I hate stupid people

[alarmclock]

I think I'll go start a thread about that.

As far as stupid people, the most prominent stupid people tend to get themselves noticed because they think they aren't stupid.  Then, of course, there are smart people who make stupid decisions, like not studying enough or something of that nature.  You can almost see the regret in their eyes in later years, contemplating the exact moment (or perhaps a long, reversible series of events) that they fucked up and made their life an unlivable shithole, because they know that they're never going to be anything more than they are right now.

Those smart people that stopped studying could be traveling the world right now and seeing new things everyday, even if they have to be beggars.  The smart people that do study have to live their life with the same job doing the same thing over and over till they die.  They work in high school so they can work harder in college, and then work harder and longer in a job.

[Corey Taylor]

Well yesterday I happen to find out that when I was in first grade, my IQ was 118. Just recently I got a four hour test done that said my IQ is in range of 124-129. I am in fact smawrt. Huh. OMG Corey, What a schocker!!! 

[CyberSarkany]

IQ test says nothing, and there is also a difference between smart and intelligent, but who cares.

My hatred for stupid people < My hatred for people who don't have their own opinion(aka media infected idiots)

We should learn thinking on our own, not repeating what others said or did.

[cupn00dles]

IQ test says nothing, and there is also a difference between smart and intelligent, but who cares.

My hatred for stupid people < My hatred for people who don't have their own opinion(aka media infected idiots)

We should learn thinking on our own, not repeating what others said or did.

What makes you think that you think on your own?

Every rational thought you have is a result of a mix of determined waves of information that reach your cognitive system through the social/interactive system it is integrated at. Your "opinion" is a result of matches and mismatches that happen amongst these waves of information.

Now, how you deal with this "opinion" of yours, which compels or repels you to take certain actions, is what should show how smart/intelligent you are in the eyes of a determined observer, who himself has a load of matching and mismatching information which creates his "opinion" on your mind's capabilities. And still, the idea of dealing with this information is information in and of itself.


Even saying "We should learn thinking on our own" is repeating what others said.

Now, unless you measure the reach of the "originality" concept and set this value as the standard for your perspective of this  concept, yours are faded to be empty words, even for yourself.


edit:

[Daniel Krispin]

Well yesterday I happen to find out that when I was in first grade, my IQ was 118. Just recently I got a four hour test done that said my IQ is in range of 124-129. I am in fact smawrt. Huh. OMG Corey, What a schocker!!! 

IQ is usually meaningless. If it's even accurate, it's only a measure of potential, and potential is nothing if not realized. It is not what you can learn, but what you do learn, and what you do with that learning, that matters. I don't think Hawking is where he is intellectually only because he has a high IQ, for exampe - I wager there are those with higher IQs that haven't achieved a tenth of what he has.

[cupn00dles]

It is not what you can learn, but what you do learn, and what you do with that learning, that matters.

That matters to what?

[Lord J Esq]

Well yesterday I happen to find out that when I was in first grade, my IQ was 118. Just recently I got a four hour test done that said my IQ is in range of 124-129. I am in fact smawrt.

That will be the day.

IQ test says nothing, and there is also a difference between smart and intelligent, but who cares.

Nowadays it is fashionable to dismiss IQ testing as unrepresentative of people's true mental operating capacity. It, along with a battery of other tests, is highly adroit ad measuring that. What I am willing to concede is that IQ tests continue to have a hard time shedding their cultural bias and measuring people from different backgrounds in such a way as to give reliable results.

My hatred for stupid people < My hatred for people who don't have their own opinion(aka media infected idiots)

In the end, those two groups are the same thing--the latter is a specific example of the former. I will say, however, that people who, when confronted with an important choice, refuse to choose, are giving too much of a free pass in our society. The perfect example is the American "middle" in our political spectrum. This coterie of independents, centrists, moderates, and apathetics consists of more people who are willfully ignorant, self-defeatingly cynical, indifferent, insensitive, or otherwise dismissive of the political system...than of people who have a true ideological situation at the crossroads between left and right.

Conservatives, wrong as their ideology usually is, may lack awareness--but they do have passion. People in the center more often have neither. No wonder, then, that the traditional media--which caters to the center--is seen as so vapid and stupid an institution.

What makes you think that you think on your own?

Every rational thought you have is a result of a mix of determined waves of information that reach your cognitive system through the social/interactive system it is integrated at. Your "opinion" is a result of matches and mismatches that happen amongst these waves of information.

Now, how you deal with this "opinion" of yours, which compels or repels you to take certain actions, is what should show how smart/intelligent you are in the eyes of a determined observer, who himself has a load of matching and mismatching information which creates his "opinion" on your mind's capabilities. And still, the idea of dealing with this information is information in and of itself.


Even saying "We should learn thinking on our own" is repeating what others said.

Now, unless you measure the reach of the "originality" concept and set this value as the standard for your perspective of this  concept, yours are faded to be empty words, even for yourself.


edit:

That's interesting coming from you. You don't typically bother to put yourself on the line by offering a substantive statement on anything. I notice you prefer to use your intelligence mostly to relieve people of their myopia by way of potshots, baubles, levity, and non-sequitur. Why the direct approach this time?

[Lord J Esq]

It isn't substantive at all. Take a look, it's all self-contradictory.

I speak of tones, not necessarily words. Was that just another one of your flybys? Somehow I doubt it.

Then again, I could be wrong. Maybe you're just getting more clever. =)

[cupn00dles]

Hold on, let me redo my post, didn't exactly express everything I meant to - -

That's interesting coming from you. You don't typically bother to put yourself on the line by offering a substantive statement on anything. I notice you prefer to use your intelligence mostly to relieve people of their myopia by way of potshots, baubles, levity, and non-sequitur. Why the direct approach this time?

What makes you think I ever bothered to put myself on the line? ; ]

Sometimes I just write more than one or two lines of blabbering. Quite un-typical, indeed, but it happens.

And well, those statements are not substantive at all. Take a look, it's all self-contradictory.


edit: Hardly more clever. Maybe more patient. Older.

[CyberSarkany]

Actually, what I meant is, if you "copy" what other people think of something just to fit into their group = not showing their own developed opinion = what I hate.

What makes you think that you think on your own?

Every rational thought you have is a result of a mix of determined waves of information that reach your cognitive system through the social/interactive system it is integrated at. Your "opinion" is a result of matches and mismatches that happen amongst these waves of information.

Thinking on my own like not needing anyone else to think. The cognitice system is my cognitive system, and the matches and mismatches are my results. That's why I would call it "my own opinion", even though the information is provided by a different entity. My brain made the work to get this opinion via judging the information it got, didn't it? And since not everyone has the same "Match and Missmatch" result, it must have also something to do with experience(from whatever kind). This makes my opinion different, at least in some way, and people not going through this, eg just "seeing" one side of the coin, are the ones I don't like.

uhm...hope that covers what I wanted to say...forgot to post and let the window open...I will try to add something:

Even saying "We should learn thinking on our own" is repeating what others said.

I just wanted to say what I think, if it correspandents(does this word exist in english?) with what other people said, I don't see why I shouldn't post it...

Now, unless you measure the reach of the "originality" concept and set this value as the standard for your perspective of this  concept, yours are faded to be empty words, even for yourself.

Unless I do what? There is not real originality, so this is sarcasm, right? So I can ignore that part, right? Sorry I had 11 hours of school today and my brain is very tired...Maybe I will get it tommorow.

But I can say: No, I don't think what I said is nothing, but I think you are refering to the last part. Did I already explain? not sure, if not, here:
We sometimes only learn the results of what other peopel did, what they found out, instead of trying to find things out on our own(which is a harder way). This is not refered to science stuff, more about life, we all know how parents try to give some advises, yet I think we, the kids, should experience these things on our own to see what it is like.

Again, I will add more tomorow...sorry.

[ZeaLitY]

Well, if this gets into free will, I believe in it at both ends of a spectrum, but perhaps not in the middle. At the very basic level, we have free will to determine what we do. We sort of lose the ability to change things as "things" expand in scope, like the entire world, or the solar system, at the galaxy. But at the end of the historical spectrum, humanity will master nature and ultimately achieve true free will.

Sort of like how these days, you can ascend to be leader of a huge corporation and impact societies, but you might still have issues deflecting an asteroid, controlling the climate, etc. while in TNG, all that is moot and humanity is beginning to experiment with time itself.

[cupn00dles]

Actually, what I meant is, if you "copy" what other people think of something just to fit into their group = not showing their own developed opinion = what I hate.

What makes you think that you think on your own?

Every rational thought you have is a result of a mix of determined waves of information that reach your cognitive system through the social/interactive system it is integrated at. Your "opinion" is a result of matches and mismatches that happen amongst these waves of information.

Thinking on my own like not needing anyone else to think. The cognitice system is my cognitive system, and the matches and mismatches are my results. That's why I would call it "my own opinion", even though the information is provided by a different entity. My brain made the work to get this opinion via judging the information it got, didn't it? And since not everyone has the same "Match and Missmatch" result, it must have also something to do with experience(from whatever kind). This makes my opinion different, at least in some way, and people not going through this, eg just "seeing" one side of the coin, are the ones I don't like.

uhm...hope that covers what I wanted to say...forgot to post and let the window open...I will try to add something:

And what in the world makes you presume that you do not need anyone else to think? The very concept of a "cognitive system" is among the information used to form your "opinion" which is itself among that information.

Now, is it really your brain that makes the work or is it inevitably conditioned to do such work by the context your cognition finds itself at? Your judgement is bound to your "opinion", not to say that "judgement" and "opinion" are the same thing, so it should be as valid as the "opinion" itself, otherwise there would be no coherence in this line of thought. You judge, and act accordingly to that judgement. You have an opinion and then act accordingly to this opinion. Or vice-versa.

And well, I could be cynical enough to come and say "who am I to say if people have the same matches and mismatches or not", but I will stick to the "discussing fella" way and keep going. If everyone has different opinions because they have different combinations of information in their minds, then everyone has their own opinion, no such thing as un-original would exist, and you would have lost your point.

According to my previous post the un-originality would come from a way deeper level than the already formed "opinion", its very foundations would be copies of previously existing pieces of information.

Even saying "We should learn thinking on our own" is repeating what others said.

I just wanted to say what I think, if it correspandents(does this word exist in english?) with what other people said, I don't see why I shouldn't post it...

In fact I only wrote that as an example of the things I wrote before it.

Now, unless you measure the reach of the "originality" concept and set this value as the standard for your perspective of this  concept, yours are faded to be empty words, even for yourself.

Unless I do what? There is not real originality, so this is sarcasm, right? So I can ignore that part, right? Sorry I had 11 hours of school today and my brain is very tired...Maybe I will get it tommorow.

But I can say: No, I don't think what I said is nothing, but I think you are refering to the last part. Did I already explain? not sure, if not, here:
We sometimes only learn the results of what other peopel did, what they found out, instead of trying to find things out on our own(which is a harder way). This is not refered to science stuff, more about life, we all know how parents try to give some advises, yet I think we, the kids, should experience these things on our own to see what it is like.

Of course there is originality. If you see something as original than, to you, it is. Or, if you choose to see something that is original to you as something un-original, than un-original it shall be. Or, maybe, would it not?  

Again, I will add more tomorow...sorry.

Why do you apologize?  

[Burning Zeppelin]

My hate for stupid people < My hate for people that think they are much smarter, and therefore superior, to stupid people

[ZeaLitY]

My hate for stupid people < My hate for people that think they are much smarter, and therefore superior, to stupid people

You'll keep thinking this until a bunch of stupid people ruin your work or waste your time by virtue of being stupid.

[nightmare975]

I think we already had this conversation on the No Child Left Behind topic.