Trash Talking Thread

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
Dude that's 20 points higher than me. Can't be -that- hard...scale)

Enigma: It's a logaritmic scale (or some other expanding scale), IIRC. 20 points higher is an awful lot in percentile. 180 is about 99.997% percentile IIRC. I'm still amazed in all the IQ threads on OTF that I still haven't published mine. Though I promised not to until JW did with his (I don't know who's got the highest on Poly, but im 99% sure it's one of the two of us, and I really don't want to know). Consider the difference between a person with 100 and a person with 120. The former is average. The latter is the average for a graduate from a top uiversity. On most tests, while 49% get higher than 100, only about 10%, IIRC, get higher than 120. With that (almost) 5:1 ratio matched, it means there are 5 people with 180+ IQs for every 200+ person. It's quite a difference. I know two people that get close to that mark (one has a 202, one has a 196) and both are quite exceptional people. I don't contend that IQ measures intelligence, but it does seem to measure thought processes in a pretty accurate way, IMHO.

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
Though, humanity being what it is, I've purposefully desensitised myself to pleasure and pain because, well... Most people would rather ignore than understand, and by virtue of action do one or the other.

I'm the other way. After reading Sartre, it made me realise how wonderful life is. Sure it's gratuitous, it has no purpose and no meaning, but it's fun

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
I'm not so frustrated at the general ignorance so much as I cannot choose but to suffer it. (I.e. Operation Renaissance isn't going very well)

That is what frustrates the person in the article. That he cannot change it, because of who he is.

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
Ergo he swears a vengeance to remove the block that prevents people from accepting him, while accepting his inability to work with people on the very basis of the effect above.

Then it is futile. If it is impossible to remove the barrier while achieveing what he wants (acceptance) then it is futile. Why not accept what you know, and live a normal life. People will see that you complete tasks easier, and so it does not matter what your reasoning is, or that you can't explain your thoughts to them, because you can apply them and gain from it.

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
There isn't much I dismiss, but my considerations are usually not done publically. It's more efficient to do things in my 'thought language' than to do them in English.

Completely. However your statements of your own gifted status seem to imply that you believe you have to dumb down. While, to almost anyone you would, there will be people here you would not need to. I already know of 3 people on Poly who have 180+ IQs.

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
Not wanting to stuff your psychology up, but...
All people adapt to their environment, so how can you be sure you're not dumbing down?

Because I feel inadiquate at times, although mostly because I feel like myself, I feel like I'm talking as I would to someone who I knew was at the very least my equal, and because she understand me. Even when I feel like my thoughts are too much to trace, and I can't see where I get ideas from, she can understand them. And because I felt this from the moment I met her. I haven't adapted this to her, I always refuse to dumb down the first time I meet someone intelligent, incase it is not needed.

Part of it's just being on the same wavelength, part of it's because she is the most intelligent person I've ever met, that I almost feel the need to try to highten what I say. And partly because she won't tell me her IQ, although she got a full scholarship to her school on the bases of that test.

Another part is that I've meditated for years, and I know when I'm alone, I think to myself. I know I don't dumb down to myself, I never have, it is my haven, so to speak. I talk to her as I talk to myself, at the top of my ability.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Drogue
But you can compare those. You can say an apple is harder than an orange. A banana is more yellow than an apple, etc.

True.
Though, in deciding what to sell to your customers, do they want yellow items? hard items? What?
You can make lots of judgements like above, but there are some complex multi-faceted issues.
Like why Copper is used as a conductor in railway lines. Why not cheaper Iron or more conductive Gold?
That's a relatively simple issue.
Now take it up a bit and ask who whould be the CyCon turnplayer. Consider experience, ability to learn, reliability, willingness to follow orders...
And now - how do you lead a country?
Police State, Democracy, Fundamentalism?
One has more EFFIC than the others, one has more SUPPORT.
But which one is... 'best'?
Then, it is hard to tell, and is based on both situation and values.

Why is a scientist better?

'cuz you just got trolled.
I was 'taking the piss' as it were...

It is not about achievement matched to age, it is about achievement straight.

Right. Well, let's start with the ACDG then, shall we?

And who do you mean, you all?

I mean TROLLED.
Still pursuing the age-old interfaculty joke present on my campus.
Every faculty thinks it PWND!11 every other faculty.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Drogue
Sorry about the many posts in a row. I wanted to address the long arguments individually, with the thought they deserve. I seem to have a lot to comment on today

It's okay. Postcount a go-go.
(+1)

[Micha]

There are so many famous economists, you have no point there.

[Drogue]

DP

[Drogue]

He wasn't making a point, he was trolling with that I like biting trolls, it's fun

As for famous economists, sure there are, but not in the same league of fame as Einstein. I could probably name 10 or so famous economists, maybe a few more who weren't so famous, but then I'm an economist, so I should be able to. I doubt most of the population can name one.

[Main_Brain]

Economics dont exist as long as say Philosophy

But go ahead Drogue and Name 10 but only Economists not Philosophers

[Maniac]

Way too many posts to respond to, so I'll keep it to "I agree with Drogue".

Btw, IQ is more or less a Gauss curve with as mean 100 and standard deviation 15. "More or less" I say as there are more people on the two tails than there would be on a perfect Gauss curve.
It would be dangerous to use IQ as the only measure for intelligence though, as the score is also heavily effected by experience with the kind of exercises an IQ test uses. So someone who is studying mathematics and is busy with it all days would probably score higher than someone who is studying law, even if the inherent intelligence of the law student on the matter tested would be somewhat higher. Also due to the increasing education level of people the average test score keeps increasing and IQ tests need to be made more difficult every few years to bring the average score back to around 100.

I doubt most of the population can name one.

Let's see...
Adam Smith (required knowledge for any civver )
Keynes
Friedrich
Rawles
Brambley
All I can think of right now though, unless you starts counting people such as Greenspan.

[DeathByTheSword]

....damn

[Drogue]

I can try:

John Maynard Keynes
Milton Friedman
Paul Omerod
Paul Krugman
Joseph Stiglitz
Alan Greenspan
Sir Eddie George
Mervyn King
Adam Smith
David Ricardo
Friedrick von Hayek (sp?)

There's 11 for you (all I could think of off the top of my head).

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Maniac
It would be dangerous to use IQ as the only measure for intelligence though, as the score is also heavily effected by experience with the kind of exercises an IQ test uses. So someone who is studying mathematics and is busy with it all days would probably score higher than someone who is studying law, even if the inherent intelligence of the law student on the matter tested would be somewhat higher. Also due to the increasing education level of people the average test score keeps increasing and IQ tests need to be made more difficult every few years to bring the average score back to around 100.

I was using IQ as a general measure there, as a symbol for intelligence. However I don't accept mathematicians score higher. Most famous mathematicians do not necessarily have high IQs, no more or less than any other profession. The main problem is what intelligence is. IQ tests measure reasoning, spacial awareness, logic, numerical ability and verbal ability. IMHO it is a good measure.

With regards to the 100, every year the main tests are standardized, and the BBC opperates a "test the nation" each year to check the average. Everytime the aim is to get between 101 and 104 as the average (people who take IQ tests are a self selecting group, and the average has been shown to be between 1 and 4 higher than most non-takers).

Originally posted by Maniac
All I can think of right now though, unless you starts counting people such as Greenspan.

Why not? Greenspan is a trained economist, doing exactly what any economist at university does. The difference being he makes the decisions as well as giving the advice.

Stiglitz people may say is a politician not an economist, but he won the Nobel prize for Economics and has written books on the subject, so IMHO he is an economist.

And I wouldn't put me in there I'm really not a famous economist. The only decent research I've done on it I found after that Krugman had already recommended

[Main_Brain]

Adam Smith although Father of Economy studied Philosophy and Mathematics IIRC

Ludwig Erhart! :=)

[Drogue]

And I think Maniac's a little more than an average member of the population, when it comes to current affairs and economic knowledge

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Main_Brain
Adam Smith although Father of Economy studied Philosophy and Mathematics IIRC

Yes, because you couldn't study economics at Oxford at all until the end of the 19th Century. What he studied at uni does not mean he did that for the rest of his life. If a professional musician studied maths at uni would he be a musician or a mathematician?

Personally, I'd consider some people like Ayn Rand and Karl Marx as economists, but they are very political/philosophical economists, so I did not count them. There's a reason Philosophy, Politics and Economics is a popular degree course though

[Main_Brain]

so true