What's a Genius and Do You Consider Yourself One?

[Fukyo]

Discuss in a civil manner @snafupants. No more snide comments.

 

[BigApplePi]

Okay. Here's my answer to the O.P. "What's a Genius and Do You Consider Yourself One?" That's two questions.

I won't know one if I see one but if I can get my hands on them I could shake them and see what falls out

and

I do consider myself one person though divided and spread out.

 

[BigApplePi]

I'm beginning to think it will take a genius to give correct answers to the O.P. <-- Can someone define "genius" as I've used it here please?

@Fukyo. I wish there were a snide thread where one could go and make snide remarks. And maybe a silly thread where I could go without feeling guilty and play.

 

[snafupants]

I'm beginning to think it will take a genius to give correct answers to the O.P. <-- Can someone define "genius" as I've used it here please?

@Fukyo. I wish there were a snide thread where one could go and make snide remarks. And maybe a silly thread where I could go without feeling guilty and play.

@BigApplePi

Define correct. The snide comments threads, as an aside, are any threads created by Melkor, Cognisant, or Minuend. Most threads are silly. Time is finite so troll today.

 

[BigApplePi]

@BigApplePi

Define correct. The snide comments threads, as an aside, are any threads created by Melkor, Cognisant, or Minuend. Most threads are silly. Time is finite so troll today.

Good day snafu. I'm trying to take my mind off my back as I injured it.

Is it important one be correct? Who correct? Isn't anything anyone says correct and true if looked at in the right light? So what's the big deal? Of course, there are temptations to lead us into incorrectness as Fukyo has pointed out.

Define correct? Consistent with and undeviating from reality to a high degree.

 

[snafupants]

Good day snafu. I'm trying to take my mind off my back as I injured it.

Is it important one be correct? Who correct? Isn't anything anyone says correct and true if looked at in the right light? So what's the big deal? Of course, there are temptations to lead us into incorrectness as Fukyo has pointed out.

Define correct? Consistent with and undeviating from reality to a high degree.

Good day? In what sense? What the hell just happened?

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Bap, how can you have so many posts and yet have not discovered the arena?

 

[BigApplePi]

Good day? In what sense? What the hell just happened?

What happened about correctness? Nuttin. I didn't do nuttin to it.

Oh? You mean my back. It must be Si. INTP's don't like to put limitations on their thinking. That could be contagious and spread to sensation. When doing physical labor I tend to ignore fatigue and do too much ignoring possible consequences (poor or lack of Se). The curve sign on the road is blocked by trees, brush and vines. I had worked several days on this but the curve sign was still not visible though I improved on it. To get to the next tree to cut down, I had to clear the ground of previously cut vines, rose bushes and other thorn bushes. So I started to pick them up and in a discus-like motion whirled them onto a pile. I was already sore from previous activity but there is no stopping me. (My sister had said I could call the highway department to do this but doing it myself is much more fun. I love physical labor.) To make a long story short, the next day I had back spasms behind my hip. It's been about four days now. If I move the wrong way, you can hear me scream. Can't name the muscle although I tried google. It's extremely debilitating as no position in bed relieves the pain. Sorry you asked?

 

[BigApplePi]

Bap, how can you have so many posts and yet have not discovered arena?

Because I keep my nose to the grindstone and look down. Besides, you didn't give me a pathway.

 

[redbaron]

So... Basically what you're saying is that if you think (believe) that you are a genius (and say so when asked), you are a mental?

Yet another straw man.

Here's a tip. If you need to paraphrase the meaning of a sentence so that you can rebut it - don't even bother. 'So basically you mean...' is a prime example.

He meant exactly what he said - that self-proclaiming genius can be associated with narcissism and delusions of grandeur.

If you want to rebut whether or not this specific observation is true, you are free to do so. Instead you're rebutting an implied meaning, that you came up with. You're not rebutting his argument, you're rebutting the argument you created for him.

You and snafupants seem to not even realise how often you do this in your arguments, which is why I've neglected to discuss the topic further. I even had to explain how burden of proof works to snafu.

If you're going to rebut something, rebut the specific point, not an implication that you've interpreted. This is why debates turn into name-calling, and why majority of my time in this thread has been spent explaining how to actually debate a point logically.

The rest is of this is irrelevant to the topic, but I'd like to add it:

I know you like to fancy yourself as a great debater, but from what I've seen people simply get tired of your inability to rebut a point, without first attaching an implication to it that was never intended in the first place.

Then you arbitrarily decide that the person you're arguing with sounds like an xSFx that you know, as if that is somehow relevant to the debate (it's not).

Please deal in specifics, and debate the actual point someone makes.

 

[snafupants]

What happened about correctness? Nuttin. I didn't do nuttin to it.

Oh? You mean my back. It must be Si. INTP's don't like to put limitations on their thinking. That could be contagious and spread to sensation. When doing physical labor I tend to ignore fatigue and do too much ignoring possible consequences (poor or lack of Se). The curve sign on the road is blocked by trees, brush and vines. I had worked several days on this but the curve sign was still not visible though I improved on it. To get to the next tree to cut down, I had to clear the ground of previously cut vines, rose bushes and other thorn bushes. So I started to pick them up and in a discus-like motion whirled them onto a pile. I was already sore from previous activity but there is no stopping me. (My sister had said I could call the highway department to do this but doing it myself is much more fun. I love physical labor.) To make a long story short, the next day I had back spasms behind my hip. It's been about four days now. If I move the wrong way, you can hear me scream. Can't name the muscle although I tried google. It's extremely debilitating as no position in bed relieves the pain. Sorry you asked?

@BigApplePi

The curve sign appears to have transmogrified into your back.

I'm sorry to hear about your plight though.

Spoiler

For the record, before I was unclear whether you meant good day dismissively (my back hurts: fuck off) or good day warmly (I haven't seen you today: how are you doing?). I guess words are subjective and their personal solderings and idiosyncratic usages exacerbate that innate lexical/syntactical ambiguity.

Spoiler

That twisting scenario reminded me of an overconfident Peter Griffin from Family Guy attempting to singlehandedly lift an automobile ("discus-like motion"). The whole deal was somewhat of a production on the show.

Anyway, I can see that you're in pain so, for what it's worth, my condolences.

Spoiler

I remember InappropriateBehavior (where is that guy?) experienced back pain and subsequent painkiller abuse. I hope your path unfolds differently.

Spoiler

That wasn't too much information. I like finding out about people.

 

[soupymess]

@snafupants

You've reported your IQ elsewhere on the forum as varying within 5 points of 140. What explains the jump to ~180? Is it just that the earlier scores were on tests with a relatively low ceiling?

 

[snafupants]

@snafupants

You've reported your IQ elsewhere on the forum as varying within 5 points of 140. What explains the jump to ~180? Is it just that the earlier scores were on tests with a relatively low ceiling?

@soupymess

Indeed, I was somewhat anxiously waiting for someone to alert the forum to this discrepancy. That's basically an accurate representation of my forum claims. The former score came from largely flawed tests taken while in graduate school. The Woodcock-Johnson III and WAIS-IV, for instance, yielded some bogus scores, which ultimately led to that posting of the one forty number. Relatively low ceilings (on the subtests) were an issue as well as age discrimination or ageism, mainly concerning the composite scores. On the Woodcock-Johnson, for example, missing one or two items on the fluid reasoning subtests obliterates one's score; this phenomenon is especially pronounced as one ascends the age ladder; another problem with the Woodcock-Johnson III is its extremely low subject ceilings, which crest at about one forty five; from memory, the subtest ceilings on Woodcock-Johnson's and Wechsler's instruments didn't exceed three standard deviations; on the WAIS the subtest mean is 10 and the standard deviation is 3, so the subtest ceiling is (an unfair) 19. On over half of the subtests on the WAIS-IV I didn't miss even one problem but the composite score didn't really reflect that performance. The third edition of the Stanford-Binet furnished higher scores because, one, it was based on ratio scores and, two, the ratio scores benefitted youngsters by virtue of the underlying mechanics of calculating the ratio score (i.e., when the denominator (chronological age) is smaller, the quotient (IQ composite) is apt to be larger as the numerator (mental age) theoretically stays constant). I personally feel the ratio score was spawned in the sixties to identify the brightest budding minds for society, the CIA, and the space race to exploit stateside but that's another story for another day. After a stint at graduate school I took the WAIS-III. I don't think I missed one question on the fucker. At this point I knew I needed a test with a higher ceiling so I took some of Ron Hoeflin's tests (e.g., Titan Test) and the end result, across more than one test, was approximately the latter score of IQ 180; I could have exceeded these scores with more conceptual mathematical sophistication; the problems I "missed" required abstruse/bizarro knowledge of probability theory or calculus, which I unfortunately didn't possess over the testing period; any question that didn't require insanely specialized knowledge to get correct, I got correct. Some of these answers took more than a day each to decipher (especially one or two number sequence problems on the Titan Test), but all's well that ends well I guess. These high range tests perhaps tap interest, curiosity, and persistence as much as raw ability but they correlate well with existing measures of cognitive ability or scholastic aptitude, like the SAT incarnation used in the eighties, which has a g-loading of ~.82. This g-loading is higher than most contemporary individual intelligence tests! Rick Rosner (IQ ~ 195) was told in high school that his IQ was IQ 150 - this was the ceiling of the WAIS at the time. Even with Ron Hoeflin's tests, low ceilings are an ongoing problem plaguing the high IQ community. The Mega Test has slightly more top than the Titan Test but markedly less floor; interestingly, scores in the middle are almost lockstep correlated. The point is that IQ scores are partly beholden to the idiosyncrasies of individual intelligence tests. Because the United States has more educational programs and accommodations for retarded kids than smart kids, which is largely due to overemphasizing political correctness and underemphasizing future achievement, the tests and policy makers treat the gifted population as an afterthought. This will continue to be to the country's intellectual detriment until pragmatism is foregrounded to tactfulness, sprinkles, and good intentions. What's going to shape the human race more in eight hundred years, presuming it lasts that long - teaching some retarded kid named Steve how to tie his goddamn shoelaces or cultivating the next Tesla? That's not really a choice for me. Sometimes it's cruel to be kind. The reason I'm so harsh is that this is very much a zero-sum game situation, and the stakes are high; the resource allocated in one way are precluded from navigating another, perhaps more fruitful, tributary. What's more humane, right? Today or tomorrow?

 

[BigApplePi]

@snafu.

For the record, before I was unclear whether you meant good day dismissively (my back hurts: fuck off) or good day warmly (I haven't seen you today: how are you doing?). I guess words are subjective and their personal solderings and idiosyncratic usages exacerbate that innate lexical/syntactical ambiguity.

Good point. I overlooked the ambiguity. No. The "Good day" was meant to be politeness on my part. I'm poor at showing spontaneous feelings, but now that you mention it, they would have been warm. I'm always (generally) glad to talk to you. Don't know why I chose, "good day." I think it was because I was going to say something personal and am not sure it will be received favorably.

Anyway, I can see that you're in pain so, for what it's worth, my condolences.

Accepted.

I remember InappropriateBehavior (where is that guy?) experienced back pain and subsequent painkiller abuse. I hope your path unfolds differently.

Right. I don't want to get hooked on painkillers and generally don't like them. My wife keeps urging me to take them as she doesn' t like to hear me groaning. I keep telling her if I don't feel the pain, I won't know how to move to let it heal. I've compromised by occasionally taking four hour Advil. This is a back muscle and unless rested or something else, it won't go away. My latest theory is aside from sore muscles, it's a recurring cramp due to a defense against pain. That means all I have to do is prevent the cramp. I'm pursuing this now. Last night in the shower I gave myself a massage and in the morning the pain was gone. So I decided to walk the dog. Big mistake. Cramps recurred.

Yes I liked InappropriateBehavior. Great humor. Wish he'd return.

That wasn't too much information. I like finding out about people.

You may be sorry. People like talking about themselves if they can delude themselves it's a safe environment, lol.

 

[intpz]

He meant exactly what he said - that self-proclaiming genius can be associated with narcissism and delusions of grandeur.

Last time I checked, individuals with mental ilnesses are called mentals; this quote implies mental ilnesses.

Dealing in direct quotations is very inconvenient. Think about it, what's more convenient in a reply: "So you think that a self-proclaimed genius must be a narcissist, delusional or have a superiority complex?", or: "So you think that a self-proclaimed genius must be a mental?" Which is shorter? Which is easier to use? Which is MORE FUN?

 

[Hawkeye]

Indeed, I was somewhat anxiously waiting for someone to alert the forum to this discrepancy.

This just shows you have a superiority complex. Nobody really cares what your IQ is.

Writing an endless stream of text with no paragraphs about the IQ tests you have taken, doesn't increase ones interest either.

 

[Hawkeye]

Last time I checked, individuals with mental ilnesses are called mentals; this quote implies mental ilnesses.

Dealing in direct quotations is very inconvenient. Think about it, what's more convenient in a reply: "So you think that a self-proclaimed genius must be a narcissist, delusional or have a superiority complex?", or: "So you think that a self-proclaimed genius must be a mental?" Which is shorter? Which is easier to use? Which is MORE FUN?

I said "Often"... funny how you left that out... Dealing with direct quotations is to keep them in the same context.

Why would one need to self proclaim genius?

Either because of pure arrogance, delusion or insecurity. There is no reason for someone to self proclaim genius other than for attention seeking...

 

[snafupants]

This just shows you have a superiority complex. Nobody really cares what your IQ is.

Writing an endless stream of text with no paragraphs about the IQ test you have taken doesn't increase ones interest either.

@Hawkeye

This brand of convergent thinking is too frequently beguiled. There are many more options to consider. What else could my recent words betray aside from a superiority complex? Suppose I had a crackerjack memory, might this help me recall the previous post? Does the topic deserve greater clarity of recall than perhaps miscellaneous posts on food, music, or comics? Is it somehow more personal? At any rate, you appear to have a real jones for this superiority complex argument? Freudian projection? I'm not sure, but I will say that I'm neither superior nor inferior to anyone on this wretched planet. Well, regarding that quaint coda near at the end of your post, I discussed more than one intelligence test and I never sought out to bolster anyone's interest: I merely sought to comprehensively explicate my position and, like the larger thread's telos, answer some questions.

 

[snafupants]

I said "Often"... funny how you left that out... Dealing with direct quotations is to keep them in the same context.

Why would one need to self proclaim genius?

Either because of pure arrogance, delusion or insecurity. There is no reason for someone to self proclaim genius other than for attention seeking...

@Hawkeye

Or to honestly answer a question dealing with genius?

Spoiler

This is pathetic - are you done squealing your disapproval yet?

 

[Hawkeye]

@Hawkeye

This brand of convergent thinking is too frequently beguiled. There are many more options to consider. What else could my recent words betray aside from a superiority complex? Suppose I had a crackerjack memory, might this help me recall the previous post? Does the topic deserve greater clarity of recall than perhaps miscellaneous posts on food, music, or comics? Is it somehow more personal? At any rate, you appear to have a real jones for this superiority complex argument? Freudian projection? I'm not sure, but I will say that I'm neither superior nor inferior to anyone on this wretched planet. Well, regarding that quaint coda near at the end of your post, I discussed more than one intelligence test and I never sought out to bolster anyone's interest: I merely sought to comprehensively explicate my position and, like the larger thread's telos, answer some questions.

Please can you break up your endless typing...

Why did you claim to be a genius? You mentioned John Lennon called himself a genius.

What have you done to make such a bold claim that you should be branded the same title?

Or to honestly answer a question dealing with genius?

This makes no sense at all...


Still doing the snide comments I see. What are you? 12?

 

[snafupants]

@Hawkeye

Please can you break up your endless typing...

Why did you claim to be a genius? You mentioned John Lennon called himself a genius.

What have you done to make such a bold claim that you should be branded the same title?



This makes no sense at all...


Still doing the snide comments I see. What are you? 12?

That last comment completely made sense in the context of the rebuttal. You made this statement:

There is no reason for someone to self proclaim genius other than for attention seeking...

After reading this hamhanded deduction I added that another reason to self-proclaim genius might be to provide an honest response to a specific question about genius.

I feel that's another reasonable possibility. Do you still find that comment snide and incomprehensible? I believe it makes ample sense. Should I hold your hand?

Anyway, I will defer to my opening post on this thread in response to your last post's first inquiry:

I consider myself a genius. To me genius is an admixture of aptitude, audacity, abstraction, eloquence, efficiency, prescience, and imagination.

I will, finally, structure my posts as I deem fit.

 

[Hawkeye]

Honesty does not dismiss delusion.

By your definition, anyone can claim to be a genius. The term becomes irrelevant.

*Everyone* can be super!

And when everyone's super...

[chuckles evilly]

No one will be...

Your snide comments are usually in spoilers. These are the snide comments I am referring to.

Ironically, you altered your post structure to what I suggested.

 

[snafupants]

Honesty does not dismiss delusion.

By your definition, anyone can claim to be a genius. The term becomes irrelevant.




Your snide comments are usually in spoilers. These are the snide comments I am referring to.

Ironically, you altered your post structure to what I suggested.

@Hawkeye

I have never interacted with anyone as willfully dense as you. This shouldn't be censored because that's my forthright assessment. I'm stunned at your incomprehension and defensive obfuscation.

 

[Hawkeye]

@Hawkeye

I have never interacted with anyone as willfully dense as you. This shouldn't be censored because that's my forthright assessment. I'm stunned at your incomprehension and defensive obfuscation.

What have I obfuscated?

 

[BigApplePi]

Guys. People often underrate and overrate themselves. Do you think that true in general? Do you ever want to kick yourself for what you've said or done? Do you ever feel overly pleased with what you've said or done?

 

[Hawkeye]

Does this mean that this topic is now dead?

I like debating and hope that this recent "bickering" (from both sides) hasn't killed it off. The vast majority probably don't even care at this point - haha

What is a genius?: - many things depending on who you talk to.

My personal opinion: a genius is someone, or some concept that embodies exceptional originality, creativity or intellectuality. Not only that, but it is associated with an actual achievement or insight. (very similar to Wikipedia O.o)

You don't have to be necessarily "smart" to qualify as a genius. There are fantastic musicians for example, that can play their instruments brilliantly and meaningfully, yet can't read music.

There are savants that can tell you what day of the week a particular date in time is in an instant, yet can't look after themselves properly. I'm sure many of you have seen Rain Man too. To me these people have genius qualities and I would therefore call them geniuses.

I do strongly believe that it is a title to be given to others as opposed to self proclamation. My reasoning for this is that most achievements are recognised by external bodies. Calling someone a genius recognises their ability with an admiration and respect. To claim you are a genius to me, seems like attention seeking. You are boasting about your own abilities based on what only you have seen. It's a biased opinion.

Many incredibly talented people don't think twice about their ability because it is natural to them. You find that the vast majority of so called geniuses are modest people who don't care for such a title.

Do I consider myself to be one?: No, because as I mentioned earlier, I believe it is a title to be received. I have done nothing to be credited with such a title.

 

[intpz]

Why would one need to self proclaim genius?

In this case, to answer the question asked by the OP. Wait, what? Am I having a Deja-vu? I thought this was already mentioned, possibly more than once... Oh well.

Either because of pure arrogance, delusion or insecurity. There is no reason for someone to self proclaim genius other than for attention seeking...

High class closed-mindedness in action, possibly spiced with a little bit of faith.

@Hawkeye regarding @snafupants' post about IQ tests, I consider it a contribution to a thread, as it talks about different IQ tests, his experience with them, as well as experience of other people. In fact, I looked up what's the "Tital Test," and I noticed that it was a test I was urged to take probably around a year ago. I didn't due to it costing money.

@Hawkeye "What are you? 12?", this is what I thought about you after reading what he quoted.

Guys. People often underrate and overrate themselves. Do you think that true in general? Do you ever want to kick yourself for what you've said or done? Do you ever feel overly pleased with what you've said or done?

I do, for what I've done when I was younger. Mostly because I was too shy and possessed obnoxious (for self) features of what is quite often described around here: listening to others because it's easier/you don't care (my reason was that I was too shy), not being honest when there's no downside for being honest, etc.. Although the latter might not be mentioned that often.

I like debating and hope that this recent "bickering" (from both sides) hasn't killed it off. The vast majority probably don't even care at this point - haha

Debating? You were merely expressing your hatred towards self-proclaimed geniuses by ignoring the given arguments and often adding irrationally made comments to your posts. There was no real debate. A debate should have arguments from both sides, and they should be rational.

I am still going to post what I was going to before I read that: This whole conversation with you is completely pointless. It's like conversing with a priest about evolution. It's like trying to prove an ISFJ that there is a better way to do something prior to doing it. See the correlation between my point and the two arguments? If not, here's a tip: it includes the word "pointless."

Depending on the further events, I might skip posting in this thread; if I wanted to debate an impossible argument, I would go to the church and say hi to the priest.

 

[Hawkeye]

I did justify my reasoning. It was just branded as sheer madness which it isn't. Try searching the phrase "self-proclaimed genius". Much of the stuff I said was from what I read around the subject often written by professors of psychology.

I have given my definition of genius which further justifies my reasoning for being against self proclamation. These points are all mentioned throughout my previous posts too. It is not pure hatred as you so put it...

As Redbaron mentioned, you paraphrase everything I say except for what is important - The context. This makes you argue against something I never meant and in tern, creates pointless/void arguments.

I asked a valid question about why a person would self proclaim genius. It was never answered. Instead, you keep responding with the same thing about the OP, but it has nothing to do with the OP. My question is completely different yet still on topic.

Why would anyone self proclaim genius other than to boast or seek attention either through sheer arrogance or some personality disorder? You seem to think there is a reason, so please enlighten me.



As for my comment about age, it arose due to the snide comments being fired at me in spoilers. This was also addressed by Fukyo (see top of the page) who asked for it to cease. It didn't. It had nothing to do with snafupants logical reasoning in the debate (which it is...). It was merely referencing the pointless, childish retorts.

 

[BigApplePi]

I asked a valid question about why a person would self proclaim genius. It was never answered.

Advertising.

Why would anyone self proclaim genius other than to boast or seek attention either through sheer arrogance or some personality disorder?

Advertising.

Edit: I wouldnt discount these three things I just thought of:
1. boasting
2. attention seeking
3. arrogance

You seem to think there is a reason, so please enlighten me.

What about Advertising? Alternative view: Publicity?

 

[Hawkeye]

Advertising.
Advertising.What about Advertising? Alternative view: Publicity?

That's attention seeking. By definition.

 

[BigApplePi]

That's attention seeking. By definition.

Well yes, but much more. It's attention seeking for a wider, broader, deeper purpose and meme's into a crowd one will never know one is getting attention from. BTW I edited the previous message with more unthought of astute -incites- insights.

BTW2. Not sure, but didn't you say something about 12 year olds? Aren't twelve year olds welcome here ... as long as they conform strictly to the rules and don't stay up past their bedtimes?

 

[Hawkeye]

Well yes, but much more. It's attention seeking for a wider, broader, deeper purpose and meme's into a crowd one will never know one is getting attention from.

OK, but how does this fit in with answering the question? It's still attention seeking. I did say what reason other than boasting and attention seeking.

 

[Hawkeye]

BTW2. Not sure, but didn't you say something about 12 year olds? Aren't twelve year olds welcome here ... as long as they conform strictly to the rules and don't stay up past their bedtimes?

To clarify,

As for my comment about age, it arose due to the snide comments being fired at me in spoilers. This was also addressed by Fukyo (see top of the page) who asked for it to cease. It didn't. It had nothing to do with snafupants logical reasoning in the debate (which it is...). It was merely referencing the pointless, childish retorts.

 

[BigApplePi]

OK, but how does this fit in with answering the question? It's still attention seeking. I did say what reason other than boasting and attention seeking.

Hawkeye. I don't have your eyesight. My attention span is diminishing. What was the question again? Please ignore me if you've already answered.

 

[Hawkeye]

Hawkeye. I don't have your eyesight. My attention span is diminishing. What was the question again? Please ignore me if you've already answered.

you actually answered it kind of. You said advertising, but then expanded to mention attention seeking for "wider, broader, deeper purpose".

I can see what you're saying, but the method of getting a new audience seems rather arrogant to me.

I perceive it like this "I will say I am a "clever clogs" and people will notice me".

Correct me if I'm way off here.

 

[BigApplePi]

Originally Posted by me, earlier
As for my comment about age, it arose due to the snide comments being fired at me in spoilers. This was also addressed by Fukyo (see top of the page) who asked for it to cease. It didn't. It had nothing to do with snafupants logical reasoning in the debate (which it is...). It was merely referencing the pointless, childish retorts.

That's a pretty heavy trip for me. This may be off topic, but how does one rate snide remarks? Wouldn't commenting on off topic remarks be off topic? Or should one evaluate snide remarks for snideness? This smacks of defining genius (I'm now back on topic) because now we have to define, "snide."

You said something about snafu? Did he say he was a genius or did somebody accuse him of same? Maybe he was referring to when he was twelve years old when an I.Q. can make sense. By the time you get to be my age ... hold on ... I'm computing ... 79. My I.Q. is 79.

 

[BigApplePi]

you actually answered it kind of. You said advertising, but then expanded to mention attention seeking for "wider, broader, deeper purpose".

I can see what you're saying, but the method of getting a new audience seems rather arrogant to me.

Oh no. Not arrogance again. My opinion on this is one is entitled to make the mistake of acting arrogant every once in a while as long as they are willing to be called on it. Of course the calling should be as careful as possible and one should not complain as one is insinuating about other people's shortcomings.

I perceive it like this "I will say I am a "clever clogs" and people will notice me".

Correct me if I'm way off here.

Yes I will correct you. You are way off here. The only trouble is I'm using Ni to say that and can't back it up with anything of substance. (Am I snide yet? I hope I'm not being snide.)

 

[Hawkeye]

That's a pretty heavy trip for me. This may be off topic, but how does one rate snide remarks? Wouldn't commenting on off topic remarks be off topic? Or should one evaluate snide remarks for snideness? This smacks of defining genius (I'm now back on topic) because now we have to define, "snide."

You said something about snafu? Did he say he was a genius or did somebody accuse him of same? Maybe he was referring to when he was twelve years old when an I.Q. can make sense. By the time you get to be my age ... hold on ... I'm computing ... 79. My I.Q. is 79.

Are you tired?

My point was that there were pointless comments thrown in here and there which were as childish as "you smell, nur nur nurnur nuur..."

It wasn't that I was offended. More disappointed. I expected a higher level of discussion.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter.

 

[BigApplePi]

It wasn't that I was offended. More disappointed. I expected a higher level of discussion.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter.

Ah ha. Now we are getting down to something. We read a genius thread and wind up disappointed. Disappointment is an emotion. INTPs don't excel in dealing with those. Maybe the expectations are too high for this thread. These apparently little things matter.

 

[hablahdoo]

My god it's the perfect INTP troll thread. Loners that can't let go of the threat of being intellectually mediocre write pages fighting to hold on to the only thing society congratulates them for. HAH. Nobody's safe from bias.

 

[redbaron]

Last time I checked, individuals with mental ilnesses are called mentals; this quote implies mental ilnesses.

Dealing in direct quotations is very inconvenient. Think about it, what's more convenient in a reply: "So you think that a self-proclaimed genius must be a narcissist, delusional or have a superiority complex?", or: "So you think that a self-proclaimed genius must be a mental?" Which is shorter? Which is easier to use? Which is MORE FUN?

You've misrepresented the actual point (again). He never said that a self-proclaimed genius must be a narcissist, only that it could be associated with narcissism.

Furthermore, narcissism in itself is not considered a mental illness. If he'd specifically said Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you could rebut his claim on those grounds. However he didn't. Delusions of grandeur are not necessarily a mental illness either. Simply having a degree of narcissism doesn't mean a superiority complex either, that's an assumption of what his opinion is.

If you want debate and discussion to go anywhere, then it is not about what is convenient or fun. Once you start to circumvent the specificity with which people present their arguments, that point(s) becomes worthless, and most of the time the entire debate follows suit soon after.

When you can't adequately rebut a point in its original form, don't bother rebutting it at all. It adds no value to the discussion and turns the debate in circles, where both parties end up straw manning each other because they lack the ability to rebut in a specific manner.

People trick themselves into thinking they've 'won' or are 'winning' a debate, when all they've done is rebut a bunch of their own straw man arguments.

However if your goal is only to have fun and you enjoy arguing with yourself, do whatever you want. If you find that not many people take you seriously though, don't be surprised.

 

[redbaron]

Ah ha. Now we are getting down to something. We read a genius thread and wind up disappointed. Disappointment is an emotion. INTPs don't excel in dealing with those. Maybe the expectations are too high for this thread. These apparently little things matter.

The disappointment is at the fact that the discussion became emotional and childish in the first place. A few people turned to name-calling and insults, turning what was originally a thoughtful debate into a personal one.

I don't think it's too high an expectation to expect people who apparently consider themselves logical and intelligent, to have enough self-control to stay on-topic and not make childish comments as stupid as, 'you're dumb, you have no brain' etc.

Then again that seems to happen often, so maybe expecting thoughtful discussion is too much.

 

[crippli]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRKn4MYArXU

 

[BigApplePi]

My god it's the perfect INTP troll thread. Loners that can't let go of the threat of being intellectually mediocre write pages fighting to hold on to the only thing society congratulates them for. HAH. Nobody's safe from bias.

hablahdoo. You ain't one of those, I trust? Yer onto something and deserve the genius posting award.

"Nobody's safe."
________________________________

Edit: hablah. If you are feeling at all like trolling, go over to the who wants to talk? thread. They are talking about food. I don't think they've established intellectual standards there, but feel free to make your contributions. One thing: don't tell them I sent you. I'm not responsible if you feel frisky.

 

[hablahdoo]

hablahdoo. You ain't one of those, I trust? Yer onto something and deserve the genius posting award.

Yo I only want to win an arguments on the internet, I never said I wanted to be a genius.

 

[BigApplePi]

Yo I only want to win an arguments on the internet, I never said I wanted to be a genius.

Yo. Hawkeye & snafupants. I know you guys rarely agree on anything, but hablahdoo doesn't seem keen on keeping his posting genius award. Should it be taken away from him like from Lance Armstrong? (BTW I think Lance Armstrong should be renamed Lance Legstrong.)

 

[snafupants]

Yo. Hawkeye & snafupants. I know you guys rarely agree on anything, but hablahdoo doesn't seem keen on keeping his posting genius award. Should it be taken away from him like from Lance Armstrong? (BTW I think Lance Armstrong should be renamed Lance Legstrong.)

@BigApplePi

I dub thee, BigApplePi, the forum's genius arbitrator. This accolade comes on the heels of many futile yet heroic attempts to leverage arguments and refine terms. Yesterday's polemical was more vicious than divorce litigation but no shots were fired (to my knowledge) and everyone came out relatively unscathed. There were perhaps some wounded egos but nothing too serious.

Spoiler

I basically knew the INTJ/INTP bitter intellectual clash was on my horizon anyway. I feel good about the points I made yesterday. The opposition didn't appear to present any novel, insightful, or formidable points and my own arguments will hold up to scrutiny.

Spoiler

To put aside that happy horse shit, how's the back today? Is the pain back?

 

[kora]

Why would anyone self proclaim genius other than to boast or seek attention either through sheer arrogance or some personality disorder? You seem to think there is a reason, so please enlighten me.

Not sure I really want to get in the middle of this debate but, why is it a sign of personality disorder? If a widely accepted criteria for genius is IQ 140+ and you find that you exceed that, then it wouldn't be insane to consider yourself a genius, and therefore say so when asked (as the thread did) Wether it makes you believe you're worth more than the next person or not is a different matter entirely.

If someone says they're really beautiful and they are, then it isn't down to a personality disorder or even arrogance. Just accurate self-perception. And as long as they don't look down on people because of it then they aren't arrogant.

 

[snafupants]

Not sure I really want to get in the middle of this debate but, why is it a sign of personality disorder? If a widely accepted criteria for genius is IQ 140+ and you find that you exceed that, then it wouldn't be insane to consider yourself a genius, and therefore say so when asked (as the thread did) Wether it makes you believe you're worth more than the next person or not is a different matter entirely.

If someone says they're really beautiful and they are, then it isn't down to a personality disorder or even arrogance. Just accurate self-perception. And as long as they don't look down on people because of it then they aren't arrogant.

That's basically where I'm coming from here. I feel like I meet this objective criterion for genius - the construct validity of IQ tests is another debate entirely - but I am neither better nor worse than anyone else, as I've already stated. Now different debates can arise over IQ tests and their classification systems, and that doesn't really concern me because I neither created the tests nor the classification systems. Suppose for a moment that in the United States "fast" was classified as running the length of a football field in under ten seconds. I would, therefore, characterize myself as fast, when asked, if I could consistently accomplish this feat.

 

[BigApplePi]

@snafuP

I dub thee, BigApplePi, the forum's genius arbitrator. This accolade comes on the heels of many futile yet heroic attempts to leverage arguments and refine terms. Yesterday's polemical was more vicious than divorce litigation but no shots were fired (to my knowledge) and everyone came out relatively unscathed. There were perhaps some wounded egos but nothing too serious.

You seem to take wounded egos pretty lightly. I'm not so sure how my own ego is taking being dubbed. How would you like it if everyone went around dubbing you? Not so nice that. In any case, I will masochistically thank you for putting me in a state of dubdum.

Spoiler

To put aside that happy horse shit, how's the back today? Is the pain back?

-Back reporting- Reporting back:

Spoiler

When I took a shower this morning, after rest, the pain was isolated to a small muscle in front of that point which sticks out on my right hip. It's very small like a rotator cuff on the shoulder but I don't know its name. The way I think of it is it's a muscle you wish you didn't have. But I know that's just whining as I'd probably regret it if it were cut ... like the Achilles tendon, lol. I have to wait and see how it goes today. How are you, BTW?