RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


Tuoni -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 4:40:31 PM)


Hmm, I'm not really disagreeing with you darkinshadows, I just don't feel our views our mutually exclusive.

quote:

By this reasoning, If God cannot interact directly with the universe, then he cannot interact directly with anything.  Not even us.  So if he used 'angels' for example - then it wouldnt be god, it would be angels.  Therefore god would not exist and angels would.
So now - prove the existance and immortality of angels.

 

The inability to interact does not madnate the inability to exist. Just because God chooses to not interact directly (because doing so would strip him of his Godhood) with our universe,  does not mean he doesn't exist. It just means he wont stop by for coffeee one morning.


quote:

Once an angel is corrupted, then it becomes a demon, which is now impossible as their choice was given before time began and sorted out before our becomming.  Therefore angels are not imperfect.

This leads back to my statement "A perfect being can not interact with imperfection and remain perfect." If the perfect being (god, angel, divine force, whatever you wish to call it) say, touches mud. Well, it is now dirty. How can a perfect being get dirty? It can't. It would become imperfect. This is a gross oversimplification, but I think it gets across what I'm trying to say. I read this somewhere, they put it much more elequintly than me so I can't take credit for this argument.


quote:

God can create imtermediates, but angels were created before time began.



Created before time, but by God. God is considered omnisentient. God knew exactly what he would need done and when he needed it. Thus, God create the angels before time so that when they were needed, they would be there to fulfill their role. Created before time does not void their role as intermediates.

quote:

God is omnipotent, therefore he can exists everywhere and as everything and within everything.  Therefore everything can become and is God.

That would be possibility b) that I wrote.


quote:

Imperfection and mortality are not linked like that.
Immortality and eternal being are completely different.

God doesn't 'become' the universe, because God always existed, therefore, the universe is god.


I did not link imperfection and mortality, I linked imperfection and God. God is perfect, God can not be imperfect. To become imperfect is to no longer be God. God can 'become' the universe only in the sense that God existed before the universe did, then God 'became' the universe by bringing the universe into existence.God always was and always will be. The universe may not be so. 

Of course, if God is omnipotent then this this all moot since God could just decide "Imortality exists because I say so. Oh, and gravity produces cookies and purple is now a direction."

This is horribly off topic, but is so very stimulating. Makes me want to leanr about other religions and God, since this argument only pertains to the Christian belief of God.






CuriousLord -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 4:43:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

CL, you're being oversensitive, and maybe it's time to get laid.  Even geniuses need to get their rocks off now and then.


OMFWTF STFU.




CuriousLord -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 5:02:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

You can see that is not the question i asked you and you answered luckydog again.  i never had anything to say about that.


Ah, okay.  Just try restating your question, and I'd try to answer it.




Sinergy -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 5:26:27 PM)

 
Thank you for the lucid explanation, CuriousLord.  I have some math background, but the older I get the more fuzzy it becomes.  I have heard that for men the mind is the second thing to go as they age.

If I am understanding your point, CuriousLord, then the Big Bang was actually a point where the total energy in the universe degraded (for lack of a better term) into matter.  Hrm.  This would make sense, I suppose I had always considered the Big Bang to be a product of a hyper-big black hole that suddenly went boom.  If it is as you state, energy "degrading" would not necessarily be rooted in one physical (again, for lack of a better term) location.

My stoner buddies and I once blew up a gallon of gasoline with an M-80.  The explosion vaporized the gas into an enormous cloud, and then a millisecond later the gas was ignited by a spark and made a huge ball of flame.  I suppose I can use the perception of a suddenly appearing ball of energy (to my senses) as an example of all that energy suddenly going from energy to stuff.

Suppose I then become curious how the energy started out in the first place.  Somewhat of a curse of mine, insatiable curiousity.

Considering the effect of gravity, however, wouldnt all the suddenly created masses start to fall towards the center of mass?  What motive force is driving mass' distance from other mass to increase?

Sinergy

p.s.  On a related note, I read a few months ago an interview with a prominent scientist (name escapes me) who is a devout Christian.  He made the point that the issue he has with intelligent design types is they dont seem to understand that religion and science are not incompatible.  He made the comment that Religion explains why, whereas Science explains how.  Said intelligent designers seem to have this need to question God's methodology.




dcnovice -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 6:01:31 PM)

quote:

On a related note, I read a few months ago an interview with a prominent scientist (name escapes me) who is a devout Christian.  He made the point that the issue he has with intelligent design types is they dont seem to understand that religion and science are not incompatible.  He made the comment that Religion explains why, whereas Science explains how.  Said intelligent designers seem to have this need to question God's methodology.


Francis Collins, maybe? Director of the Human Genome Project and author of The Language of God.




Sinergy -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 6:05:54 PM)

Sounds right, dcnovice.  I loved reading his analysis of the issue.

Sinergy




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 7:58:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Now consider : Ignorance is bliss. Just think of the flipside of that. Really, that is what it is. The more I know the more I am ready to go out in a blaze of glory. But that is not insanity, not yet.


~nod~

Fortunately, nephandi showed me there's enough good out there to be worth holding on to.

quote:

The insanity comes because there is no clear target, nobody to hit to make things better, in fact anything that could be done would be counterproductive.


Exactly.

This pretty much defines one of the causes of depression: when there's nothing to do to make things better, and stuff really sucks.

quote:

That is the worst kind of stress, things that have no solution. The genius personality seeks always to solve problems, that is how they get to be a genius. A certain amount of emotional detachment must occur for the genius to maintain some semblence of sanity, and that is precisely where the insanity comes in.


I'm not a genious, at least by my own reckoning. 99th percentile or thereabouts. But I do have a mind that is geared toward solving problems and operating rationally. And I can certainly say that such a combination necessitates some mental athletics to manage to find a balance that computes without things breaking down. Detachment is one of the common ways of "solving" the problem, but it really just makes some things worse.

quote:

Why are monsters hailed as heroes ? Because they do drastic things. Hitler was a hero to the German People in the 1930s because he did drastic things. He told the French to stick it up their ass and then invaded them. When you need a wheelbarrel full of money to buy a postage stamp, perhaps it is time for drastic action. Those who we would typically call sane will not do such things.


Indeed. And Germany might in fact be better off for it. The Jews probably are, all in all, since they got a country and general acceptance from it. Democracy was established as a gold standard of government in contrast to it. Ethical standards of medical research followed from it. There's no denying the horrors of WW2, but some good came of it as well, perhaps more good than from most other wards.

As a less controversial example, Vlad Tepeş was a national hero, too. Despite his arguably horrific treatment of a lot of people. "Dracula" was banned until recently for defiling a national hero.

quote:

Perhaps the founding Fathers of this country were insane. What 'sane' people tell you to do is vote and change comes from within. But they are not genius caliber. Smart people know better, that we need better candidates.


The Founding Fathers brought on untold bloodshed for something a bare third of their country wanted. Yet history remembers them fondly, and quite possibly rightly so. The normal thing to do is to let things go on as they do. Yet, sometimes, drastic changes are neccessary. Sometimes, these cannot come about peacefully. Other times, they can, but in a timeframe that will entail a greater injustice. Either way, history is written by those who "win", and one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. By analogy, one man's visionary is another man's brutal dictatorial monster.

I doubt many people who have gotten to power, and have abused it, did so without there being something more to them than some fondness for mayhem. Even Hitler had his good sides, according to some who knew him, and he thought he was doing the right thing. Some have suggested, by the way, that he was predominantly vegan. When we think back, though, we'd prefer not to picture him playing with the kids and such; it's a lot easier to have a "clear" picture in our heads if we stick to him screaming to the sheep ... err ... people, and ordering lots of people killed. It'd be entirely superfluous to our mental image of him to recall one of the architects of the "euthanasia" programme, a real psycho, being upset about how Hitler insisted that he devise a humane way to do it, rather than letting him do what he wanted to do.

quote:

I don't go postal (notice how that term is unique to the US) because of two reasons.


Good reasons. I think loss of the second, or seeing a possible solution to the first (albeit one people wouldn't like) is probably how a lot of people end up doing such things. In some cases, it might actually improve things. I remember when people in a place I worked got asked to pool money for a hit on the boss. I'm still wondering whether the pool would have been big enough if I had added my contribution (I didn't), and whether that would have been for the better, given the enormous amounts of crap he's the root cause of (he was a noticable factor in local police brutality statistics, and I would "credit" him with one instance of infanticide).

My ethics did not allow me to contribute, but I'm not sure how I feel about it, at all.

And, by the way, "postal" is not unique to the US. I've heard it many times.

We used it more often than usual in that department, though; including, solid, formerly "sane" people, married, middle-aged, kids, good reputation, U.N. contacts, job offers elsewhere, etc. Fortunately, nobody did go postal. That's a minor miracle in itself. We did have screaming contests, though. Not the "arguing" kind, but the kind where we'd go to some secluded location together and just scream our lungs out until our voices wouldn't come anymore. Glad I don't work there anymore. And glad we managed to keep the boat afloat for everyone else until the board got rid of the head honcho and started fixing things like we'd suggested.

quote:

And that is why I am not afraid to die. It would be a welcome rest. I am also curious about what is on the other side, if anything, but when the simple fact that it will be over becomes enticing, watch out.


If I didn't have my nephandi, I'd second that sentiment.

Still not afraid to die, though I worry what would happen to her if I did. ~knocks on wood~

quote:

And I can point out the similarity between insanity and genius. I think I have.


Fairly well. There are some subtleties you're not covering, but I frankly think they'd be lost on most of those who don't know them already. And shot down more than it's worth posting them.

quote:

Serial killers operate for years before getting caught, they can't do this if they are stupid.


Actually, having examined some cases, I think it's more a case of there being a lot of leeway for a wolf in a society of sheep, where the infrastructure is built to catch the black sheep, not the wolves. Having seen some of the ways some of these have been caught, the mile-wide trail of evidence they leave behind, and so forth, I think it's very likely that the police assessments are right that, in many cases, these people are anything but geniouses.

If you wanted to kill people, there's a million ways you could get away with it, provided you have the self-control required to stick to the plan, the patience not to act on impulse and the intelligence to think it through.

Many times, I've been wondering just how many people out there aren't being caught. Kind of scary.

quote:

I need intoxicants simply to slow down.


Phenobarbital 0.5mg/kg BID works wonders. Helps with sleep, too. Some may end up developing a tolerance to it, though, so watch out for that. Better than alcohol, though, in many ways, and not nearly as unpleasant for the same amount of sedation; you don't get as dulled down as from the alcohol, for instance.

I don't like either, though. Except the sleep improvement; that's nice.

quote:

Also intoxicants allow one to think and act like normal people for a time.


To some extent; mostly, it makes it easier to go with the flow and not give a damn. And the bit about "screw tomorrow", as you said, kind of falls under that heading.

I don't appreciate that state, though.

quote:

The problem comes when you start to really care. Live my hell for a day and I bet you wind up in a straitjacket. And I don't mean playtime.


Caring is where the problem is at, yeah.




Sinergy -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 8:12:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

Actually, having examined some cases, I think it's more a case of there being a lot of leeway for a wolf in a society of sheep, where the infrastructure is built to catch the black sheep, not the wolves. Having seen some of the ways some of these have been caught, the mile-wide trail of evidence they leave behind, and so forth, I think it's very likely that the police assessments are right that, in many cases, these people are anything but geniouses.



What is curious about serial criminals, is that for a lot of them they lack remorse or a sense of guilt about what they did.  It is almost as if they dont really believe they will be caught.

And the real sociopaths, the mentality seems to be "Oh, prison, jail, court, something new and interesting to experience."  There is no connection between who they perceive themselves to be and their actions.

As for the rest, as any number of detectives have pointed out "They do their crime once, I investigate their crime for a living."

quote:



If you wanted to kill people, there's a million ways you could get away with it, provided you have the self-control required to stick to the plan, the patience not to act on impulse and the intelligence to think it through.



Most people lack the experience and insight.

What is interesting about adrenal response, is that a person who commits a crime successfully has to deal with the adrenalin / muscle memory aspects of it.  This is why criminals tend to be monogamous; the way they did it last time worked, why change their M.O.?

As for the drug discussion, the words of Matt Damon in The Legend of Bagger Vance, about "how drunk is drunk enough" come to mind.

Sinergy




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 8:15:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrimsonMoan

Ok one Cheney would have a heart attack in office from the stress of leading the free world.


Ahem...

The President of the US does not qualify as "leading the free world".

That aside, what stress? Stress occurs when you care, not when you don't.

quote:

Two why shoot him? Everyone would knwo it was you unless you made him shoot himself. i'd just hand him a bowl of preztles and sit back and wait. The hypothetical assassination of Bush should be far more imaginative that a bullet to the brain.


The guy is not as stupid in private as he pretends to be in public, believe it or not.

Anyway...

What you want to have a look at is "Assassination Politics", an article by Jim Bell. The protocol for implementing AP was worked out by Timothy C. May, Carl Johnson and Matthew Taylor. Their work attracted the attention of the IRS, FBI and Secret Service, who were not best pleased. The original article is available online. Some, including WP, have pointed out that some of the underlying concepts of AP were stopped being theoretical with the 20010911 attacks in NYC, where there was significant evidence that money changed hands over the stock markets.

In short, I'd hate to see anyone implement AP, but it would clear Bush out of office in no time.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 8:20:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: apettiger

i once told my um that all genius's are crazy (cant be help as they worry about the bigger things all the time) and all artist are freaks. so all artist geniuses are crazy freaks.


Well, creativity, artistic talent and genious are three things positively correlated with several forms of mental disorders and neurological abnormalities. Entirely apart from that, I would strongly suggest reading "How Art Can Be Good" by Paul Graham; just click the link. He's got some other essays of interest too, but some of them are not as general in nature. As a teaser, I'll quote a few paragraphs from it here:
I grew up believing that taste is just a matter of personal preference. Each person has things they like, but no one's preferences are any better than anyone else's. There is no such thing as good taste.

Like a lot of things I grew up believing, this turns out to be false, and I'm going to try to explain why.

One problem with saying there's no such thing as good taste is that it also means there's no such thing as good art. If there were good art, then people who liked it would have better taste than people who didn't. So if you discard taste, you also have to discard the idea of art being good, and artists being good at making it.

It was pulling on that thread that unravelled my childhood faith in relativism.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 8:40:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SadisticMan

Geniuses have different/unique brain-wave patterns. They can be compared to a serial killers brain activity and look quite a bit alike. The difference is in the frontal lobe where
self-control is maintained.


Actually, that's a gross oversimplification.

I take it you're referring to the "ring of fire" pattern and/or cingulate gyrus hyperactivity.

The frontal lobe is somewhat different, yes, but decreased neuronal density in the prefrontal cortex, or an increased density of D4-receptors in the area, is correlated with "genious", not serial killing, despite being considered a marker for poor self-control.

I'll simplify things further...

I'm no genious, by my reckoning. But I do have one quality that's associated with them, which I think may be the "dangerous" one, as well as being the one that is essential to the contributions such people have made to humanity over the years:

The ability to think the unthinkable.

Simple as that. Being able to think what other people cannot, in fact being unable not to do so, is the thing that allows people like Albert Einstein to put together the Theory of Relativity. It is also what allows some people to think "Okay, it'll cost half the population, but it's the only way out of this mess." or similar. In that, it is priceless, both valuable and dangerous.

One of my main fears if people are allowed to start "engineering" their kids, is that that trait will be identified, and bred out of the species. Then we'll be stuck with the lowest common denominator, and snail-paced progress, in all areas of life, art and technology.

quote:

I would agree with the above statement that a genius will look deeper into a problem and usually come up with a better answer faster.  And the mind of a genius never stops.


It's not so much "faster" as "better answer". Most people I know with that trait, some of which I would consider geniouses, have a sequential thinking speed that isn't all that amazing, as such. What really sets them apart, is the way that thinking is organized, and the amount of information that goes into each sequential step. Certain forms of bipolar (A. Einstein, for instance) and some kinds of ADHD (most such thinkers I know) are the best known correlations of this kind.

As someone put it, it's not just that it takes them less time to come up with the answer, but that most people couldn't come up with the answer given any amount of time. It isn't a matter of "working through" it, but rather a matter of having the ability to grasp enough elements of a thing at the same time to work with the whole of it, and thus being able to work at a different level.

quote:

Some may have started out in elemtary school as average or below average, their desires of learning more geared towards abstract.  At some point a teacher may have a great influence or teach them a way that clicks, propelling their mind into high speed and suddenly able to see the problem and resolution.


As most people probably know, Einstein wasn't doing to well in school. The guy who founded Oracle dropped out. Lots of brilliant people don't "fit" into school. That's also the case for lots of not-so-brilliant people, but I digress.

In my experience, unless there's some very special teacher present, recovering from school takes a lot of time for anyone who thinks in that way. Abstract thinking, pattern analysis and systems (wholes, as opposed to parts) have been my forte all along, and I know I definitely spent a lot of time fighting the school system. I learnt just about everything on my own, before encountering it in school, and couldn't get why they'd want to hold me back, and why they were obsessing with memorizing details that I could look up in a book in no time. If I hadn't been fortunate enough to get into a special class for advanced students, my love of learning might have been lost for good, and I'd have gone on to becoming pretty much nothing.

I can't recall who said it, but someone did once say that "Education is what you are left with when you've forgotten everything you learned in school", and I think there's a fair bit of truth to that. For anyone, really. I mean, how much do you really remember of the stuff they put lots of emphasis on, and how much have you forgotten?

I'll round off with a quote about thinking the unthinkable, by Albert again:

"Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions."

I'd also point out Paul Graham's essay "What You Can't Say", but that's not so much about ways of thinking, as about comparative methods to reduce cultural bias in the ways one thinks. For the interested, it'll be found at the same site where the other essay I linked to was. Menu on the left-hand side.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:06:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: latexbarbiets

I have a question, if a subbie has a genius IQ(160 or so). What affect might that have on finding a compatible partner/Dom/Domme? As one of the above posters stated geniuses tend to overthink or constantly dwell on things, which would affect finding a partner.  Guess my main question is have any subbies with genius IQ have problems in relationships? Especially in a Dom/sub relationship.


If that score is yours, it'd help if you could post it as a percentile. Scores are usually not very standardized. Percentiles are. Mine are in the 99th percentile somewhere, IIRC, which would, depending on the scoring used, be anywhere from about 130 to 200+. Not sure I'd say that qualifies as genious, though. When I think about genious, I'm usually thinking about stuff like 7σ up to the nine-nines club. My nephandi is about +1σ or so, as I recall.

There are some potential issues involved in any relationship that involves a significant gap. Some of these issues may be more significant in a D/s relationship, if the sub is the one on the top end of the scale. But with the right Dom, it doesn't have to be a problem as such. There are things to deal with, though, and some things the Dom might have a problem helping you work through. On the other hand, a Dom can provide a pillar of stability when one goes through a time where the thoughts leave some things in limbo.

Kind of silly of me to bring a fantasy author into it, but Robert Jordan put a potential problem rather well in relation to one of the cultures in his world, saying that a woman (I'm not delving into the gender issues; it makes sense for the situation that culture is in in the setting, and others are the opposite, so..) wants a man who is strong enough that she can be all that she can be without feeling the need to "lower" herself for him to be in control, and that if she had to do so, she would grow to resent him.

Essentially, what it's saying is that if the relationship works in such a way that you end up feeling that you need to suppress your intelligence in order for the relationship to work, and in order for the Dom to remain in control and happy about things, then you may very well come to resent that, and possibly the Dom. Something to bear in mind, and to keep from becoming a problem.

I've got some experiences from the other way around, but I don't care to share them on the public side of the board, so PM me if you're interested.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:12:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: girl4you2

i'd suspect if one were to conduct a study, one would find similar results regarding iq.


Studies indicate that IQ tends to be a factor. Men tend to prefer women with lower height, muscle mass, education, income and intelligence than themselves. Women are the opposite. Mind you, this is a trend, not an absolute given.

People also seem to pick partners of similar intelligence to themselves; i.e. with a small gap to themselves. This may limit the pool a bit (an IQ of 160 occurs in less than 1% of the population, depending on the scoring), but not necessarily all that much.

quote:

as to how one functions within a given relationship, it's very dependent on many more things than just iq. iq alone doesn't determine social functioning.


One could go so far as to posit that social functioning is inversely correlated with IQ, as a general trend, but I won't go quite that far. Suffice to agree that it's a different axis, although I think it can be a significant problem in certain situations.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:21:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Being a genius is, by definition, mentally ill.


It's in the DSM?


Leaving aside the controversy of the DSM for the moment, and any points about it having contained homosexuality as a disorder in the past...

Whether it is in the DSM or not, there have been studies that show a very strong correlation. A causation has not been determined, however, except that certain gene variations (DRD4 7-repeat allelle, COMT phenotype, etc.) have been tied to both significant mental skills and certain conditions classified as mental illnesses (for the examples, Autism/Asperger/ADHD and Schizophrenia, respectively).

Presence of one particular COMT phenotype, for instance, gives you a baseline in the prefrontal cortex that would otherwise be unacheivable without the use of cocaine or amphetamines, as performance enhancers, in optimum dose.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:27:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Perhaps it is a deficiency in your ability to properly express complex concepts.


It may just be lack of patience. That used to be my problem. I've worked hard on it.

quote:

I have explained a few concepts to people of normal intelligence, when I can I use analogies, but sometimes there is no readily available analogy to use. Case in point, wide spectrum sattelite photography. I had to break it down, there was no other way, no analogy to use.


Very nice counterexample to the common statement about how one who cannot explain something to a 10-year-old doesn't really understand it. Though, as a general rule, given enough time, I can explain just about anything to a 10-year-old, if they are genuinely curious. There are, as you say, exceptions.

quote:

This basic shit should be old hat to most genius' but try explaining it. Explain it to someone with absolutely no electronics background whatsoever. Ven you can do that my friends, I vill allow you into my cirkle of darkKness.


I've done that a few times; admittedly, it takes a lot of patience, but it is doable.

Do I get a cookie for my initiation rites? [:D]




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:32:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

At least I'm not a bar bouncer, right?


Being a bar bouncer isn't necessarily bad, in any way.

A highly intelligent friend of mine, some might say brilliant, is an auto mechanic.

Why? Because it is work he can do in his sleep, while his mind does other things.

Similarly, Einstein worked as a patent clerk for many years. Now that should be the most mind-numbingly dull experience a human being can be put through, but he managed to turn it into something interesting, and used the opportunity to learn from the ideas submitted and (more relevantly, usually) the prior art cited.

quote:

Perhaps why I preoccupy myself with silly things, like posting constantly on a BDSM board.


It's not necessarily silly. I do it all the time. [:D]

Consider this: you could be frying your brain cells watching low-grade reality-TV. Or in a frying pan. Hmm... wait, I said that already. [;)]

quote:

Excuse me before I get a bit emotional.


Thanks for the thread reference, and hope stuff will work out better for you in the long run.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:40:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: girl4you2

there is a little book called, alice in quantumland, which provides plenty of relatively simply analogies to explain particle physics. many people are familiar with alice in wonderland, so it kinda helps. you might take a look at it, and how it explains things to get an idea of how to bring some things to a level of understanding that others might "get." best of luck with it.


Similarly, novels are a good medium. In fact, art is a large part of the difference between "getting it" and being able to express it.

I know "Flatland" is outdated by now, and there are better successors, but that family of books also gives an idea of how to explain certain parts of a concept to someone. To go all the way, of course, would require a book series that would go on at ridicolous length, but to explain something to the satisfaction of the audience, or to use a partial explanation to get the desired result (as with the paper), is all one really needs, most of the time.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 9:44:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertRat

How do you explain your inept usage of the English language? Being a genius, you surely are aware of it. Is your poor syntax and grammar due to neurological or organic problems or are you just lazy? Please "dumb down" your response as much as possible for me. Thanks.


Cognitive skills, including abstract reasoning, are located in different centers of the brain, and their level of functioning are independent; it takes a lot of training, consciously done, to work around that.

In "dumbed down" terms, assuming you were sincere and not sarcastic, the gist is this:

Language skills are seperate from intelligence.
Intelligence is seperate from language skills.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 10:06:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gypsygrl

Not true.  There's a distinction between 'intelligence' and 'sanity' and they are evaluated by different instruments.  To say that someone who scores higher than average on an iq test is mentally ill would be the same as saying someone who below average on an iq test is mentally ill.  Mental retardation is not a mental illness and neither is genius.


Actually, mental retardation is classified as a mental illness. Diagnostic codes F70 through F79 in the ICD-10, with which I am more familiar. If I recall correctly, the term used in the DSM is "Axis I" mental illness. And the means used to ascertain sanity are the same used as for ascertaining mental illness, speaking as someone who is on a first-name basis with one of the leading minds in psychiatry in this region (both as a patient and as a friend) and has studied it extensively, as well as TA'ing students in psychiatry (without a formal degree).

There is also a significant covariance between intelligence and mental illness, which can be posited to be a mix of genetics, frustration at society, and a prevailing negative attitude toward people of higher-than-average intelligence.

The strongest genetic link is, as I've said, with the DRD4 and COMT phenotypes.

quote:

Iq is a norm referenced measure which compares the performance of an individual to a normal population.  "Normal" here is a statistical concept.


I'm sure he's well aware of how IQ works.

The gist of it is that there is a fairly bog-standard bell curve distribution, and that the test used must have been previously tested on a normalized sample to obtain a reference scale, and that it must have used a sufficiently large sample to accurately distinguish in the range the person being tested is in; most of the wide-range tests cannot measure at all above the 99.9th percentile (ceiling effect), and lose accuracy way before that.

For instance, Marilyn vos Savant was placed in the 99.999997th percentile, which means one in about 30 million people have that level of IQ. Obviously, accurately discerning something with statistical validity at this level is hard, if not outright impossible.

quote:

You're confusing statistical and behavioral normalcy.  The two are different.  They don't use normative assessments when diagnosing mental illness.


Normative assessments are definitely a part of diagnosing mental illness.

For instance, to be diagnosed as delusional, the belief you hold must not be normal in your culture.

Also, a requirement for most diagnoses is that there must be significant distress, or an impaired functioning in society. Not being well adjusted to a profoundly sick society, as Jiddu Krishnamurti said, it not a sign of health in my book, but it is one of the things that will satisfy this criterion.




Aswad -> RE: So Why Are All The Genius's Insane? (6/3/2007 10:12:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

Not sure what it says about us all that no one's needed to ask what the DSM is!


That's one of the best observations on this thread so far.




Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625