|
Nelek wrote: That doesn't imply that there are not intelligent people here or that you are more intelligent as us
If you read the original post again that's why I said I can accept I may be the stupid one.
That being said, I do think experience is the real teacher in life. Those who are experienced in a field know when someone who is not is speaking. There's a lot of argumentative, inexperienced people here. And for that reason, I do feel as if I don't have much in common.
For instance, I've lived in Vegas... lived. Had some dude on CP argue about how nice Vegas is who's never been there. How foolish can people be? It's a waste of time and life energy.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: If you read the original post again that's why I said I can accept I may be the stupid one.
I did... but I still said for the sick of being a smartass 
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I do think experience is the real teacher in life.
For me life is the teacher and experience is the result, but yes... I can go with that.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: For instance, I've lived in Vegas... lived. Had some dude on CP argue about how nice Vegas is who's never been there.
I have never been there, but alone for what I have seen in films and reportages, I don't think I'll ever visit it if I go to the US.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: I have never been there, but alone for what I have seen in films and reportages, I don't think I'll ever visit it if I go to the US.
If you do, you'll be ok as long as you stay in the touristy spots. Vegas is like a ghetto (in mentality) but with money, so once you leave the touristy spots things change... even nice grocery stores will have used condoms in the parking lot, etc.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Define intelligent.
I've known PHDs that didn't know which end of a screw driver was the usable end.
I've know expert carpenters that couldn't tell you who Einstein was.
Intelligence depends on the subject matter, most people could carry on an intelligent conversation in some area.
I don't think before I open my mouth, I like to be as surprised a everyone else.
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: I've known PHDs that didn't know which end of a screw driver was the usable end.
I've know expert carpenters that couldn't tell you who Einstein was.
I think what you're describing there is more education than intelligence.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Or knowledge?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: PHDs
Have heard of a Mathematics PhD, whose doctoral thesis was on mathematical simulation of a type of vortex flow in fluid mechanics, but who could not recognize such a flow happening in front of him, on a rainy day.
Aside, I am also a PhD holder, hopefully not like him 
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: didn't know which end of a screw driver was the usable end.
Both ends are usable for different tasks. Failing to recognize that a tool may be used for more than one task shows a lack of intelligence.
I frequently use the butt end of a screwdriver to push small nails into the wall to hang pictures. In fact, when I use a hammer to put a small nail in the wall, I use the handle, not the head. The butt end of a screwdriver is also useful for inserting model railroad spikes.
I was thinking about this again just yesterday in regards to an argument I was having which is essentially "can be used like" does not equal "is like". To wit, stating that a screwdriver can be used like a hammer is not the same as stating that a screwdriver is like a hammer or that they are equivalent.
It kind of came down to a point where I would characterize the other party's assertion as "two sets are equivalent if the intersection of the sets is not the null set" -- which is patently untrue. In other words, both a hammer and a screwdriver can be used to put small screws in a wall to hang pictures, but that doesn't make them equivalent, each can be used for other tasks.
A hammer can be used as a screwdriver only in the crudest sense, not very effectively.
If one could carry only a screwdriver or a hammer, the screwdriver is likely to be the better choice due to its flexibility.
modified 8-Nov-23 14:20pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly, there's a reason screwdrivers come with a warning saying not to use them as a hammer or a chisel.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, yeah, I forgot about that time I used a screwdriver when I was too lazy to go get a chisel.
I don't recall seeing any such warning.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: Define intelligent.
Yeah, good point. There is more than one type of intelligence. Rather than retype what I typed, please check my other replies.
Mike Hankey wrote: I've known PHDs that didn't know which end of a screw driver was the usable end.
Mike Hankey wrote: I've know expert carpenters that couldn't tell you who Einstein was.
I see both of these people as intelligent (in theory), just in different areas of specialty. If they're both intelligent enough to not be asshats, are introspective, can communicate, etc. then there's still a certain level of intelligence exhibited by both.
Mike Hankey wrote: Intelligence depends on the subject matter, most people could carry on an intelligent conversation in some area.
I wish there were true. It's been my experience though, like with being online, too many folks are ill-experience and too immature to have a real conversation. Maybe the problem lies with me, maybe not. I just know for a fact a lot of peeps talk out of their arse when they're clueless.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: like with being online, too many folks are ill-experience and too immature to have a real conversation. Maybe the problem lies with me, maybe not. I just know for a fact a lot of peeps talk out of their arse when they're clueless.
It's funny when people get online they are very different people. They are not responsible for their actions and don't care what others think or how it affects them. In short they act like most people when they've had too much to drink, it brings out the inner Hyde in them.
I don't think before I open my mouth, I like to be as surprised a everyone else.
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: it brings out the inner Hyde in them.
1,000% agree. My theory is that most people aren't really happy. Some folks pretend to be. But few strive to be. So, it's their escape to release emotions they try and suppress to appear "normal".
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
MacGyver intelligence: "how do you roll up a blind when all you have is a fork?"
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Hold it against someone's throat and tell them to roll up the blind?
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: Intelligence depends on the subject matter, most people could carry on an intelligent conversation in some area.
I suspect deep subject matter tends to camouflage lack of intelligence, in many cases. Someone who knows SubjectX inside out can discuss it in depth, debate the grey areas, and come across as highly intelligent.
However I think true "intelligence" isn't related to depth of subject knowledge, but is related to (1) the ability to take on and understand new knowledge, and (2) to apply knowledge gained in one area to another area. It's to do with making the links from a known to an unknown field, and thereby multiplying the power of the knowledge they have. Finally I believe it requires a moral aspect that can then apply that understanding for the benefit of others.
Every once in a while you come across people who have achieved mind-bogglingly vast amounts in a single lifetime. To be able to achieve so much such people not only require great stamina, an outstanding drive to achieve, (and a complete absence of procrastination!) but also the ability to absorb and re-apply skills over and over again. Many people achieve much, but there seems to be a step-change in achievement levels that is barely understandable to mere mortals like myself.
(An example that comes to mind is Beatrix Potter. Many people will think of her as a children's book author. However most of her books were not for children; she was also a diarist (written in a cipher of her own invention), painter, illustrator, botanist (specialising in mycology - doing original research on fungal germination and hybridisation and publishing a paper on the subject), conservationist, pioneer of merchandising (her stuffed-toy Peter Rabbit was the very first licensed character), landowner, farmer, sheep breeder and judge, historian and more. All this at a time when women were not expected (and even allowed) to do some of these things; and travelling regularly between London, the Lake District and Scotland.)
[See Wikipedia[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I mostly agree but I think the true sign of genius is imagination.
I don't think before I open my mouth, I like to be as surprised a everyone else.
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps we need intelligent people who are also receptive to other's ideas, meaning those who are patient listeners.
|
|
|
|
|
100%... I'd extend that to say that it takes two people to talk though. As for me, whether or not this makes me "dumb"... I've lost patience with a lot of immature people who just argue and rattle off stupid nonsense. I admit I'm jaded though. There's just only so many years a person can watch the same crap happen over and over before it gets old.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: There's just only so many years a person can watch the same crap happen over and over before it gets old.
I hope you're ignoring politics. 
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, just by listening (to certain people), you are considered "intelligent." But if they catch you listening to someone else ...
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Reminds me of some blogger who worked for a decade or more at Microsoft. I forget who it was, but it doesn't matter.
After leaving the company, he wrote he knew there were very smart people working at Microsoft. His claim is that he was just expressing frustration from never meeting any of them while he was there...
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: After leaving the company, he wrote he knew there were very smart people working at Microsoft. His claim is that he was just expressing frustration from never meeting any of them while he was there...
100%! People need to connect with other humans. It can be lonely to know the best conversation you're going to get out of those around you are fundamentally tantamount in caliber to that of a high school conversation.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
You have an IQ of 132+? (Mensa)
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
If I say yes... would it be believable? If I say no... would it be believable still? 
You should know my bias... I think the concept of an IQ has serious flaws. There is more than one type of intelligence. It also fluctuates, as in the IQ isn't static throughout a person's life. Not to mention, different tests use different scoring systems and so on. But humans are humans, and we need something quantifiable to explain to average folks what cannot be comprehended.
So, I'll just say it like this... I can pass whatever dinky test they throw my way, and I've taken IQ tests in the past as a child and adult. Not official tests at a center or anything, but from books and so on (except for one but I don't trust that place), and it was always around 150+ depending on the test. To be fair, I was young and less depressed, so preliminary aging (via depression) can take its toll should I score lower now. But, I'm willing to bet, worst case scenario, I could pass it after a few tries at least.
But, I don't like labels and numbers. They're not static anyway. It's a system of classification that excludes. I get it though... people want something to measure.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 7-Nov-23 16:20pm.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
