stuff is universally as bad as most of the free software, for example, so it's really easy with slight modifications and proper sound hardware to have perfectly convincing shifts. I've been paranoid, I've been stupid, I've been all kinds of things over time just... seeing people. Sometimes for a decade or two.

I'm not malicious or anything. I've genuinely tried to help quite a lot of people, sometimes with money. Sometimes using my persona to get them out of a bad situation to live with friends I made, thinking it was me. It's really hard to even explain all that without snap judgments, but I'm no psychopath. It just sort of collectively happened early on and I kept doing it, kept meeting new people doing new things.

My perception? People are just people. You can mirror them and come out alright, you push them too far with disagreement or discord and it is really easy to lose them. People give you respect you didn't earn, they give you grief you don't deserve, and sadly it is when you play the worst off down on your luck kind of person that people are most vicious. Especially if you play up some hollywood idea of some trapped in poverty genius. That, honestly, was the most shocking to me and my most recent final run when I closed it out.

Meanwhile in real life I just read a lot, exercise, date people, live a pretty standard life.

>>14573286
Sofar as the geniuses go? Yeah I've met some really clever people dedicated to ingeniously stupid positions. Lopsided capability where people are really good in one domain, utterly useless in anything else. The thing I've most noticed, and the thing that is really weird to me, is everyone has some sort of sacred cow of something they will not budge from.

It could be a moral paradigm, and it usually is but not always, it could be more specific or arbitrary such as strongly disliking a given person or set of ideas. Even people nearer my ability, and of course I know they have a whole lot of justifications for it obviously, but in such cases it is often a lack of interest or motive to change without direct personal gain or threat. Especially threat.

It's hardly that I lack introspection - far from it - it's just that I see that kind of thing and it puts me off. Always has been that issue with me, where I find more and more inconsistencies in things. Maybe it takes a few years, maybe a decade, maybe a couple days, but it seems I always have to move on to something else. For every other genius I've found who is genuinely in that category, they just seem like people with more than they know what to do with. If they don't have autism or anything of course.

>>14573340
Wow I feel personally attacked. Just kidding, but seriously that does sound like me. I was labeled as globally gifted instead of having extra sauce in one area so I think that might be what distinguishes geniuses who can function in society from those who don’t do as good of a job. Like if you have the super math mind you get lost in that and that whole thing. I don’t know even though I function well in society and people don’t seem to realize it I do feel like that tortured genius meme you talk about though not from the societal reasons that seem to bother everyone so much

>>14573358
Well, in my experience playing that role or "being that person", you definitely don't want to be the tortured genius type. It attracts the most malicious kind of person who will get off on torturing you further, while to others putting responsibility on you that is obviously unfair. Of all the things I set up to be, and act out, that one is the most shocking to me over the years. It is also the longest one because I met some very interesting people. Of course you don't do these things like donning some mask, it's rather organic, and I would assume I'm at least kinda good at it with all the experience.

I can't really go into detail about it but... "wow" hardly covers just how shitty people are. That is, though, keeping in mind self selection of a person. Even a "fake", though I am quite genuine, you end up in places with people who don't even comprehend just how terrible they are. No psychopathy necessary either.

Hard agree with you on the difference of someone more global vs exclusive, too. Plenty of people could "out math" me, just having abstract ability doesn't imply I dedicated the necessary time to it. Hence my disdain for the stupid "genius = math addict" meme.

I don't know what if anything I'm lost in. Just reading this, you'd think I'm obsessed, but it's not really that time consuming. It's all relative. Guess I'm just stuck with a stupid galaxy brain and nothing to do with it. I sometimes think it'd be better to "get lost in" or be able to be lost in a thing like they do. I romanticize it sometimes.

>>14573381
The thing is I don’t really feel like I’m playing a tortured genius. I mean it’s not like I act this way that much in front of other people so it’s not like I would attract a bunch of Sadists. It’s more like when I’m alone with my thoughts I get caught in these seemingly never ending though holes where I feel tortured by my own thoughts but I have had less of these as I have accepted life for what it is and focus on being in the moment instead of trying to look at the big picture all of the time. The more time goes on the more I feel bad for other people instead of feeling anger towards them

>>14573409
Oh that. Well yeah, I think that necessarily comes with experience or maturity. I just felt the need, since you mentioned it, to caution you against BEING the tortured genius. I found it and the people in that life appalling no matter how good of a person you try to be.

My thought on being alone with your thoughts? Well, for a long time I also played - and details get mixed into personas because it helps fill out a person - and acted out being more of a buddhist. Since learning something, and being something, I think is an important "altogether" thing people ordinarily miss out on due to how real life forces you to be consistent to people. Your usual drugs-to-enlightenment sort of story religious people like a lot. Buddhists have a lot of valid points, and one of the most important is framing.
You write "I'm alone with my thoughts", the more accurate framing is "There are thoughts". If you can connect those dots, understand how changing the minds concept of itself changes the response, shifts in thinking like that can help you quite a lot.

In the end I think what one decides to do with that pity for others, and honestly it is a bit deserved, is personality more than anything.

>>14572711
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbOu-QxtbI4

>>14573433
Yeah I actually have years of experience with Buddhism and buy a lot of it and often time consciously frame what I say to be more palletable to a western mindset. To me at least it is clear that suffering does coke from attachment.

>>14572711
>what are the advantages of having an IQ 3+ SDs above the mean?

One thing I didn't realize until I worked in a church is that having a very high IQ means I basically end up treating everyone the same. Ppl with middle tier IQs, for example, in the church i was part of, would talk down to the mentally disabled people and have this weird "ohg, that's a mentally disabled person, I am superior" act they did.

I remember one guy I was helping in our office, he was, like, very well mannered, and then I realize he wants me to photocopy some paperwork that says he has an IQ of like 84. I just thought he was "another person."

Then I realized why: for me, given my IQ is > 3 sd from the mean, talking to him is basically like talking to someone w/ a 100 IQ or a 115 IQ, there is still a _huge_ gulf, and I never ended up with some sort of superiority complex---people are all evolved w/ different abilities, I focus more on character than smarts because if I only socialized w/ ppl in my IQ bracket, it would be very lonely.

so ya, the pic is exactly like what it was, me and the 85 IQ dude got on great, because neither one of us was judging the other, and we both had a similar attitude due to being outlying from the middle-tier ppl. Good times.

I recommend volunteering in a large church if you like learning about retards, esp. middle tier retards.

>>14573481
Hah, you know anon, I like that story. I didn't come to that moment of clarity in such a picturesque way, arguably my story is fucking alien probably, but I feel this on a spiritual level.

>>14573485
>Hah, you know anon, I like that story. I didn't come to that moment of clarity in such a picturesque way, arguably my story is fucking alien probably, but I feel this on a spiritual level.

Going to Church as an adult, voluntarily, not due to conversion (Episcopal Church) provided me with a lot of insight into how people, even "professionals" (my church was in an urban center, we had doctors, lawyers, a superior court judge or two, etc.) can be absolutely bat shit crazy, and also...not the sharpest tools in the drawer. But somehow they are "able" to be Judges, Physicians, etc. etc. And they all act in the same way. The "really" mentally retarded people would often say things like "wow, I dont understand what you're saying, but I'll think about it." The middle-tier ppl in professions, who were, like, legit schizos due to belief in God (I saw it as musical theater to control the retard population w/ song and dance, to impose certain norms) would adopt this "oh, I dont understand that, you must be crazy." We had several "harvard divinity school" fags come in who did this act, was comical.

>>14573300
>autism
Graphic invalidated. Are you gonna tell me the few high IQ spergs make up for the masses of literally disabled low-functioning man-ape autists?

>>14573567
Been there, done it, different way but same result. Arguably that is also virtually all I see with my online chameleon shenanigans over the decades. Sometimes I am the religious one, other times I'm the victim of them, so yeah I've learned a lot about all ends of it over the years. Probably the most fucked up cult would be jehovah's witnesses or scientologists.

But the funny thing is? I swear, volunteer for the state outreach services or whatever, non-church oriented things. You will see exactly what you described there, but worshiping other things like whichever political party color they think will save everyone. Stuff like that.

>>14573567
Legit Schizos are like that
Legit Schizos also believe in things like morals, rights, values, freedom, ethics, laws, social norms, property, free will, society and civilization.

>>14573579
>Legit Schizos also believe in things like morals, rights, values, freedom, ethics, laws, social norms, property, free will, society and civilization.

Ya, this comparison really rustled their jimmies. Like, I have beliefs about conduct, norms, for example, but I recognize they're my preferences, they don have any independent being. And this view, whether ppl are religious or secular, I cant tell if it terrifies them, or if they think its "taboo to talk that way" or what.

But the more religious AND secular ppl I met (tho Bertrand Russel said communism is a religion) the more I realized this is simpl;y something that afflicts a large majority of humans, they lack insight into the "contingency" of their values.

>>14572951
I’m sorry but you are describe a life pattern of cope without even realizing it.

>>14573579
Well, no. A legit schizo is unavoidably compelled to make spurious inferences. A fool convinces himself reliably to mistake the tool for the blacksmith.

>>14573584
Max Stirner was a nihilist not religious and he made that argument.
>Atheists are skeptical for the existence of God, but they are credulous and gullible when you replace the word ‘God’ with another mysterious thing called ‘morals.’ - Max Stirner
That is why the many different moral systems adopted by atheists are in reality not much different than religions. In fact, Max Stirner, saw secular morality as nothing more than a new religion.
Which Nietzsche also refers to as Western Buddhism.
Take for example the Genealogy of Morals, the third essay What is the Meaning of Aesthetic Ideals.
It specifically addresses the idea that freedom requires a freedom from truth.
It's no more or less crazy than anything else.
The 'absolute idea' in Hegelian philosophy, which again in manifold refractions split into the different ideas of philanthropy, reasonableness, civic virtue, and so on. The philosophers of our time say concepts are to decide everywhere, concepts to regulate life, concepts to rule.
To which Hegel gave a systematic expression, bringing method into the nonsense and completing the conceptual precepts into a rounded, firmly-based dogmatic. Everything is sung according to concepts and the real man, I, am compelled to live according to these conceptual laws.

>>14573589
>In fact, Max Stirner, saw secular morality as nothing more than a new religion.

Well, you can find one of the earliest expressions of a similar bent in Antiphon, on the distinction between phusis (nature) and nomos (law). This is because you get the weird translation of "dikaion nomikon" and "dikaion politikon" into "natural justice" and "political justice." "physical justice" is IMO more literal but then its like "wtf, physical justice?"

"[Col. 1] ... (6) So justice consists in not transgressing the regulations (nÒmima) of the city (10) of which one is a citizen. Thus a human being is likely to use justice to his own (15) best advantage, if he stresses the importance of the
laws in the presence of witnesses, (20) but when he is alone and there are no witnesses (follows) the dictates of nature (tå t∞w fÊsevw) . For the dictates of the laws (tå t«n nÒmvn) are (25) adventitious, whereas the dictates of nature
are inescapable; dictates of the laws, based on agreement as they are, are not natural growths, whereas the dictates of nature (tå t∞w fÊsevw), being natural growths, are not
based on agreement." (https://escholarship.org/content/qt7kg1w5zm/qt7kg1w5zm.pdf))

>>14573589
Oh shame for you... you fell for my alucard.

Max Stirner made the comparison in the context of trolling the ever-loving shit out of the hegelians by centrally contrasting everything to the ego (quite literally "the ego and its own"). The context in which you relate his meaning, and his self evident actual meaning, are two very different things.

The sense in which it is gullible is the sense in which one confuses the owner for the thing owned. Stirner goes over that constantly, repeatedly, over and over again. It is in that sense, not the sense you've abused it, Stirner means that. That his feelings, ideas, thoughts, systems, and so on, are but unto him akin to property and to confuse those for things unto themselves is folly.

But do, please, tell us more about things you might've glossed over and didn't understand. I miss shitposting stirnerisms hidden in things.

>>14573584
I think you done rustled yourself up a schizo sized jimmy, bob

>>14573579
You are bringing lol degeneracy into here, not a valid description of those with high intelligence.

>>14573598
>But do, please, tell us more about things you might've glossed over and didn't understand.

If you have not read Stirner, Hegel, etc. in German, while being fluent in German, you miss a lot.

t. was taught hegel by a German-speaking prof, had anglophone profs reference clearly hegelian ideas/mention hegel w/o being conversant in the german terms used.

>>14573588
Prove morals exist.

>>14573598
A state is illegitimate when even one person doesn't want to be a part of it anymore, and thus cannot exist. When a bunch of selfish dicks ally with other selfish dicks by their own free will is the only kind of 'state' that should exist. If you don't want to be a part of a system, you shouldn't be forced to, and that system can set out to do whatever it wants, because only might makes right and morals are illusions made up by high society.

>>14573595
Sounds like Taoism

>>14573611
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof

>>14573616
>Sour grapes
Yeah yeah boo hoo I read more things than you. You done? You faceplanted. Anprim shit is boring go back to /pol/

>>14573626
>sour grapes
>quotes Stirner's use of ego in regards to abstractions
The real question here is why are you triggered and becoming unhinged?

>>14573633
Effortless.

>>14573605
>>14573584
I gotchu senpai jimmy got rustled back to buffalo.

I do love when people start referencing shit I've read, and quite a lot of, only doing so in a way that clearly shows they've read none of or nearly none of it. We needn't concern ourselves with the schizo further. Had my fun.

>>14573636
Elaborate and Y U mad tho?
>>14573637
>Ony I understand what I read and how the ideas are presented
Sounds like a god complex on your part desu

>>14573647
Yanno, it stops being as funny when you make it this easy. Okay I lied it's even funnier.

>>14573637
>I do love when people start referencing shit I've read, and quite a lot of, only doing so in a way that clearly shows they've read none of or nearly none of it

This is a pretty low-tier take, there are people who have read the entirety of the corpus of any author, who disagree about things, possible fundamental things, about the interpretation of that text.

>>14573666
>Damage control and hypothetical situations you came up with to cope
Why does it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself rather than me?

>>14573669
I was thinking the same thing but didn't want to get caught up in the autism tennis match.

>>14573669
>only doing so in a way that clearly shows they've read none of or nearly none of it
Sort of like how you didn't read that sentence.

>>14573681
It supposes the only possible interpretation of a thing contingent on "clearly showing they've read none of or nearly none of" is false. Rather ironic if the superficially stated position is "Buht maybe different interpretation".

It's kind of funny, but also kind of sad people don't tend to catch blatantly dishonest things like that.

>>14573686
Notice how only your interpitation is correct and anyone else's is wrong or in your opinion they can't grasp the source material presented.
Very narcissistic and it feels like a defense mechanism that you developed over time to cope with feelings of inferiority.
You come across as supercilious, haughty, and disdainful toward others. You treat others in an imperious, overbearing, and aggressive manner.
In short: seek help

>>14573704
Mmmmno, your post requires that you assume there is no possibility for the judgment to be true. In fact it assumes that conclusion to posit my judgment is a "low tier take", as if it somehow applies without warrant in all cases. You must have a lot of fucking spare lighting because you are projecting really hard right now.

So let's recap:
You assume I must in all cases be wrong and without warrant, for you entirely ignore half the sentence specifying the condition "clearly showing they've read none or nearly none of it".
You then call me a narcissist for something you did.

That is literally classic narcissism. It's called gaslighting. You might want to up your game. As anyone can plainly read, you are accusing me of what you did and your own faults.

>>14573718
Let me sum up your post for you
>No U
You got real defensive there.
Almost as if my post struck a little too close to home for you.
You can keep up this charade you presented but the fact remains.
You can lie to yourself but you can't lie to others.
Don't think I didn't notice your desire for validation from other posters who you agree with.

>>14573733
Sorry pal you can't rewrite causality. You did what you later accuse me of doing >>14573669. Ya lost. Again. Want another round?

>>14573739
Sounds like you're trying to find a way out after you claim victory.
Proof by declaring victory is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma.
It is is substituted for rational thought. This is very similar in effect to summary dismissal. This is often coupled with a straw man fallacy.
Very sad and pathetic
Is it delusions of grandeur on your part?

>>14573755
oof just repeating yourself now gg no re.

>>14573760
>oof just repeating yourself now gg no re.
Translation
>How dare you call me out on my bullshit!

>>14573718
>In fact it assumes that conclusion to posit my judgment is a "low tier take", as if it somehow applies without warrant in all cases

There are some pretty smart ppl who have formal reasons for suggesting that any claim to a univocal "take" leads to the problems identified by Godel's Incompleteness Theorem, e.g. even if your take were formalized in some Language, that language would itself have difficulty proving its own completness or consistency, etc. So the metatheoretic problem with univocality is more that you cannot assert a language in that is consistent, and provably so, in which to make your theoretical claims.

You can also approach this from a more "contintental" pov ala Richard Rorty, who is certainly not using Godel and other metamathematical concepts to argue against foundational univocality.

"clearly showing they've read none or nearly none of it".

The issue is that you give a hot take and then suggest that anyone who had read the source would agree with the univocal truth of your hot take, which has all sorts of formal problems with it, in terms of defining the language in which your hot take is communicated, presuming it is even capable of formal specification.

>>14573739
>Sorry pal you can't rewrite causality. You did what you later accuse me of doing >>14573669 (You). Ya lost. Again. Want another round?

You are either a bot, or you are incapable of determining when you are talking to two interlocutors.

>>14573733's poster is not me, poster of >>14573669.

145+ Iq here. I feel like I can't have an argument or disagreement with anyone without pointing out a contradiction in their thinking, which of course sends then into an untethered, violent rage.

>>14573770
Imagine being so desperate you feel the need to posit shared meaning is impossible just to get out of it. Using the tool one declares invalid for exactly that purpose. I'm genuinely amazed.

>>14572854
What's it like talking to someone highly intelligent, but with low energy?

>>14573789
>Imagine being so desperate you feel the need to posit shared meaning is impossible just to get out of it. Using the tool one declares invalid for exactly that purpose. I'm genuinely amazed.


here is the flavor of what I am suggesting, from a really fun book from a guy who taught me epistemology a long while ago.

It's not positing that meaning is impossible, it is more subtle than that. It is more like there may be an endless ramification of meaning, that your attempt to play "Hierarch" (Priest) and impose a univocal meaning is formally indefensible for reasons to do w/ the nature of formal language---and this is presuming your theory could be formalized and proved as a formal function of the corpus of Stirner's work which is, IMO, very unlikely.

>>14573794
An example of that behavioral dichotomy is here, actually. I quite enjoy letting idiots make asses of themselves. People who are lower energy, I suppose, are more passive in their approach by nature. Though these can vary by motivation of course, so I am speaking in terms of averages.

>>14573788
See >>14573146
This person has the highest IQ ever recorded and she had no problem talking to people.

>>14573797
The curtains are blue. Go cry about it. Next.

>>14573804
>The curtains are blue.

The guy who wrote the pic had PhDs in mathematics and philosophical logic. Do you understand what he's saying?

>>14573800
>that lack of self awareness

>>14573809
>>14573810
I can't hear you over your lack of formally defensible function for the corpus of my writing.

>>14573815
>I can't hear you over your lack of formally defensible function for the corpus of my writing.

So now you're simply retreating into irony, which is sort of where Rorty would sugget, the "liberal ironist," tho this take is not without criticism.

>>14573819

>>14573815
>Bulverism
Yawn

>>14573831
You obviously cared enough to reply. You arent good at this, are you?

>>14572951
>OP pic is true and most chicks are retarded
Virgin cope sneethe and dial 8

What is it about higher IQ people that causes them to be so easily emotionally triggered in arguments with strangers on the internet?

>>14572711
why never understood this pic. why is 110 IQ a mini apu with that smug face, its so random

>>14573856
you must have missed the part where i can talk to them fine, im far from a virgin ive been with many girls and women 19 to be precise, enough to know theres more to life

>>14573921
The pic is an edit of the original height shaming pic from /fit/. I don’t remember what the two Pepe’s heights were, maybe 6’2+. Wojak is iirc 5’10/5’11 and Apu is 5’6 or something like that. I’ve also forgotten the original IQ edit but it gets changed to less impressive spreads of Pepes depending on the board and poster’s insecurity.

>>14572854
>Hell they always seem to agree with me about how it doesn't really help. It just makes you really fucking bored.
Literally me. I thought this was part of my personality, not a consequence of having a high IQ.

>>14573246
It is practially impossible to measure IQs above SDs

>>14574536
above 4SDs*

>>14573574
High IQ overlaps with autism significantly, correlation doesn't mean that low functioning autists don't exist. Moreover low functioning spergs generally have more disorders than a psychiatrist admits to the family, that has been my experience with them so far.

>>14572711
The advantages that matter only come in at 145 IQ. Being a 115-145 midwit is eternal suffering.

>>14572729
This might be midwit, I'm also between 100 and 110 (took only practices or shitty ones online) and constantly have feelings like this where I notice inconsistencies with the world constantly. Anyone with an IQ at 130 have any comments about what their thought process is like? It could also be that thinking ability plus spending time alone results in this.

If I'm 142 do I get the benefits of the 145+ side? What if I was 144? Seems like a bit of an arbitrary boundary and the test can be +- a few points. I say this because whenever people describe the issues you get around 145+ I can strongly identify with them

>>14574831
No. No. Retard. What part of "145+" is so hard to understand? The frequency of people at every level decreases exponentially.

>>14574867
So what differentiates someone with 144 versus 145? Is there a switch that flips in your brain when you +1 an IQ test that could be the difference between remembering the definition of a single word during one section of the test

>>14574870
YOU BREAK THE COGNITIVE SPEED OF LIGHT AND GAIN THE ABILITY TO TIME TRAVEL IN YOUR MIND

>>14574870
What differentiates 144 from 143? What differentiates 143 from 142? ...

145 is the lowest point at which the effect becomes barely perceptible. An arbitrary, generous lower threshold. You are a midwit.

>>14575439
144-142 is within error. there is no statistical difference between them at all.

>>14572748
ethics are a meangingless illusion brought on by decadence. you are just a mentally ill suicidal faggot who should rope ASAP

>>14572951
You're clearly somewhat intelligent but not enough to realize that your feelings of absurdity towards human behavior are themselves an irrational thing borne of dissociation. Calling human beings monkeys trading paper is just an adolescent's understanding of the world and of society, and fails to understand that such feelings are themselves not attached to a purely rational base but simply another emotion. You also sound like an arrogant guy with a rather unwarranted sense of superiority over others, combined with your dubious life choices and drug habits I'd say you're squandering your potential.

>>14574773
>Anyone with an IQ at 130 have any comments about what their thought process is like?
I think it depends a lot on personality as well.

If I’d have to describe my thought process in a matter of differences to the norm I’d say it is more free from preconceived notions.
This means I have a higher frequency of „original“ thought and can make inferences faster, but at the price of having to understand the principles of everything I learn, instead of just accepting it as functional knowledge, and ending up in some weird conceptual corners because my working memory (commonly correlated to blood glucose level) gave up while I was fixated on an idea.

I also do that a lot. Fixate on ideas. Everything else feels like a chore during that kind of fixation.

>>14575478
redpilled and redpilled
/philosophy

>>14572766
That's a <95 take if I ever seen one

>>14573917
Semantics. Most of the time the art of argumenting online is to use a lot of strawmans, plus half of the things people say are personal things not related to the subject. It just infuriates me when the argument cannot stay on course, but it has to be shifted to some weird agenda every fucking time.

>>14572711
Is anyone here at 146 IQ? I was at 146 IQ when I was 17-19 (I was tested two years apart due to school) using the WAIS-III scale. How do you find it? I sometimes worry if my IQ's regressed somehow but I've never found any evidence that suggest I could have shrunk it over 7 years from 146 unless I'd been doing nothing but causing brain damage and eating lead.

How do you find having an IQ of 146?

>>14573462
As a genetics fag, I don't know why a religious man tries to bring it up so fucking much.

>>14575824
Wish I could help you but mine is 149, I wouldn't be able to understand the struggles a puny intellect like yours experiences and you wouldn't be able to understand my perspective anyway

>>14575840
Yeah whatever fucker. How'd you feel when you found out. I remembered being elated for a while because I was actually one of 'those' geniuses... And then I realised that I'd probably always been this smart and there wasn't any difference. Nothing had changed. So it's just kind of unexciting and uninteresting now-Plus you can't mention it without seeming like you're bragging.

Disappointing. And worse, I keep worrying I somehow lowered it by just having a normal college with some alcohol, weed and other drugs mixed in.

>>14572729
>inconsistencies and fallacies of your surrounding world
Examples?

>>14573246
>IQ=160
>Makes up phrases like "fucked upness"
>Doesn't use a hyphen

It's easy to see the LARPs going around in this thread. The verbal fluency in your written communication gives it away. Or, you're extremely lazy.

>>14572711
I know that it's much too late for enough people to interact with my post to make it worth typing out, therefore I will be waiting for this thread to come back around. Catch you on the Fippy gentlemen.

>t. 158 (and counting)

>>14575518
this is correct. there's an itch that must be scratched when learning. you must hit the absolute bedrock of a concept to properly integrate it into your psyche/schema. It can get tiresome because most people don't bother teaching properly.

>>14575890
Oh good, the thesaurus man is here. Now we can have a real conversation about intelligence. Thank fuck, all these other losers are larping about eternity and treating retards the same. Enlighten us, man of intellect.

>>14576022
>treating retards the same

IF you were really smart, you'd know that tardfarming is inevitably the thankless task that the intelligent have thrust upon themselves. You have to be kind to your livestock.

>>14576037
Fascinating.
The perspective you think is funny is driven by your ego is how I can tell you're a brainlet. Neat, right?

>>14572711
None, my life is a disaster.

You know, at least I make it funny. This is just boring. Took three or four /pol/tards (or one cringe samefag) vomiting regurgitated relativism to protect one of their own with a stupid take, and they still fell all over themselves.

You guys are just going
>Durrr u can't engrish
>Durrr u think u smart
>Durrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

If you're going to be a waste of space at least be funny about it.

>>14576058
I love it when you express yourself, anon. What else is going on? Also, I am funny. Get a better perspective, loser.

>>14576069
You ain't even worth laughing at. You're just sad.

>>14576072
Lmao, have I hurt you, friend? Why are you hurling insults?

>>14576074
>>14576058

>>14576082
Right, to which I responded with
>>14576069
And then you began to insult me. So, for the record. Did I hurt your feelings or are you simply mad for reasons outside of this thread and are bringing your impotent rage here?

>>14576087
Ah, so it's the "I'm illiterate and will pretend what you wrote did not preclude what I reply with".

Like I said, boring.

>>14576091
I am asking clarifying questions to directly address the communication problem you're describing. What's the problem?

>>14576043
>The perspective you think is funny is driven by your ego is how I can tell you're a brainlet. Neat, right?

Not really, it's sort of strange. I don't think it is funny at all, it is sort of sad, but it is just what you have to do, unless you want the retards to eat you. You have to train them not to eat ppl, etc.

Also, a mistake that some ppl w/ high IQs make is that high IQ makes people come to the same moral/ethical conclusions: it rarely does.

But tell me more about your psychometric!

>>14576099
You are one million percent larping, friend.

>>14576101
>You are one million percent larping, friend.

In terms of what, having a high IQ? Not only do I have a high IQ, I am also extremely tall, so I am, like, off the charts rare! Maybe you are a lil guy?

>>14576099
Seconded on the larping. Also very old hat larping. Get new material. Or get evaluated for narcissism. Either way.
>>14576105
You know it is entirely possible to have a high IQ... AND narcissism

>>14576107
>You know it is entirely possible to have a high IQ... AND narcissism

What do you mean by narcissism? Part of the issue is that moral development has more to do with socialization than intelligence, so if you are tall, get lots of social validation, your view of things is different than if you're some short little dweeb whose ONLY talent is writing tests.

>>14576109
>What do you mean by narcissism?
Is your google broken?

>>14576121
>Is your google broken?

Well, let's presume I know what the term means, so I'm not certain why you're using it here, so what is your idiosyncratic definition?

>>14576124
Your sense of value is tied to arbitrary genetic lottery rolls which is a sign of insecurity that you seem to project by painting yourself as Chad Thundercock in anonymous message boards hence narcissism.

>>14576124
>>14576129
To add to what that anon wrote: Not to mention needing to pretend people mean something other than what they write so you can interpret it in a favorable way. Huge tip off.

>>14576129
>Your sense of value is tied to arbitrary genetic lottery rolls

Not really, where did I say anything about value? I just said rare, I didn't say being a rare specimen was anything good.

Also, genetics are not a lottery role, they tend to involve men and women making good breeding decisions over many generations.

>>14576151
Principle of charity. Bet you can't do it.

>>14576134
>Not to mention needing to pretend people mean something other than what they write so you can interpret it in a favorable way

It's more like I don't see how going "being tall and having a high IQ is pretty rare," that's true. I don't see how this is "narcissism," so I'm wondering what the meaning you're using is, 'cause on the internet people use lots of psych terminology in colloquial ways, e.g. schizo, etc.

>>14576155
You're trolling or a narcissist. Obviously that is not in relation to "being tall and having a high IQ is pretty rare" (which is wrong anyway, IQ correlates with height between populations)
>Not really, it's sort of strange. I don't think it is funny at all, it is sort of sad, but it is just what you have to do, unless you want the retards to eat you. You have to train them not to eat ppl, etc.

Obviously, it's this attitude and similar statements being referred to. That you've conveniently forgot. Anyway I'm not wasting a single second more on you.

>>14576151
>Not really, where did I say anything about value?
> Not only do I have a high IQ, I am also extremely tall,
These are things you think are valuable, no? Not ONLY are you high IQ man but you are ALSO tall man. Very value, much good breeding decisions over many generations. You think you're the culmination of good decisions (intelligence and height) over generations (and you were chosen to be you) if I quote you directly. . How is that not narcissism?

>>14576169
>Obviously, it's this attitude and similar statements being referred to.

*shrug*, all I get from you is that you're not a straight shooter--I would say exactly what I have written here IRL, and I somehow doubt you would behave this way. You remind me of several ppl I know who talk very differently online or behind ppls backs, but rarely to their faces this way for some reason.

>>14576179
>How is that not narcissism?

Do you think any positive self-appraisal is narcissistic? That seems pretty pathological.

>>14576189
On anonymous boards, unprompted? You don't? You aren't secure in you until you announce it to people you don't know. That sounds like positive self- appraisal to you?

>>14576192
>You aren't secure in you until you announce it to people you don't know. That sounds like positive self- appraisal to you?

What's the topic of this here thread, kiddo? It's not narcissistic to have a positive self-image, to take pride in one's traits. The problem is that lots of people do not have traits that many ppl desire, especially males.

I realized this at University, when pretty much every class I'd end up with a girl or two wanting to hang out with me. I quickly realized that most guys did not have this experience, they just did their work and ran away, none of the girls ever went 'hey anon, you are a 5'8 guy and I find that, like...I want to get to know you, anon!!!'

>>14576200
If there is nothing to feel threatened by, why are you talking down to me?
> kiddo?
>to take pride in one's traits.
Right, ego. Brainlet.
> The problem is that lots of people do not have traits that many ppl desire
You assume it's a problem to not have a trait people desire. That's ego, that's just you in this conversation. I don't think you understand that.
> I'd end up with a girl or two wanting to hang out with me
You think your value comes from female validation, yes? That's also ego.
>hey anon, you are a 5'8 guy and I find that, like.
Okay, you're also clearly insecure about your height. How tall are you? I am 5'10 I've literally never had a problem.

>>14576203
>If there is nothing to feel threatened by, why are you talking down to me?

You're the one who started throwing around terms like narcissism w/o any provocation at all, this is called "turnabout."

You're a 5'10 aggro dude who thinks this act is acceptable behavior. It's not, and if someone returns fire you suddenly start doing this weird "OMG I CANT BELIEVE HE STRUCK BACK!" act.

You also have this weird fixation on denying ego (self). Well-developed people have an ego, they can assert themselves and their values.

Like, are you this egoless creature or something?

Is this a cultural thing? You are acting in a totally weird way, like you werent socialized properly and if a man who was shows up and asserts himself, you start backbiting about ego, narcissism, etc.

>>14576179
You're going to quickly learn these kinds of people are not rewarding to talk to. Unless you're a masochist who enjoys gaslighting.

>>14576209
>You're the one who started throwing around terms like narcissism w/o any provocation at all, this is called "turnabout."
Right, an observation illustrating your behavior hurt your feelings. I understand now. Not narcissism, by the way.
>You're a 5'10 aggro dude who thinks this act is acceptable behavior
Height is clearly an issue for you. That's clear now as well. Are you short? How short are you?
>and if someone returns fire you suddenly start doing this weird "OMG I CANT BELIEVE HE STRUCK BACK!" act.
Okay, my perspective was it's confusing because I didn't know that hurt your feelings. Now that i know. I understand why you're behaving this way.
>You also have this weird fixation on denying ego (self). Well-developed people have an ego, they can assert themselves and their values.
Right, brainlets can't see past the ego. Same team.
>Like, are you this egoless creature or something?
No, I have an ego. I simply understand where the boundaries are. Do you?
> this a cultural thing? You are acting in a totally weird way, like you werent socialized properly and if a man who was shows up and asserts himself, you start backbiting about ego, narcissism, etc
Pointing out weird behavior, yes. If you don't know then how do you learn is what I am thinking.

>>14576211
I do enjoy shitposting very much. People are fascinating.

>>14576218
Eeeeh I can't say I'm any different. Just ensuring you know what you're getting in to. As stated previously, I'm not a psychopath, and sadly am cursed with the stupid desire to help. Carry on.

>>14576214
>Right, an observation illustrating your behavior hurt your feelings

My behavior hurt my feelings? It's not hurt feelings, you seem to like these dualisms, e.g. ego/non ego, hurt/not hurt, and picking one side as normative.

> Height is clearly an issue for you. That's clear now as well. Are you short? How short are you?

This is the opposite of what I have said. I have noticed this throughout my life, in socializing w/ other tall males, none of us do this weird aggro act you're doing, it's mostly guys under 6' who do it. It's also born out in criminology, short dudes are more violent.

> Right, brainlets can't see past the ego. Same team.

There's nothing to see past the self. If there is something that sees, it is the self by definition, and what the self is, well, we can address whether you're some weird spiritualist here, there is no univocal self, the "self" is an aggregate of complex material inteactions in the nervous system. That said, it tends to be pathological to try to suppress the aggregate reaction, to worry "am I being X" where X is narcissistic, etc. Even your aggressive behavior is fine, I just dont really think it's the best sort of socialization, but what do I know?

> I simply understand where the boundaries are. Do you?

Who made these boundaries, where are they?

> Pointing out weird behavior, yes.

What do you mean by "weird"? Lots of norming of behaviors is really just aggression projected onto an abstract entity, "the normal" as a way of dealing w/ ppl who otherwise wont play by "the rules" which are mostly made up for ppl who need them, e.g. ppl who can play a rules-based game but cannot play a physical game.

Like, any non-physical rules you would posit are purely a sort of cultural grime.

>>14576233
>My behavior hurt my feelings?
An illustration of your behavior prompted you to hurl insults on the internet, yes?
>It's not hurt feelings, you seem to like these dualisms, e.g. ego/non ego, hurt/not hurt, and picking one side as normative.
You seem to be missing the points I am making.
> I have noticed this throughout my life,
Right, why have you noticed it? One can go their entire life without noticing something. You've noticed height, why is that?
>short dudes are more violent.
Cool. I love violence. Don't you?
>There's nothing to see past the self
That's a hilarious thing to say. Bless your heart.
>If there is something that sees, it is the self by definition
And ego and self are the same thing. I understand what you think and why you think it. I disagree. I think people who experience ego death still exist in that moment as self in a form of consciousness. Do you disagree?
> just dont really think it's the best sort of socialization
Yeah, you do worry about socialization a lot. What up with that?
>Who made these boundaries
Is your ego the universe? If not, there is a boundary, no?
>where are they?
That's for you to find out, my guy.
>What do you mean by "weird"?
The narcissism.
>"the normal" as a way of dealing w/ ppl who otherwise wont play by "the rules" which are mostly made up for ppl who need them
You mean like how being intelligent and tall are GOOD breeding decisions over many generations? Those kind of rules?

>>14576259
>I think people who experience ego death still exist in that moment as self in a form of consciousness.

Well, OK, where are you getting this term ego death from, Leary and company? Jung?

> You seem to be missing the points I am making.

We are all chatters here, we are chatting! What is your point, exactly?

>>14576308
>Well, OK, where are you getting this term ego death from, Leary and company? Jung?
Imagine your brain as a tool you use and pay attention to your thoughts as they emerge from the perspective of an observer rather than the originator. evaluate the patterns that emerge. If you can do this you'll figure out the rest. To answer your question directly, Jung.
>We are all chatters here, we are chatting! What is your point, exactly?
You're a narcissist and that hurts your ego which in turn hurts your feelings. I am not insulting you, I am saying you can fix it if you're willing to self-reflect, unironically.

>>14576327
>You're a narcissist and that hurts your ego which in turn hurts your feelings. I am not insulting you, I am saying you can fix it if you're willing to self-reflect, unironically.
Other anon popping back in, and that's the part why I warn people to ignore narcissists. To my knowledge you can't fix a narcissist. They have chosen to live in a fantasy of their own superiority, and I do not think it is possible to "undo" that in an ethical manner. Basically the main problem they have is themselves.

So you could go on like that for decades having the same conversation. If a narcissist thinks they can get something out of it by complying, so framing it in a way where they're obviously even more superior and awesome, they will. Otherwise it just continues on like that indefinitely.

>>14576327
>Imagine your brain as a tool you use and pay attention to your thoughts as they emerge

Well, this is the process of signals going from one cortex to another, there is no external "observer" who "observes the cortical activity," the observation is itself neurological activity, which in turn influences the activity, because the brain feeds back and forward and all around.

IMO Jung is pseudoscience, like psychoanalysis. But if you are well off and enjoy it, there's no problem with that.

> You're a narcissist and that hurts your ego which in turn hurts your feelings

You keep retreating into this weird desire to diagnose others w/ personality disorders, it's abnormal, normal ppl dont diagnose other ppl with personality disorders, esp. when they have no investment in them.

There's nothing wrong with me, this is just weird 4chan-asshole gaslighting.

>>14576340
>To my knowledge you can't fix a narcissist

Why would you think it your role to "fix" anyone? Are you some sort of human repairman?

>>14576345
>You keep retreating into this weird desire to diagnose others w/ personality disorders, it's abnormal, normal ppl dont diagnose other ppl with personality disorders, esp. when they have no investment in them.

>I'm not the weird one you're the weird one
>You're abnormal
>Stop gaslighting me

You mean while you try to deflect by mirroring what you think are personal attacks on others... gaslighting them?

>>14576340
lmao, turns out you're right.
>>14576345
>There's nothing wrong with me, this is just weird 4chan-asshole gaslighting.
True, you passed the test. We were all just memeing you. You're perfect.

>>14576349
>Why would you think it your role to "fix" anyone? Are you some sort of human repairman?
Why assume I think that is my role? Are you some kind of psychic?

>>14576351
>You mean while you try to deflect by mirroring what you think are personal attacks on others... gaslighting them?

By abnormal I mean that in any normal adult social milieu, going "hey, you're a narcissist...you want me to help fix you?" or "you're a narcissist, you cant be fixed" would be extremely socially inappropriate. Even if it is true it would be socially inappropriate. But here, on the internet, you engage in your messianic desire to fix people, unsolicited =]

>>14576359
MMmno as clearly stated you can't fix a narcissist. That precludes your delusion of others having a messianic complex. I can laugh at you though.

>>14576356
>Why assume I think that is my role? Are you some kind of psychic?

Well, I just asked why. Like, if your intention isn't to fix, what is it? Why do you care?

>>14576361
>That precludes your delusion of others having a messianic complex. I can laugh at you though.

Not really, ppl who have poorly socialized often latch on to psychiatric labels as a way to "other" ppl. I have no idea why they do this, but, you know, it is fairly common. I generally divide ppl into those shorter/stupider than me (most everyone) and then everyone as tall and as smart as me. It's pretty simple, so, there you go.

Remember, "first they came for retard!" if you want to disagree with someone, you can justs call them a retard, you dont need to suggest personality disorder, its better invective.

>>14576370
>Well, I just asked why.
>Why would you think it your role to "fix" anyone?
No, you asked why I thought something I don't think. Hate to tell you this but little games like that are really easy to spot.

>>14576374
>No, you asked why I thought something I don't think. Hate to tell you this but little games like that are really easy to spot.

I said "why would you' not 'why do you.'

There's no game here, I'm just chatting w/ you, you're the one who has all sorts of labels for what is going on. I'm just trying to figure out why you think your rigid taxonomy is correct. But I am also addressing that if it were me, you and a few others having a drink and you acted this way, they would think you were behaving...oddly. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

>>14576381
>I said "why would you' not 'why do you.'
Why would you ask why I would think something I don't think?

>>14576387
>Why would you ask why I would think something I don't think?

So you don't think that, so what is it you're trying to accomplish? Are you just chatting, kiddo?

>>14576390
Am I trying to accomplish anything? I guess you're afraid to explain why you asked me about something I don't believe.

>>14576393
>I guess you're afraid to explain why you asked me about something I don't believe.

You really like attributing mental states to ppl in order to explain them. Do you do the same thing with the weather, or just w/ ppl?

>>14575827
Ed Dutton is an atheist

>>14576395
Only the ones terrified to explain why they'd ask me about something I don't think, instead of asking me if I think it.

>>14576399
>Only the ones terrified to explain why they'd ask me about something I don't think, instead of asking me if I think it.

It seems pretty clear why someone asks a question, they want the answer. So, we've established your motivation isnt fixing anything, so what is it? This entertains you?

>>14576353
>lmao, turns out you're right.
As you can tell I have ample experience dealing with these kinds of people. Even so, as shown, you can face one of these people with their own mental games and they can only deny deny deny. It doesn't matter how transparent, or how ridiculous, or what the consequences are. That is why it is a disorder, because it considerably harms their ability to function normally.

Unsurprisingly such people use the internet to feed their need for superiority quite a lot.

>>14576409
>Unsurprisingly such people use the internet to feed their need for superiority quite a lot.

No u.

>>14576409
>considerably harms their ability to function normally.
Yeah, that sucks. Well, you live you learn .Cheers anon.

>>14572748
Nobody cares about your antinatalism because your cause will die in a generation or two since you are not reproducing. So yeah, it's a rather good thing you won't reproduce (not like there was the danger of it anyways lol!).

>>14574773
Got 131 from a long internet test (not that mensa marketing) and around 130 from another internet test (not mensa either). So take my IQ with a pinch of salt.
Anyways, it depends on what you mean with inconsistency because the physical world is perfectly logical with its laws etc. (even if we may not understand it now). If you mean inconsistencies in human society...I think noticing the inconsistencies is only the first step. The next step is to realize that they aren't so much of inconsistencies as they are humans doing things intuitively and have kind of "hidden" logic to them. Or what do you mean with inconsistencies with the world?

>>14573481
Fucking hell, I can relate to this so much.

My verbal IQ was said to be in the 130 - 140 range, and verbal IQ is basically the IQ correlated to abstract thought and understanding, so my core intelligence and comprehension of concepts is quite high.

The only detriment was my performance IQ was very low at the time but improved after I was tested as a child. My existence seems the only thing I can discern as irrefutable truth, and every other conceptual model derived from it are just a matter of probability. I see my own consciousness as a fractal of great consciousness, and the absurdity of some of these realizations makes me feel very weird. And I get caught up in the idea that everything I see can only be 'likely' to be true and not 100% true.

In school, I couldn't relate to how normal people thought and acted and had to act purposefully like a retard in order to make friends. In all honestly, I don't see being a high IQ as a super big advantage, I have an insight into things most other people don't contemplate and I can learn abstract concepts with a bit of effort - but I was also incredibly depressed. Oh and find talking to women and normal people extremely mundane.

>>14577960
verbal IQ is for betas

With 3+SDs above average you can become a new Milton, Holmes or Musk. It is all that counts.

I placed in all extension classes (music, english, maths) in high school. I was able to regularly pump out A+'s in the top classes. I also won national music competitions. I am now burnt out and work as a cleaner.

>>14573262
Newton was an autist

>>14573286
Ted's a terrorist, not a serial killer, get your facts straight

>>14575859
uhhhh truth of degrading institutions ( USA with debt, etc, ) yet the constant publication of "everythings fine" and having an echo chamber of "normies" agree, which makes you feel extra
"crazy" in your view honest representation of the current "world" and its events"

>>14579583
You sort of lose all credibility when you state a retarded tradcon "past was better" golden-age myth as the basis for your proclaimed intelligence. You might want to use it and devote some time to metacognition and investigating these beliefs.

For a start, identify what "institutions" are supposedly "degrading" and on what criteria BEFORE your brain retroactively makes up excuses to find whatever can be misinterpreted to agree with it.

>>14573246
>in there experience
>live there life
There's this chick I follow on Facebook. I accidentally started following her because she has the same name of this girl I met and thought I was sending a friend request to her. She was only 14 when I started following her. As soon as I realized she wasn't the person I was meaning to follow I went to unfollow her. But then I realized this 14 year old girl was hilariously stupid. She didn't know why America would send a separate team from Georgia to the Olympics, she couldn't figure out why elevators had buttons for the floor she was already on, and many other things I just saw and laughed. Anyway I never stopped following her because she was such a big source of my morning laughs.

She got pregnant at 15 because she thought you couldn't get pregnant on the first time. She was sure that the 15 year old boy that got her pregnant was going to be a great daddy. Well the kid is 1 now and she always complains about him never being around and how he would rather stay at home bored than see his son and all the other crap any of us could have warned her about when she was certain she was going to be the one teenage mom whose baby daddy would actually hang around.

Anyway the reason I bring all that up is that through these 2 years I've followed this complete moron she has never written "there" when she meant "their". So if this person can get it right, then everyone can.

>>14573575
>You will see exactly what you described there, but worshiping other things like whichever political party color they think will save everyone
Yeah it's pretty obvious the average human needs a religion and, since atheism has risen, people have just picked different things to treat as religion

>>14579713
>Yeah it's pretty obvious the average human needs a religion and, since atheism has risen, people have just picked different things to treat as religion
No, not even a little. What's "pretty obvious" is the most motivated people due to personal feelings of emptiness or lack of meaning seek out extremes and make other people's lives miserable. You see that in religion and in politics. This is not "muh normies" causing the problem.

>>14576179
>high self esteem = narcissism
>low self esteem = depression and neuroticism
Do you psychology fags ever have something that's NOT pathological?
Also, narcissism is a delusion of grandiose, if this person actually has a high IQ, then he isn't narcissistic, he is realistic.

>>14573481
And the dummies approach you the same as they would approach a midwit because for them you're effectively as far as the midwit, the same as they are effectively as far as a midwit for you.
Only then if you want to connect with them and be receptive they change the tune, possibly being overzealous, treating you as their ally right away and shit like that.
Besides the simples/dummies are way better and easier to connect with because they do not have the capacity nor time for the pseudoelaborate self-delusion with loads of energy sacrificed for cognitive dissonance maintenance that midwits do to construct their ambassador of their own brand persona.

>>14579826
>Do you psychology fags ever have something that's NOT pathological?
Yes.
>Also, narcissism is a delusion of grandiose, if this person actually has a high IQ, then he isn't narcissistic, he is realistic.
His expression of it is not. The issue is not claimed accomplishments, nor acknowledgment of unearned traits.
What you've said amounts to "Depression don't real because I get sad sometimes and that's realistic". About as fucking retarded as it is possible to get.

>>14572711
All the supposedly >145+ IQ anons in this thread appear infantile in their social commentary and provide zero indication of any exceptional intellectual ability. They talk like midwits LARPing as high IQ and it’s glaringly obvious. I’ve long had the suspicion that at the tail end of the bell curve, IQ inflates a good amount of otherwise middling individuals, and if these posters are telling the truth, it gives weight to that assumption. It’s truly lonely to lack peers, even on a forum supposedly dedicated to math and science.

>>14572729
I'm seeing some new knowledge, which I'm getting ready to publish on YouTube, but my fuck you're onto it about loneliness and unwillingness to act immorally.

>>14572793
I feel like I got fortunate enough to speedrun up the patronage ladder to going "oh fuck, they're all immoral and retarded", at least at the level of my country's national politics and of Western academia. The happiest I've been in a work environment is as a labourer on a building site with a boss who was straight with me and a collegial environment. IT DOESN'T GET BETTER. (From what I've seen.)

>>14580025
Fwiw, I actually respect and feel less lonely around:
1. People fluent in my culture but from a very different culture
2. Animals. See the world differently from me. Are more intelligent than myself in some ways (e.g. ability to process visual information and correctly navigate physical action at speed)

>>14580042
That is usually what I hear from people. I'll go on a bit here about things not getting better. Either they're lucky, or they're not, and hard work or whatever can either be a soul drudging waste of your time or magically catapult you to top success. With no real choice in between other than being clever enough about ruthlessness to force the issue otherwise (obviously I'm not talking about being "hollywood evil").

I've larped online virtually every end of the spectrum and heard it all. If there's any truth to it, and the various scientific publications and indicator, I find myself increasingly agreeing with people who propose the need of necessary evil. To the point where failure to commit necessary evil is a moral failing as "a bad" in and of itself, for there's no virtue in existing in agony and misery when doing so only compounds that agony and misery.

The more I've looked at the big picture the more "you get what you fucking deserve" seems like a perfect criticism of society at large. The way things are set up to be so reliant on luck and so cruel to the unlucky, irrespective of ability, honestly it deserves a lot worse.

>>14580025
>appear infantile in their social commentary and provide zero indication of any exceptional intellectual ability
Cite the infantile social commentary and an example of exceptional intellectual ability as you perceive it, friend-o.
>>14579826
>Do you psychology fags ever have something that's NOT pathological?
Sure, when applicable.
>Also, narcissism is a delusion of grandiose, if this person actually has a high IQ, then he isn't narcissistic, he is realistic.
Delusions of grandeur are a very bright flare to spot, but it's not the entire picture. Narcissists are into themselves. It is possible to be a low self-esteem narcissist. For example, a person who lives in a world where things are done to them and they are a perpetual victim predominantly are concerned with themselves. Additionally, I am of the opinion that one of the filters in intelligence is the ability to perceive beyond ego. An individual incapable of doing that is not as smart as they think they are from where I am sitting.

>>14572951
Smart people don't enjoy badwwoop Bing dabooop. Smart people find kids drugs like dude weed and dude alcohol. Smart people don't go to festivals with subhuman midwits indulging in wreckless hedonism. Smart people look for ways to take advantage of the system and improve themselves. You're coping hard and have coped your entire miserable life.

>>14580487
>Smart people find kids drugs like dude weed and dude alcohol to confer no benefits and think they're pathetic.
Fixed

These threads always end up in dick measuring contests or some LARP, pretty embarrassing to see... keep going.

>>14579834
>they do not have the capacity nor time for the pseudoelaborate self-delusion with loads of energy sacrificed for cognitive dissonance maintenance that midwits do to construct their ambassador of their own brand persona.

This reminds me a lot of a guy at chuch who was, like, a functional idiot. Back in the day they had "high schools" and "technical schools," the latter were for people who were not "university track" here.

he went to one of those, and ended up having a job in a group home, on the night-shift supervising actual retards. He was a good guy.

>>14579958
>His expression of it is not.
Sure it is. You're just into psychology, which is a pseudoscience anyyway.

>>14580025
>provide zero indication of any exceptional intellectual ability

What sort of indication would you want?

>I’ve long had the suspicion that at the tail end of the bell curve, IQ inflates a good amount of otherwise middling individuals

Well, by definition they're not "middling IQs." IQ is really not as important in the University system as test-taking, where, under time conditions, "arguing with the test" is counterproductive, same for "arguing with your instructors."

IQ testing comes in before there is as much test-taking required to do things, for example, you could do all sorts of fun chemistry stuff into the 1950s, 60s, even 1970s without permits from the government, etc.

A high IQ means you probably could ace most types of tests, but it doesn't mean you'll want to, and to have any sort of profession, you need to write tests.

>>14580487
>Smart people look for ways to take advantage of the system and improve themselves

That is more about motivation or personality traits, not intelligence. Intelligence, or IQ, if we want to call it that, is not about whether you WANT to play a game, it is more about your capacity to play the game, if you were motivated to do so.

Someone can have a very high IQ and little motivation to play games like "get the MD degree" etc. It doesn't mean they couldn't, just that they dont want to.

>>14580487
Genuinely smart people don't give a fuck about other people's idea of what smart people are supposed to do

The actual, biological, scientific reality is that the highest form of pleasure that is achievable in a human life is taking molly, lsd, weed, and cocaine with beautiful young slutty women and high energy dance music and lights and lasers, heroin releases significantly less dopamine.

It's not a sustainable lifestyle but if your intelligence allows you to keep up with your school work it's worth it to know what life has to offer instead of forever being a bitter cuck hating people who got to have all the incredible, amazing social and sexual experiences you'll have to go your whole life without ever getting to taste

>>14582148
Wrong. Smart people aren't entertained by sportsball or bingbadwwop and no where did I suggest accomplishmentfaggotry as an alternative.

>>14582161
Not what I said. See this also >>14582162

>>14582162
Low effort trolling

>>14574773
Just think of every human as a mercenary and their actions start to have logical sense. It’s actually scary that I can predict human behaviour so easily after I understood some truths. You don’t ask yourself why does this person have such and such political views, you ask yourself what rewards is this person getting from promoting such and such political views?

Sex. Money. Women. Power.

>>14582172
It's exactly what you said; that you rely on society to tell you what smart people are supposed to like and do and how they're supposed to act, and as this has caused you to adopt a repressive attitude and held you back from having normal developmental experiences for someone your age, you're now highly resentful of those who don't follow these idiotic societal expectations and still undeniably are more intelligent than you.

I'm sure you're in some level of ignorance and self-delusion that blinds you to this, but it's quite obvious, remember I'm far higher IQ than you.

>>14582177
Its not A then B but the fact that they already reached B through a way wich they cant openly assert in a useful way so
they are searching for A

>>14582197
>>14582209
They do it for sex and power and they tell you to do it for free. Thats why i stopped from listening to any politician at all, you are not a subject you are an object

>>14572711
>IQ 3+ SDs above the mean? i feel like many are already present once you are 2 SDs above
I don't think anyone 3+ SD's above the mean has ever visited this board, frankly. Most people here are less than 1 SD above at best, and a significant number are probably resting at double digits.

It's hilarious to see how many self-proclaimed geniuses are hanging around though. If you reply to this, please tell me one thing you have accomplished with your mega-brain: An invention, a scientific discovery, a piece of software that people in the real world use, a math proof in a journal... etc. If you are past the age of 25 and you don't have any significant intellectual accomplishments to your name, you are not intelligent. You are a larper. Period.

>>14572711
>>14572729
>>14572854
>>14572951
>>14573246
>>14573286
Actualy I dont have the taim to tag all of u pretentious little snowflakes.
I have a question for u faggots. If you are so smart, why aren't you reach?

>>14582233
Well said

>>14582233
>If you reply to this, please tell me one thing you have accomplished with your mega-brain: An invention, a scientific discovery, a piece of software that people in the real world use, a math proof in a journal... etc. If you are past the age of 25 and you don't have any significant intellectual accomplishments to your name, you are not intelligent. You are a larper. Period.

This just shows you don't understand what IQ measures. If you're trying to say "IQ isn't intelligence, intelligence is X," that is fine, but theres no sense in which somone has to have done any of the X,Y,Z to "confirm" their IQ, IQ measures IQ, it doesnt measure capacity to publish in math journals, tho it is probably strongly correlated with that.

So, if you're saying someone doesn't really have an IQ 3 SDs above the mean if they haven't X, that's not...how IQ works...

By the time I was 25, I had represented someone in a State Supreme Court, w/o being a lawyer, does that fall into your list? Not his friend, like, his representative, by leave of the judge. Most lawyers have never seen this happy! Not many such cases!

>>14582233
This is you
>if you haven't dunked by 25 you aren't 6'0 tall.
Out of all the different archetypes that comment my favorite brand are the ones that pop in these threads to drop a comment about how they clearly see the midwit larping scoffing from the sidelines which coincidently implies their own genius without explicitly stating it. Fascinating.

>>14582260
>if you haven't dunked by 25 you aren't 6'0 tall.
Unironically, yes. If you're 2 SD's above average height, that puts you at about 6'3". If you are 6'3" and you can't dunk, you're either a worthless cripple, or you're lying.

>>14582251
>By the time I was 25, I had represented someone in a State Supreme Court, w/o being a lawyer, does that fall into your list?
By age 25 you could have graduated from a top law school and represented someone at the State Supreme Court legitimately, so no.

>>14582260
>Out of all the different archetypes that comment my favorite brand are the ones that pop in these threads to drop a comment about how they clearly see the midwit larping

It's also funny because everything he mentions is something that a conscientious person who is 1-2 std deviations above the mean can do. University publications, etc. are far more about conscientiousness than IQ.

High IQ + Low Conscientiousness doesnt mean the person isnt "really intelligent," it just means they dont like playing games, often when the games are set up to reward conscientiousness more than intelligence.

High IQ + High Conscientiousness can also backfire, because you end up arguing w/ professors, etc. Generally, Slightly above average IQ + slightly above average conscientiousness is going give you a better chance to access "social capital" like publication, tenure, etc.

>>14582275
>By age 25 you could have graduated from a top law school and represented someone at the State Supreme Court legitimately, so no.

That is the easy way, this is what I am illustrating. Playing games is boring, making your own way is sorta fun---like Indiana Jones!

This was a criminal case and everything, not civil. I tell lawyers about it and 99%+ of them have said they have never heard of this ever happening, so it is far more rare than someone getting a JD, arguing a case as a lawyer at 25.

IQ is a scaled test, all it is talking about is how "rare" your score is compared to other people's scores, so the things you've suggested are not that rare, also, they are things that are rare because only so many ppl get into a grad program, or a university, etc.

In the 1970s, lots of school districts in various cities started making "alternative" programs because high kids who didnt want the school trip were dropping out.

>>14582280
>This was a criminal case and everything, not civil. I tell lawyers about it and 99%+ of them have said they have never heard of this ever happening, so it is far more rare than someone getting a JD, arguing a case as a lawyer at 25.
It's an interesting story but you haven't remotely convinced me that it's an intellectual achievement. But regardless, if you're proud of it then good for you.

So far everyone who's responded has proven my point. Four seething responses, zero intellectual achievements.

>>14582272
What's the value of worth assessment by some random person? Still 6'3.

>>14582293
>So far everyone who's responded has proven my point. Four seething responses, zero intellectual achievements.

It's an incredibly rare intellectual achievement, to be allowed to represent someone in a criminal superior court w/o being a lawyer, it is far more rare than publishing a math paper. Every math prof will know of a few undergrads who published as undergrads, lawyers, law profs I have told this story to, they say they've never heard tell of it, some even insist it is "illegal" even tho Judges have control of audience in their Courts.

The problem is you have a narrow list of what you consider "mapping up with high IQ." I think the issue here is that you see yourself as the arbiter of what a person with a high IQ would do.

Most people I know who have legit high IQs dont think that way. I certainly don't. Someone with a high IQ might want to do nothing but breed chrysanthemums, or prizewinning cabbages.

>>14582302
>What's the value of worth assessment by some random person? Still 6'3.

All these random guys with the same personality type remind me of a guy I know---he's not a bad guy, but he basically didn't socialize AT ALL except on the internet until he was in his late teens. He's smart, he actually published a math paper w/o even being in University, but he's very...rigid, has the attitude that he does everything he does because he is smart, not because...well, who knows why anyone does anything, its not like we have free will.

>>14582303
>It's an incredibly rare intellectual achievement, to be allowed to represent someone in a criminal superior court w/o being a lawyer
Frankly it sounds like bullshit.

This article says it's a crime to represent someone in court if you're not a lawyer:
https://thelawdictionary.org/article/can-you-represent-someone-in-court-if-you-arent-a-lawyer/

Even if you did represent someone, which I doubt, you still haven't demonstrated how it was an intellectual achievement (did you prove you could pass the bar exam in an unofficial test sitting?). I'm imagining you as the lawyer in Idiocracy exclaiming that you object because your client interrupted you from watching "Ow, my balls!".

>>14582302
>I'm smart, I've just never manifested my intelligence in any useful capacity.
This is a cope.

>>14582312
>has the attitude that he does everything he does because he is smart,
I come across this a lot. I find it a lot more difficult having a genuine conversation with people who are convinced they're correct because they're smart. The stakes are too high to have an open mind so the roads we can traverse are very narrow.

>>14582331
>This article says it's a crime to represent someone in court if you're not a lawyer:
>https://thelawdictionary.org/article/can-you-represent-someone-in-court-if-you-arent-a-lawyer/

That's simply not true, it's up to the Judge. Also, it might vary by jurisdiction, some places might hasve prohibited it by statute, but not in the commonwealth countries.

Also, that article makes no citations, and most legal profession monopoly acts specify you cannt do certain acts in expectation of reward or fee, so you cant do them for money, at least that is the typical phrasing in the commonwealth.

I think in USA things ar emore uniform, in the commonwealth because we inherit several 100 years of English/Anglo-Saxon (!!) law, there are amnyt hings that lawyers just are not taught because they're not very profitable, except as defensive material.

Also, there are some things you cannot do by a lawyer, who is an officer of the court, e.g.

>>14582347
>The stakes are too high to have an open mind so the roads we can traverse are very narrow.

He did acid once and curled in a ball crying for 8 hours, never did it again.

Me, I like to take acid and ride bikes.

We are different people. Both smart, but he is very attached to his rigid self-conception.

>>14582331
When investigating somebody's claims you may want to first understand enough to know that rules by district, state, county, etc, vary wildly as well as allowance for exceptions to the rules and what rules can be set aside under those exceptions.

He could be bullshitting, but he might not be.

>>14582363
>He could be bullshitting, but he might not be.

I have had this discussion with numerous lawyers at cocktail parties, and many of them assert that it is "impossible," which it is not even by the words in my region's act regulating the "legal profession."

You can't ever say you are a lawyer, but you can do most things a lawyer can do, as long as you are not doing them for the expectation of gain or reward, and, if they involve appearances in court, w/o leave of the court.

>>14582363
Obviously we're an anonymous board here so I don't know where the fuck he lives. I assumed it was somewhere in the US, but since he used the term "commonwealth countries" now I'm thinking probably a 3rd world shithole like Sri Lanka, which makes more sense.

>>14582373
Well yeah don't get me wrong I understand you made a reasonable inference from your perspective.

>>14582341
How so? 6'3 is 6'3 whether I dunk or not. I don't understand why capacity comes with an external validation clause. What does that add?

>>14582375
Also the png he posted of some legal snippet using the archaic "s" suggests that wherever he lives, the legal code hasn't been updated in at least 200 years.

>>14582375
>Well yeah don't get me wrong I understand you made a reasonable inference from your perspective.

I am skeptical the article he cited is even a product of researching every single state, and of right, anyone may be an attorney, by leave of the court, it is only by statute that only bar members may be such.

I say this because that article repeats exactly what lawyers told me in my jurisdiction, and they were 100% wrong. It's something lawyers think is true, which may be true in some states, but is not necessarily true in every state.

For example, yhere is from texas:

"Sec. 81.102. STATE BAR MEMBERSHIP REQUIRED. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person may not practice law in this state unless the person is a member of the state bar.

(b) The supreme court may promulgate rules prescribing the procedure for limited practice of law by:

(1) attorneys licensed in another jurisdiction;

(2) bona fide law students; and

(3) unlicensed graduate students who are attending or have attended a law school approved by the supreme court." (https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.81.htm))

It does not define "bona fide law students." It does not say "law students enrolled in an incorporated college," it says "good faith law students." So that is very different.

>>14582377
If you're 6'3" but ride around in a wheelchair, you're functionally less than four feet.
>I don't understand why capacity comes with an external validation clause. What does that add?
It proves you're not bullshitting.

>>14582381
>Also the png he posted of some legal snippet using the archaic "s" suggests that wherever he lives, the legal code hasn't been updated in at least 200 years.

That's not codified law, it is common law, that is, common reason: if you put in a plea by attorney, that is, in any court, attornment and submission to the Court.

You can only plead in abatement (e.g. "the court lacks jurisdiction over me") in your own proper person, but you sort of have to know what you are doing.

Also, I'm not sure US courts are even properly called courts, they mostly seem like pirate ships to me.

>>14582384
>If you're 6'3" but ride around in a wheelchair, you're functionally less than four feet.
There is a degree of difference between a guy who doesn't dunk and a guy who is in a wheel chair, no? Feels a touch disingenuous to paint both as the same entity, no?
>It proves you're not bullshitting.
Okay, to whom and how does their belief reflect on my capacity?

>>14573246
I would expect better grammar, and punctuation from someone with a higher IQ than myself.

>>14580487
>Smart people don't go to festivals with subhuman midwits indulging in wreckless hedonism
wrong because I want to do this shit

>>14572757
Agree with this. I’m 132

>>14583512
Impressive. Did you fight in WW1?

>>14582236
132 IQ I’m doing pretty well I make 300k a year doing about 5 hours of work a week with unlimited vacation that I don’t bother even asking for because I’ve automated most of my job anyway without telling anyone

>>14583517
I meant 132 iq, but if I was that old I’d do everything I could to get out of the Rothschilds’ war

>>14583524
Obviously your medium IQ doesn't help to write intelligibly on an otherwise low-IQ board.

>>14583524
>300k a year
How is the 2022 market treating you, anon?

>>14574279
You can have inattentive ADHD and a high IQ, so that is always an option.
>>14583412
Yeah basically it's a lot of personality. Personality especially at the extremes determines a lot.

Me, well, I just kind of drift through life feeling as if it's a kind of nightmare or a dream with no significance to it. Not depressed, nor do I have any psychiatric condition, but I'm about as detached from other people as I think it is possible to be without being a schizoid.

Sometime in my 20s, and I'm getting to be an old fuck so this is many moons ago, I learned my IQ was "off the charts", so that helped to explain most of my disappointment with people. You get a lot of "lol larpers" or IQ denial, but if you really are at an extreme your mind can fuck you up a lot trying to justify everyone always being so goddamn stupid. Including the firm belief that you are the stupid one, because everyone forms a self-justifying narrative that you have to be since nobody can understand you. It's like the teen angst on TV only actually justified and a horrible cruelty you see groups of people adopt to justify the consensus.

"A world not made for me" is perhaps the best summary. One that is only boring, with people who maybe are "okay" but who I can never truly share my mind with. For a long time I did go the academic route, before giving it up, chasing after that desire for understanding. I can't say it gets better no matter how high up the totem pole you are, because it just seems to get worse in different ways. Like how Feynman had an impossible time explaining some of his ideas to other experts in his field, because they kept explaining to him the mistakes he were making that weren't mistakes.

"A world not made for me" and "people correcting mistakes I never made" is about right. So I've grown to prefer audiobooks and animals to people, that's for sure. I just wish I wasn't so damn alone sometimes. You get used to it, but you also sort of don't.

>>14583560
>Accidentally posted mid-edit and introduced some grammatical errors.
Fuck me sideways sudoku time

>>14583560
>You can have inattentive ADHD and a high IQ, so that is always an option.
nope, "mental illness" and "brain damage" are synonymous terms, if you have mental illness then you have low IQ. if you have mental illness and you think you have high IQ, then what you really have is mental illness, low IQ and grandiose delusions of superior intellect.

>>14583570
low IQ

>>14583620
Whatever you say buddy. I'm sure one day someone other than your mother will pretend they care too.

>>14583556
Fine because none of it was equity. If you want to pwn me then You should be asking how much I missed out on from 2015-2022 by not taking a FAGMAN job that pays a third of salary in options.

>>14572729
>and my IQ is only 105
this was obvious from the rest of your post

>>14572729
this post is surprisingly inspirational, thanks anon

>>14583748
>defensive
>no detail outside of "fine"
Larper locked on.

158 IQ here

>>14583630
>Whatever you say buddy. I'm sure one day someone other than your mother will pretend they care too.

I don't get why these guys post like this, it's like they've never had a conversation with people ever.

>>14573246
Based on the way you write there is no way you are 160 IQ faggot

>>14572729
i like what you said about creating knowledge being akin to creating life. Mitchell Heisman called it a new kind of evolution by which ideas or forms manifest in reality and seek to reproduce (memes as apposed to genes). he called it technological or "post-biological" evolution. this will of course lead to technology that self-recursively improves itself and culminates in the technological genesis of God. it started with Christianity and monotheism

im going to kill myself. ive never taken an iq test but i think im smart lol

>>14584300
What's god?

>>14584311
i guess i have two answers; at this stage in my life i don't know which one i would stick behind when push comes to shove. the first is that god is the creator of the universe. the second is that god is incomprehensible and doesn't fit into some kind of syllogism. i'm not sure if man is capable of conceiving of the true god—man is just an animal.

>>14584327
Do a flip.

>>14584330
i appreciate the sentiment, but im going to shoot myself

>>14584332
Hope you don't miss. Good luck.

have a good one

>>14583806
>>makes a self deprecating reply
>defensive!
4channel.org/sci/ is the smartest this site has to offer

>>14572711
Active member of Mensa with SD 3+ (WAIS).
Met other 3+ (TNS, etc.)
> Usually very nice, subtle and gentle people
> Most of then with serious, usually solo, achievements in various fields
> Somehow better adjusted to society than SD 2
> Not successful in the common sense
> Most of then somehow spiritual / mystical according to their cultural traditions

>>14584717
>dodges question
>why aren't you paying attention to my self-deprecating larp
>must be low iq

>>14572711
IQ doesn't mean all that much desu; it's just pattern recognition. 90% of my high school was +130 IQ. You could walk down a hallway and ask a random person their SAT score and they would always have at least one perfect subject. You could probably get away with asking them to recite a few dozen digits of pi too if you really wanted to waste time. Two people from my class became doctors and five work at various low level stores like stapes/shoprite/home depot.

You need drive AND the IQ. Just comparing IQ is a dick measuring contest for people who think physically comparing penises is immature.

>>14583866
>no period
If you were really 158 you would have known better.

>>14584851
You’re right, I’m wrong

>>14572711
I'm right above the threshold of 3 SDs above average (officially administered Stanford-Binet), and the most significant advantage I can think of is that I can "solve" 99.9% of the people I come across within moments of interacting with them, which means I pretty much always get what I want in social situations (admittedly due more to my appearance than my intelligence) and normal people perceive me as highly intuitive and wise.

>>14572748
childfree antinatalism is the biggest goypill in existence.

>>14585803
>wise
>pattern of manipulating 99.9% people
>think no one sees it
>3SD above average
I believe it.

>>14576397
I'm pretty sure he studied chaplaincy and religion in university?

>>14572711
Our world has low 'ceiling' for IQ in most things.

>>14572711
I don't know where the difference lies desu, but over the last few years it's become evident to me that my friends can't really go down the same path and create opportunities that I can do. fwiw.

>>14572951
you've got it all wrong
>>14573140
This guy gets it, if you are a hyper giga galactic brainoid then you transcend upwards, like me. Make money and become financially free. Sex the girls on your terms. Then you've got it all.

>>14572748
>Objectively it will be unethical
Holy reddit

>>14583560
I feel the same way but don't have a genius IQ
starting to think IQ isnt the relevant factor, more like theres a certain threshold requirement and after that it doesnt really matter

>>14590106
You certainly have to be "in for it", whatever the "it" is, for its own sake beyond a given point. Once you end up in a situation where you're ALWAYS stuck explaining yourself from "step 1", then re-explaining as people fail to get it so they keep explaining more "mistakes" that aren't mistakes, and you just circle that drain until you're fed up.

That can be contextual, but where it becomes the "great filter" is when you're in academia or where the supposedly smart people are... and that didn't improve at all. Only now instead of trying to explain to some dock worker he can just multiply the length and height of a pallet (same sized boxes) to get the quantity you're trying to explain to somebody why the statistical inferences they've made from an ecological sample not only aren't valid but they're flatly WRONG from square one.

It's one thing if you're teaching students because they tend to just try to pass a class anyway. It's quite another when you have to explain to a tenured professor that they're a fucking idiot who should step down and make way for literally anyone the fuck else willing to keep up with some basic fucking meta-science. Why no, dumbass, we don't just survey people like it's the 1960s and make up whatever results we want but sure whatever go ahead enjoy the retraction farce oh look I was right. No I am not just going to "make the math look right". That, by the way, happens as often in the private sector.

Point is: It IS relative, and your cutoff IS going to be in some sense based on how far from the mean your SD is I think relative to the baseline you are dealing with. There is 100% a real communication barrier and if you're in that 0.01% life is just hell if you fight it.

>>14590254
>Point is: It IS relative, and your cutoff IS going to be in some sense based on how far from the mean your SD is I think relative to the baseline you are dealing with. There is 100% a real communication barrier and if you're in that 0.01% life is just hell if you fight it.

I found it got even worse at 6'5 after I lost weight--suddenly I was basically the tallest AND most intelligent person in (some) rooms, and these "assistant professors" loved working out on me. When I was fat they mostly ignored me, but once I was fit, it was like, I remember one, he was 5'6 and he was just the most sophomoric person you can imagine, he was basically my dept's first equity hire in an otherwise 100% white dept.

>>14590254
Also none of that is at all even the tiniest agreement with the fucking retarded /pol/ idiots who can't read. The issues you find on the back-end with what I've mentioned are never in some major journal, just your usual "publish or perish" time wasting bullshit and university political jockeying for shit that doesn't matter. Meanwhile the real research only a few lucky people get to do by kissing all the assholes has nothing at all to do with how important that research might be. How we allocate funding is absolutely broken. Even so, for the top journals or "major research", there's at least no fraud involved most of the time.

The problem isn't with the academics either. It's with the administration in funding allocation because nobody in charge knows their head from their ass or how to evaluate likelihood of returns beyond clickbait headlines. THEN there's ethics review boards - where all good or common sense goes to die. https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/29/my-irb-nightmare/

I've been through something similar to Scott Alexander's "IRB nightmare" and it kills most good research ideas outright. Purely because some Karen was given authority to be a cunt. THAT is the problem with academia, far more than some old fart tenured professor thinking not improving for 40 years means he's still the best.

>>14590271
Yeah I don't tolerate that shit. Unsurprisingly I never won any awards for politics. I just always had options so "Either fucktard goes or I go" and if fucktard wouldn't go I would.

>>14590282
>Yeah I don't tolerate that shit. Unsurprisingly I never won any awards for politics. I just always had options so "Either fucktard goes or I go" and if fucktard wouldn't go I would.

But you're in STEM, no? In some ways it is easier---the problem is that if everyone smart justs builds a hidey-hole in STEM and doesnt bother to do PhDs in English, Philosophy, etc. etc. then this leaves this disciplines that have far more contact w/ students who are far more impressionable to the wolves.

But on the other hand, being in a humanities department, if you could do STEM (philosophy used to be an exception, but more and more it is becoming "woke") is like banging your head against the wall.

>>14590311
I'm just saying that either way you have virtually the same problem and the problem is always relative to your level of competence. The more extreme that competence the less acceptable the roadblocks get. Sadly it gets no better at all in the private sector, you just get lucky or you don't.

Also sofar as I'm concerned students are not some "thing you indoctrinate" they come looking for the indoctrination that matches them. Self selection. They radicalize themselves and pick the professors radicalizing them in the way they want to go. Everyone else just uses any service at all to avoid those nutcases.

>>14579583
>USA with debt
Oh you mean the continuous rate of interest that it owes mostly to itself to begin with? Or did you mean the debt to GDP ratio which is actually relevant? Mind you pattern recognition isn’t really necessary to understand this concept but rather information acquisition and memory retention to the point the pedestrian could even grasp this concept.

>>14590329
Man I've explained that so many times. You have to wonder why the idiots don't police themselves and SPREAD the fucking explanation. Instead if they ever admit they're wrong they hold it private like sacred inner secrets that nobody else must know or some shit. But oh no they were real happy spreading falsehood before then!

((((((((((((((((((((VERY IMPORTANT))))))))))))))))))
If you retards are so smart share your music taste.
***Hard mode: Classical is now allowed***

>>14572748
If it is unethical then that means that people should not do it even if they want to do it and benefit from it. And if that was the case then there would exist a reason. Outside some weird anti-natalist religion such reasons do not exist so anyone who doesn't belong to the religion has no reason to view it as unethical.

>>14590493
your fixation on bathing yourself in the imaginary reflected glory of your preference in *insert consumer goods category here* is a transparently cringey coping mechanism.

>>14590493
>((((((((((((((((((((VERY IMPORTANT))))))))))))))))))
>If you retards are so smart share your music taste.
>***Hard mode: Classical is now allowed***

Grateful Dead.

>>14590615
Yeah no one bugs me more than people who define themselves by what they consume

>>14590493
Who cares seek validation from somewhere else

>>14572711
You can basically do anything. Get any job. Reason your way in and out of any situation. I'm telling you, high IQ is literally a superpower.

>>14584300
if you are smart you should be able to solve your problems or cope with them in a smart way without killing yourself

>>14591654
What if he's smart enough to mathematically prove there is no solution