/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14641040]

How does one deal with the fact that he doesn't have enough intelligence or wasn't born in the right circumstances and time to have an impact on the world?

[Anonymous No.14641062]

you open a business

[Anonymous No.14641068]

>impact on the world
Only midwits think this is a worthwhile goal. The genius doesn't want to contribute to the technological-industrial system. He lives innawoods and doesn't share his deep insights.

[Anonymous No.14641073]

>>14641040
>How does one deal with the fact that he doesn't have enough intelligence or wasn't born in the right circumstances and time to have an impact on the world?
You learn what intelligence means in the first place and then go develop it
https://archived.moe/lit/thread/16639317/

>wasn't born in the right circumstances and time to have an impact on the world
When you read the entire think in the link I posted, maybe you won't care about that when you become more intelligent, maybe you will. Either way, if you can't find opportunities, create them.

[Anonymous No.14641085]

>>14641040
if you want to change the world, a good way to start is by reposting the same tired old memes over and over and over again

[Anonymous No.14641088]

>>14641073
>il/lit/erate confuses intelligence and intellectualism
Sad. Many such cases.

Intelligence is IQ. Intellectualism is the moral constitution compelling you to use your IQ to pursue truth. For example a few women can have high IQ, but no woman ever shows any sign of intellectualism. That's why even the smartest women will never be among the top 10 people in any field of intellectual pursuits but always remain in a state of boring mediocrity.

[Anonymous No.14641113]

>>14641085
Frog posting will never be a "tired old meme". Frog posts are aesthetically pleasing, intellectually stimulating and morally enlightening. They perfectly convey eternal beauty and truth. Frog bros are the most insightful and emotionally mature posters on this website.

[Anonymous No.14641117]

>>14641073
>When you read the entire think in the link I posted
lmao I'm not reading those walls of text

[Anonymous No.14641138]

>>14641088
>il/lit/erate confuses intelligence and intellectualism
>Sad. Many such cases.
>Intelligence is IQ.
The word intelligence comes from a series of other words that existed before IQ was invented as a concept, and much before scientism became the dominating midwit ideology.

[Anonymous No.14641143]

>>14641117
Then stay at your level of intelligence for the remaining of your existence. It is an excellent article written by one of the most influential Brazilian philosophers of this century.

[Anonymous No.14641144]

>>14641138
>scientism
Another midwit dogwhistle. Yikes.

Nobody cares about etymological origins of the word "intelligence". Language changes dynamically. Intelligence has been formalized by the concept of IQ. This does not imply any "scientism" strawman of yours.

[Anonymous No.14641245]

>>14641040
Many famous historical scientists made significant discoveries by accident. Yet they were smart and academic-minded enough to work as scientists in an era when there was 1/1000th as much funding for science as today. You pretty much had to live in Paris, Berlin or London and be admitted into one of a dozen labs

[Anonymous No.14641247]

>>14641144
Scientism is not a midwit dogwhistle

[Anonymous No.14641252]

>>14641144
>Language changes dynamically. Intelligence has been formalized by the concept of IQ.
Fuck off bootlicker

[Anonymous No.14641270]

>>14641040
You look at the bigger picture and realize that the kind of "intelligence" you adore so much is a cancerous and dysgenic trait responsible for every ill in this world, worldwide chronic misery and probably the ending of all life.

[Anonymous No.14641317]

>>14641144
>Language changes dynamically
You can change the word for a zebra but the zebra is still a zebra.

The problem is that in this case, the word for zebra started being used to define a monkey, yet people think the monkey and the zebra are the same thing

[Anonymous No.14641367]

>>14641068
This is true. I have a stack of math proofs of theorems only I know and I don’t have any interest in publishing them. I share them with a few friends as conversation pieces and that’s it, they otherwise only serve to satiate my own curiosity on things.

[Anonymous No.14641382]

>>14641040
You can't deal with such a fact.

[Anonymous No.14641419]

>>14641040
>to have an impact on the world
I'm fucking tired of people with that immature goal

[Anonymous No.14641443]

>>14641040
destroy everything humanity has ever conceived

[Anonymous No.14641483]

>>14641419
>immature goal
The urge to create stems from the fear of death, which is hardcoded into every human being.

[Anonymous No.14641490]

>>14641040
options
> don't care, know your place
> not aware
> care and get upset and insecure and try and prove your worth obsessively
first two options are good

[Anonymous No.14641532]

>>14641483
>which is hardcoded into every human being
maybe every teenager?
people here are unironically scared of something they will NEVER prevent, kek, get mogged

[Anonymous No.14641631]

>>14641247
It's a word literally only ever used by midwitted pseuds.

[Anonymous No.14641635]

>>14641317
Glad we agree. You can use your private language to redefine intelligence by some absurd appeal to etymology, but ultimately it won't change the accepted definition of intelligence via IQ.

[Anonymous No.14641676]

You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you want to have an "impact" on the world. Hyperconpetitive neurotic brainrot and a fear of death have conditioned you to try to make yourself a martyr for a concept instead of a multifaceted human being. This is why people shoot up supermarkets and publish manifestos full if regurgitated memes.

[Anonymous No.14641693]

>>14641040
>le impact on the world
unironically who cares

[Anonymous No.14641726]

>>14641367
Nice larp.

[Anonymous No.14641730]

>>14641068
Having an impact on the world can also mean destroying modernity and globohomo.

[Anonymous No.14642252]

>>14641730
>globohomo
/pol/ is leaking again

[Anonymous No.14642264]

>>14641040
99,99% of people won't make any impact on the world and that's ok. Just enjoy your time here as much as you can.

[El Arcón No.14642273]

>mfw I don't know that feel

[Anonymous No.14642286]

>>14641040
>have an impact on the world?
When did this egoism start? I can't imagine the average bumfuck farmer in medieval times thinking how they should impact the world, yet everyone today seems to want to be God. Is it Hollywood/Disney teaching kids that they are "special" and "unique"?

[Anonymous No.14642291]

>>14642286
>When did this egoism start?
Protestant revolution

It's a spiritual sickness

[Anonymous No.14642292]

>>14642286
When the western world became educated collectively.

[Anonymous No.14642300]

>>14642292
>When the western world became educated collectively.
Any boy who just finished his education in ancient greece would intellectually mog any living adult in this board

[Anonymous No.14642303]

>>14642300
Not really, but believe what you want.

[Anonymous No.14642316]

>>14642300
Probably would in debating skills and how to skin a deer, but I doubt much else.

[Anonymous No.14642493]

>>14642300
Nigga Euclid's Elements was cutting edge mathematics back then.

[Anonymous No.14642529]

>>14641040
>impact on the world
Don't do it. The greater your impact on "the world," the more harm, death, and general evil you will personally be responsible for by whatever action or inaction you take.

[Anonymous No.14642542]

>>14642300
>education
By this you must mean the priviledged few who could attend the philosophy schools. Even then, we would still mog the Naturalists as well the Pythagoreans by disproving Aristolianism and getting drowned by the latter. We would get absolutely wrecked by Epistemologists, Sophists and the like in debate sure, but there's a reason no one remembers their names. Using modern knowledge we would be at least Aristotle or Archimedes tier even if we never gain Socrates tier fame.

Simple intellectual honesty goes a long way across the ages. Scholarship before the Enlightenment is honestly a bit overrated in that regard. We've drastically improved our rigour and pedagogy.

[Anonymous No.14642547]

>>14642529
>the more harm, death, and general evil you will personally be responsible for by whatever action or inaction you take.
Anon, you want to head over to /pol/ where they care about such things. We only care about computing homotopy groups here.

[Anonymous No.14642622]

>>14642303
>Not really
As children they had to memorize their classical literature, study music, gymnastics, that alone turns you into a gigabrain

[Anonymous No.14642629]

>>14642542
>priviledged few who could attend the philosophy schools
No, I mean the education given to children, which was perfect.

Philosophy schools would be the last step in someone's education, they only accepted grown men there.

[Anonymous No.14642637]

>>14642542
>Scholarship before the Enlightenment is honestly a bit overrated
All the Enlightenment philosophers (e.g. Rosseau who left his 5 children to die, much lile Marx would) were complete scum and the archetype of today's revolutionary cancer

[Anonymous No.14642666]

>>14642547
>computing homotopy groups
>impact on the world
Anon...

[Anonymous No.14642696]

>>14641040
>impact on the world
Hi there, I was 18 once as well.

[Anonymous No.14642707]

>>14642696
>>14641040
The education system takes people who have high IQ and lots of inspiration, molds them, and puts them in dark room where they're forgotten about and to work like a dog under someone else's thumb. My impression is that with the growing power of institutions, it's more so now then ever. Smart people who don't actively look to escape the rat race end up as a cog in the machine, or placed in an environment full of low IQ people, and destined to be unhappy.