• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.

Intelligent but not always right

Local time
Today, 10:17
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,850
Location
subjective
#1
I have a friend that is intelligent, intelligent the same way my brother is. Mechanical and things based. But when talking to him we had a disagreement. First, he says that half the earth (one hemisphere) is complete ocean (Pacific ocean) but in google maps, it looks like 1/3 of earths surface not 1/2. He said they did not have the right way to measure the earth and that is why the Pacific ocean is 1/2 the earth's surface with all the contents on the other half. Second, he said at one point Sweden was at the equator. I tried to say that would mean the rotation of the earth would need to change since the equator is where the earth spins creating the polls. He said Sweden would be the equator because of an electromagnetic toroid that goes through the earth center emerging at Sweeden and that we were taught wrong in school that the rotations of the earth was the equator and that the real equator was the toroid magnetic field.

I can tell that he thinks like my brother, He is not stupid, But because he is intelligent like my brother he makes the same mistakes. My brother and I had a fight once because he said America was enemies with Great Britain. But the way he plays video games suggests he understands mechanistic puzzles. He told me that when he plays a game, when a problem occurs he can mentally picture in his head 40 or more tools to find the right one for the puzzle. They flash by him is 2-3 seconds.

I googled the opposite of mechanical thinking and the result was Holistic (system thinking). I think I am Holistic because I look at things from the top. I do not like to get my hands dirty so I look at what the purpose is of anything I do and look for a creative elegant solution to a problem that does not involve a Jury rigging solution. I look for a way to do things without hurting myself unlike what my brother does.

So by that dichotomy, I cannot memorize and experiment with matching tools to solutions. What I do is take what I have and manipulate it to fit what needs to be done. This may contradict what I said (this may imply I Jury rigging solutions) but it really does not because the solution I come up with work and his ends up failing or taking 5 times the effort because his solutions gave no leeway to what needed to be done. He does a project 5 time over because the parts do not fit well mine do because I think about how everything must fit. Both our project require new solutions but he starts with premade solutions. I find new solutions.

So both of them are intelligent mechanically but are wrong in so many ways it is scary to tell them you disagree with them. My brother wanted me to level up his character on a Nintendo Wii game and he told me I was playing it wrong so we had a fight. I could not dodge and fire the gun at the same time because the enemies were too fast so I was going along the edges. My brother did not understand this and he said just go into the center, right at them. I said I cannot do that because they would all attack at the same time and I will die. Then he pushed me.

My brother is intelligent but not always right. Same with my friend (But less violent). Could be because of the way they think. Could be because of the way their cognition works. Jungian type may be part of it. The main point could be summed up as "Their brain function is such a way as to see things through a different epistemological lens".

Intelligent but having a different epistemological lens than other people.
 
Local time
Today, 10:17
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,850
Location
subjective
#2
Something that frustrates me is how people more intelligent than me can sometimes use argumentation to justify why I am wrong when I am not. It is a simple error. The error is that the begin with the certainty they are right. And they deconstruct what you say without considering that there are dependencies between the concepts that come together as a whole argument. they look for what is wrong and not for what is intended. They do not ask questions they only use reduction.

Not all people with high intelligence interact this way with moderate and above average people. But I have come up with three ways the scenario above can play out.

1. They are right and errors do exist.
2. They do not understand your argument because of deconstruction and reductionism and not asking questions.
3. Your arguments are correct but you are unable to explain them because of the onslaught of the more intelligent person's ability to always make it look like you are wrong.

It is said that the more intelligent you are the better you can Bullshit people. That is not what I am saying in my above message. What I am saying is that the more intelligent you are the more you can use logic in an adversarial way against defenseless people making it difficult for them to learn to think. The point is not to win but to learn. When I had my neuropsychological evaluation the doctor whispered that he was surprised how thoughtful I was. We should be thoughtful of other people and not think of communication as a way to defeat other. I often see people more intelligent than I say something I think is incorrect but since I have seen how their personality is I do not interact with them because I know will be dismissed under the gues of logic or the outright hostility of me having a lower intelligence than them. I state the most basic facts I think are true and called stupid because other facts were not mentions so I do not know what I am talking about.

Point is certain intelligent people are offended by everything they see wrong with what median intelligent people say. And the people that act all logical have trouble seeing logic outside their framework of logic. They take data and fit it all together to create an amolgamated theory (Te) other logical people have an idea and look for data to confirm or deny the idea. So when the less intelligent person has an idea and tells the logical person this is hypothetical, the logical person will look at the pill and say they see no way for the idea to fit. The person with the idea will say the idea must for it to be confirmed must combine parts from the pill to see what conditions there must be for the idea to be verified. The logical person says the only conditions are how the data fits together, reorganizing them has no certainty that the idea will work, the way they fit together perfectly explains everything.

Let that sink in: reorganizing them has no certainty that the idea will work, the way they fit together perfectly explains everything.

This is why discussing any topic with certain people of higher intelligence is fruitless. They know that everything is explained and even the tiniest idea you have does not fit in their model.

The biggest insult I received was when a person said I was playing word games trying to explain why I thought intelligence tests measured some of intelligence. What he was saying was that I was making shit up that did not mean anything to convince people IQ tests are valid. Can you see how insulting that is since that was not what I was doing? Same for that other guy.

The intelligent person will use words thinking they will not be caught to insult others by the syntactical structure hiding the insults cleverly as convoluted language.

An obvious way to gauge Mental Age or grasping power.

Captured any more frozen moments in those back woods mountains in recent years to share with the city-bound shut-ins of the world constrained to contemplating their navels, mental ages, and masturbatory -- mental and otherwise -- `grasping' power ?
This is what he thinks on the whole discussion of intelligence. Who the fuck is it for him to say anything at all about the nature of this topic having anything at all to do with sexual activities. None because he is a piece of (expletive). Because of his high intelligence, he thinks discussions on intelligence are beneath him and people discussing it are beneath him. The innuendo to masturbation shows that this topic is a disgusting activity since is results in nothing. It is nonproductive and nothing is gained from it. we might as well say INTP forum is a Bullshit forum because everything here is the result of masturbation. (Someone is a piece of shit). I think all topics on INTP forum are productive and those that don't can piss off.
 
Top Bottom