THAT’S A MISTAKE. You’re attributing a skill to a similarity. In other words, very smart people understand each other just as well as ordinary people understand each other just as well as very stupid people understand each other. But just as you can’t understand very smart people, they can’t necessarily understand you. There are a lot more average people (66%) than there are exceptional people (the under 1%). This makes average people think they have a skill, rather than, that they are just surrounded by many people more like them. So emotions and others play a larger role in the life of ordinary people than they do very smart people. And it is harder to imagine why someone would rely on the opinion and intuitions of others when “they are so often wrong or foolish”. WHY? At 7 points (1/2 standard deviation) one can provide help to one another. At 15 points (1 standard deviation) the higher can provide management and leadership to the lower, but at 22 points (1–1/2 standard deviation) we have difficulting understanding each other, and at 30 points (2 standard deviations), we have a great difficulty understanding one another. We are just as different as types of ants. The difference is that our differences are cognitive and emotional not physical. EXAMPLE I had a very hard time understanding why ‘normies’ worried or had fears or concerns about trivial things, and how important trust of others was, and how much of their information and decisions they obtained from others rather than their own investigation, and moreover, what they found entertaining and interesting. I thought people were just plain mean and evil until I understood how … limited they were … and that they were just doing the best that they could. Once I understood it I was horrified, and depressed for months. )
Theme: Agency
-
PEAK HUMAN? —“Are there any morphological differences between the brain of a h
PEAK HUMAN?
—“Are there any morphological differences between the brain of a highly intelligent person and a person with average intelligence?”—
Three positive factors:
1 – greater neurogenesis
2 – greater neural density
3 – greater white matter (reduced friction)
Three negative factors
4 – Lack of defect in biochemistry (or other illness)
5 – Lack of defect in personality trait (brain structure and chemistry)
6 – Lack of defect due to trauma (of any kind).
And one less obvious:
7 – False knowledge or beliefs (non-correspondence). Certain sets of ideas are incredibly attractive but entirely destructive to our ability to think.
We should note that so far, (as most of us expected)
a) intelligence is influenced by a very large number of genes.
b) unfortunately most influences are negative not positive.
HOWEVER
That means:
c) that potential intelligence does not require we increase any substantial capacity.
d) that potential intelligence can be incrementally increased by cumulative, specific, genetic corrections.
AND
f) Ot seems likely that intelligence then developed a long time ago by accident but through reproduction we have not been able to produce dominance in intelligence without controlled reproduction (like we do with animals),
OR
g) Or the innate possibility was there originally and we have actually devolved from it. This hypothesis isn’t as strange as it originally sounds. Its entirely possible that the rapid increases in our ability to communicate produced greater selection pressure on verbal ability than it did intelligence, and we began to function more as a collective (social) intelligence than individually intelligent agents who imitated each other. The relationship between brain size and intelligence isn’t linear but it exists, and we have smaller (less expensive) brains than both Neanderthals and Cro Magnon’s for example.
In other words, we might have passed peak genetic ability in the past but because of verbal communication reduced the cost and size of our brains, and as such, increased the survival of our weakest.
We don’t know yet.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-02 13:15:00 UTC
-
HUMAN? —“Are there any morphological differences between the brain of a highly
https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-morphological-differences-between-the-brain-of-a-highly-intelligent-person-and-a-person-with-average-intelligence/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=0cb0e37b&srid=u4QvPEAK HUMAN?
—“Are there any morphological differences between the brain of a highly intelligent person and a person with average intelligence?”—
Three positive factors:
1 – greater neurogenesis
2 – greater neural density
3 – greater white matter (reduced friction)
Three negative factors
4 – Lack of defect in biochemistry (or other illness)
5 – Lack of defect in personality trait (brain structure and chemistry)
6 – Lack of defect due to trauma (of any kind).
And one less obvious:
7 – False knowledge or beliefs (non-correspondence). Certain sets of ideas are incredibly attractive but entirely destructive to our ability to think.
We should note that so far, (as most of us expected)
a) intelligence is influenced by a very large number of genes.
b) unfortunately most influences are negative not positive.
HOWEVER
That means:
c) that potential intelligence does not require we increase any substantial capacity.
d) that potential intelligence can be incrementally increased by cumulative, specific, genetic corrections.
AND
f) Ot seems likely that intelligence then developed a long time ago by accident but through reproduction we have not been able to produce dominance in intelligence without controlled reproduction (like we do with animals),
OR
g) Or the innate possibility was there originally and we have actually devolved from it. This hypothesis isn’t as strange as it originally sounds. Its entirely possible that the rapid increases in our ability to communicate produced greater selection pressure on verbal ability than it did intelligence, and we began to function more as a collective (social) intelligence than individually intelligent agents who imitated each other. The relationship between brain size and intelligence isn’t linear but it exists, and we have smaller (less expensive) brains than both Neanderthals and Cro Magnon’s for example.
In other words, we might have passed peak genetic ability in the past but because of verbal communication reduced the cost and size of our brains, and as such, increased the survival of our weakest.
We don’t know yet.Updated Apr 2, 2018, 1:12 PM
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-02 13:12:00 UTC
-
2 – Neoteny/Pedomorphism/Juvenilization produces lower rate and depth of maturit
2 – Neoteny/Pedomorphism/Juvenilization produces lower rate and depth of maturity, more aquiline features, longer development times, and greater ‘distance’ from impulses.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-31 20:18:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/980177613904842753
Reply addressees: @DiasporaDiabhal @PTcarlo
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/980136949938900992
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/980136949938900992
-
1 – IQ produces many incremental ‘goods’ (morality, cooperation, adaptation, inv
1 – IQ produces many incremental ‘goods’ (morality, cooperation, adaptation, invention, cost of learning)
2 – Neoteny/Pedomorphism/Juvenilization produces lower rate and depth of maturity, more aquiline features, longer development times, and greater ‘distance’ from impulses.
3 – The balance between the male brain and the female brain produces behavioral differences. Populations vary in this distribution of biases, just as they vary in the distribution of maturity. (Climate and disease gradients largely determine this.)
4 – Asymmetric reproduction (upward reproduction) improves these conditions, and symmetric reproduction does the reverse. Hence why cities are dysgenia-factories.
5 – ‘Something wonderful happened’ either before (black sea) or when we combined horse, wheel, and bronze. But it ‘appears’ that the black sea -caspian created a rapid recursively improving gene pool. Same with yellow river. Most but west and far east were also isolated.
6 – So the answer is that when the original people moved west into poland and germany, and developed a trading civilization among the north sea baltic peoples that they already possessed a genetic and possibly cultural advantage.
7 – The roman empire destroyed celtic civilization (as they did carthaginian and east mediterranean), which appears to have been the ‘core state’ of europe – and created opportunity for the high germanics to migrate, and eventually conquer rome.
8 – Now, nordic peoples practiced a form of late marriage and manorialism for a long time, possibly ‘always’. But by 700 the people of the low countries institutionalized it, and this formalized reproductive eugenics. Bipartite manorialism is demarcated by the Hajnal Line.
9 – Beginning with the redevelopment of major trade lines, about 1000, and certainly by the establishment of the Hansa in 1200, europeans started aggressively hanging ‘troublemakers’.
10 – downward movement of middle class reproduction meant that by the late medieval/early modern period much of european population above the Hajnal line was genetically middle class. Add literacy, and redistribute the dead capital in the church hands – and magic happened.
11- So it appears that the advantage is genetic and long standing, but is amplified substantially by (a) heroic culture, and (b) culling of the underclass through systemic eugenics, starvation, war, and disease.
12 – Ergo, the underclasses were not ‘oppressed’. They were domesticated like any other animal, and the untrainable one’s ‘removed from the breeding pool’. And we have reversed those IQ gains in just 150 years.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-31 16:41:00 UTC
-
Um, even your question grants them the presumption of agency that they demonstra
Um, even your question grants them the presumption of agency that they demonstrably do not possess., Those who lack agency demand it of others. The way they demand it is by rebellion.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-29 18:48:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979430095944339458
Reply addressees: @enlightdark
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979429282496696320
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979429282496696320
-
Start with Camus’ question: to answer any question of choice, first answer the q
Start with Camus’ question: to answer any question of choice, first answer the question of why you do not commit suicide. This tends to prohibit you from cunning falsehoods. So, why do you not commit suicide?
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-29 18:27:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979424936715542529
Reply addressees: @_Discouraged @LibertyGuy85 @ThomasEWoods @BobMurphyEcon @ComicDaveSmith
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979424154582691841
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979424154582691841
-
Why does one justify a falsehood that provides him comfort and context if not to
Why does one justify a falsehood that provides him comfort and context if not to improve his ability to function? We developed mindfulness in the age of transformation for a reason: cooperation across tribal groups.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-29 18:18:40 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979422606901305344
Reply addressees: @_Discouraged @LibertyGuy85 @ThomasEWoods @BobMurphyEcon @ComicDaveSmith
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979420826306011136
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979420826306011136
-
You may not understand this but your response, out of the field of possible resp
You may not understand this but your response, out of the field of possible responses, betrays two cognitive errors (a) NAXALT, and (b) Virtue Signaling. In other words, you just confirm my argument.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-29 16:51:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979400568342040576
Reply addressees: @oldoddjobs @Outsideness
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979398450012917760
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979398450012917760
-
Adulthood begins with responsibility. Responsibility begins with having children
Adulthood begins with responsibility. Responsibility begins with having children. Other countries lower marriage (sex) to 9 years old. The great mistake in classical liberal history was not providing the underclass with their own house, rather than handing over gov’t to peasants.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-29 14:47:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979369439140503552
Reply addressees: @MMFlint
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978385565577031686
IN REPLY TO:
@MMFlint
If there’s one thing we’ve learned since Parkland, it’s that the voting age should be lowered to 16. Other countries do it, we should too.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978385565577031686