GENIUS FORUMS

Jury's out.
Case closed.
Turf War.
Political.
Conditional.
Empty.
Meaningless.
Bliss.

I've been busily reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra but I stopped reading after 76 pages. Some of it does make sense (good sign!) but a lot of it doesn't. I like the story parts but the philsophy I'm not sure that I understand or agree with. Not agreeing with someone like Neitzsche probably means I don't fully understand it.

I also started reading Paradoxes from A to Z. Which is very difficult to grasp. Let's see if you can make sense of it:

• The Paradox of Knowability
  
  There are truths that no one will ever know, even though they are knowable in principal. If p is such a truth, it will be impossible to know that p is a truth that will never be known, for otherwise it would be possible that p should be both known and not known.

• The Knower
  
  (K) I know this assertion, K, is false.
  
  If K is true it is false, because I know it; so it's false. But since I know that, I know it's false, which means it is true. So it is both true and false.

By the way, studies show that a program called Dual n-back improves IQ. Apparently the more you use it the higher your IQ gets.

Can people change?

Of course people change it's called development, but to change your mental status is to hone your mental ability.

Genius is not about knowledge of other people's text, it is about developing a passion to ability status. It is your ability to master the development of your most prized possession your passion itself! In other words your ability to hone your passion to perfection. A violin player with the ability to make his violin sing sort-of-speak, because he mastered his art to perfection.

First, you must have the interest or passion to play the violin or whatever your interest lies in. Second, you must practice daily until you're perfect at it, once you've perfected it which may take years depending on your ability to develop your passion, you won't have to practice daily anymore, however, ability isn't limited to one passion, ability can be abundant in many areas of your person. You may have the ability to outsmart someone, or the ability to outrun anyone, or the ability to write, or the ability to act or dramatize, which then you'd look into theatrics or drama class. Whatever ability you have, it's up to you to develop it through your passion.

Genius is simply developing a passion to perfection, a janitor with no education can be genius, it's not about education.

I am working hard towards going from being a person of average intelligence to becoming a genius. That is the kind of change I had in mind. I strongly believe that with that kind of change possible the world would be a much better place.

Specifically I would like to be a genius at learning. For if you have a great ability in that you'll be able to learn almost anything; thinking, writing, etc. But what is a genius? To me it is someone with a special kind of quality which enables his/her brain to work at its peak performance. We all - genius or otherwise - have the same hardware (neurons) but the difference is mostly in the software (psychology) of each individual person. Some for example will choose the easy/lazy life and become a couch potatoe while others will work their butt off at something and acheive something which seems unattainable for the first group - same brain, different uses.

I only wish I started sooner when my brain had more potential for development. But that just motivates me and I know that there are late blooming geniuses.

A strong passion definitely helps.

Luke Space wrote:I am working hard towards going from being a person of average intelligence to becoming a genius. That is the kind of change I had in mind. I strongly believe that with that kind of change possible the world would be a much better place.

Specifically I would like to be a genius at learning. For if you have a great ability in that you'll be able to learn almost anything; thinking, writing, etc. But what is a genius? To me it is someone with a special kind of quality which enables his/her brain to work at its peak performance. We all - genius or otherwise - have the same hardware (neurons) but the difference is mostly in the software (psychology) of each individual person. Some for example will choose the easy/lazy life and become a couch potatoe while others will work their butt off at something and acheive something which seems unattainable for the first group - same brain, different uses.

I only wish I started sooner when my brain had more potential for development. But that just motivates me and I know that there are late blooming geniuses.

A strong passion definitely helps.

Genius is innate. Ingenius ideas can be had by people who aren't of genius intellect. That is my view.

Check out the sub-heading of this board, called Genius Forum:

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment

Genius here, then, does not refer to the conventional discussion of genius, i.e., discussing the genius of the human sciences, rather the genius to discuss That which is the source of these things. The first type of genius operates in the realm of the senses, in the realm of cause and effect; the second type of genius operates in the realm of spirit, beyond causality. Both realms use the intellect, but only in the spirit realm is the intellect without images of the physical universe.

People with exceptional intelligence (aka genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

GodsDaughter1 wrote:Can people change?

Of course people change it's called development, but to change your mental status is to hone your mental ability.

Genius is not about knowledge of other people's text, it is about developing a passion to ability status. It is your ability to master the development of your most prized possession your passion itself! In other words your ability to hone your passion to perfection. A violin player with the ability to make his violin sing sort-of-speak, because he mastered his art to perfection.

First, you must have the interest or passion to play the violin or whatever your interest lies in. Second, you must practice daily until you're perfect at it, once you've perfected it which may take years depending on your ability to develop your passion, you won't have to practice daily anymore, however, ability isn't limited to one passion, ability can be abundant in many areas of your person. You may have the ability to outsmart someone, or the ability to outrun anyone, or the ability to write, or the ability to act or dramatize, which then you'd look into theatrics or drama class. Whatever ability you have, it's up to you to develop it through your passion.

Genius is simply developing a passion to perfection, a janitor with no education can be genius, it's not about education.

But, Godsdaughter1,

The buddhist believe in good karma. I'm not talking about just in satisfaction but joy in satisfaction. Those who are less fortunate like me must bury their past and follow in the lines of Neitsche. Knowing how to over come ones trials is one thing-is what you are saying. But, I say 'fuck' the system. Which is paraphrasing you don't understand because you are not aware. Awareness comes with age. Some people in this world aren't so fortunate to try out for running or any sport. They are the neglected ones who find interest in other hobbies. My abilities don't put me any highter than the one with no abilities.
I am not 'known' for my actions or am I?
Godsdaughter1,
Why is a man poor? Did he neglect his actions? Is he poor because he likes it? Why doesnt he just join a marathon? Does he not afford the shoes? Think of the karma if you Godsdaughter1 bought that poor man some shoes to run with? What would you be changing? Your persuit of happiness.

Luke Space wrote:People with exceptional intelligence (aka genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

Doubt it. I don't doubt humans are intelligent but freaks are freaks. I'm on the freak scale, fairly high up, though no where near someone like William James Sidis. No matter how much effort is involved i'll never be like him.

mental vagrant wrote:

Luke Space wrote:People with exceptional intelligence (aka genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

Doubt it. I don't doubt humans are intelligent but freaks are freaks. I'm on the freak scale, fairly high up, though no where near someone like William James Sidis. No matter how much effort is involved i'll never be like him.

Didn't he die at a young age after a lifetime of being misunderstood and mis-portrayed? The name sounded familiar, so I read the Wikipedia article. Why would anyone strive to be like him?

It seems doubtful that even if one had the potential for rapid intellectual advancement, one could realize it unless placed in environments geared for it. IOW, not your typical public or parochial school system.

I once saw a panel of gifted children on Oprah. These weren't the typically gifted sort who excel in one thing or are advanced at one skill. These were six-year-olds speaking like intellectually gifted adults - and not young adults, either. These were not the kind to make a parent proud, they were the kind who frighten others and might make the parents avoid social situations.

This is a world in which we have come to hold Olympic games just for our retards, because it makes us feel good. We might sponsor or attend such events, but we are all secretly glad there aren't any such "special" people at home. It would be best not to forget that in many cultures it was standard procedure to kill a child if were noticeably more beautiful than other children in the fear that Evil was at play. This world is unforgiving of aberrations, those who dwell on either extreme of the bell-curve. Witness the wildly influential but deeply depressed Isaac Newton; witness the highly gifted Otto Weininger, who failed at his first attempt at being recognized and could not bear the prospect of living with his own genius and not becoming influential.

We either convince ourselves they we do fit in or that we could if we wanted to. I can't see striving to be someone who literally cannot.

cousinbasil wrote:

mental vagrant wrote:

Luke Space wrote:People with exceptional intelligence (aka genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

Doubt it. I don't doubt humans are intelligent but freaks are freaks. I'm on the freak scale, fairly high up, though no where near someone like William James Sidis. No matter how much effort is involved i'll never be like him.

Didn't he die at a young age after a lifetime of being misunderstood and mis-portrayed? The name sounded familiar, so I read the Wikipedia article. Why would anyone strive to be like him?

It seems doubtful that even if one had the potential for rapid intellectual advancement, one could realize it unless placed in environments geared for it. IOW, not your typical public or parochial school system.

I once saw a panel of gifted children on Oprah. These weren't the typically gifted sort who excel in one thing or are advanced at one skill. These were six-year-olds speaking like intellectually gifted adults - and not young adults, either. These were not the kind to make a parent proud, they were the kind who frighten others and might make the parents avoid social situations.

This is a world in which we have come to hold Olympic games just for our retards, because it makes us feel good. We might sponsor or attend such events, but we are all secretly glad there aren't any such "special" people at home. It would be best not to forget that in many cultures it was standard procedure to kill a child if were noticeably more beautiful than other children in the fear that Evil was at play. This world is unforgiving of aberrations, those who dwell on either extreme of the bell-curve. Witness the wildly influential but deeply depressed Isaac Newton; witness the highly gifted Otto Weininger, who failed at his first attempt at being recognized and could not bear the prospect of living with his own genius and not becoming influential.

We either convince ourselves they we do fit in or that we could if we wanted to. I can't see striving to be someone who literally cannot.

You watch Oprah? Anyway, they sound like cases of prodigies, kids that develop at an extremely fast rate. They might not further develop though. Sidis was an example of a savant prodigy, i think he had learn't 45 languages after lecturing at Harvard during his early teens. Daniel Tammet is a somewhat similar example of such extreme form.

Olympic games for retards - Please explain, is there olympics for the mentally disadvantaged?

Well quite, everyone has their limitations.

mental v wrote:You watch Oprah?

I have seen Oprah quite few times. When she had something like this on, I would watch. It looked like adults trapped in children's bodies.

Olympic games for retards - Please explain, is there olympics for the mentally disadvantaged?

I was referring to things like the Special Olympics.

Know of a link?

mental vagrant wrote:Know of a link?

Click on "Special Olympics" in my last post - it's a hyperlink...

cousinbasil wrote:

mental vagrant wrote:Know of a link?

Click on "Special Olympics" in my last post - it's a hyperlink...

oprah

mental vagrant wrote:

cousinbasil wrote:

mental vagrant wrote:Know of a link?

Click on "Special Olympics" in my last post - it's a hyperlink...

oprah

Why didn't you say so the first time? I'll try to find it.

cousinbasil wrote:

mental vagrant wrote:

cousinbasil wrote:

mental vagrant wrote:Know of a link?

Click on "Special Olympics" in my last post - it's a hyperlink...

oprah

Why didn't you say so the first time? I'll try to find it.

It should be obvious.. you'd given me a link for the SO. Thanks.

I am still looking. Wish I never brought it up because I am now wading through one Oprah clip after another to see if it's the one I recall. Talk about penance. Maybe it wasn't Orca Winfrey after all, maybe it was another show...

Don't worry about it cousinbasil.

mental vagrant wrote:

Luke Space wrote:People with exceptional intelligence (a.k.a. genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

Doubt it. I don't doubt humans are intelligent but freaks are freaks. I'm on the freak scale, fairly high up, though no where near someone like William James Sidis. No matter how much effort is involved i'll never be like him.

Who is to say that you can't be better than him? No one knows your true potential, not even yourself.

Luke Space wrote:

mental vagrant wrote:

Luke Space wrote:People with exceptional intelligence (a.k.a. genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

Doubt it. I don't doubt humans are intelligent but freaks are freaks. I'm on the freak scale, fairly high up, though no where near someone like William James Sidis. No matter how much effort is involved i'll never be like him.

Who is to say that you can't be better than him? No one knows your true potential, not even yourself.

Hi Luke,

I do know that i'm incapable of achieving accolades equivalent. I know because he had a cerebral tumour, neurogenesis in the extreme, he died from cerebral hemoraging.

I know how to make blair dizzy!!!

Just scroll down the page really fast, several times!!!!

Luke Space wrote:People with exceptional intelligence (aka genius) and people with average intelligence all have the same innate abilities. Except one group develops their intelligence and the other does not. That's the difference.

No to first sentence.

No to second sentence.

No to third sentence.

coming into this party late, but richard feynman had an IQ of 125. a high IQ, but not exceptional by any means. what made him so successful was his drive--his obsession--with the content he partook in.

often (education, for example), i find my IQ to be a hindrance rather than a positive thing because i do find the mental tasks to be boring, and i let my mind take me into something more stimulating. it's allowed me to develop bad habits that are difficult to break. i've never had to study really, so as content begins to get more extensive and elaborate, (and studying is inevitably needed) i suffer as a result. also, because i learn things so quickly, it's often frustrating when i don't understand things right away. depending on the complexity of the task, the frustration can often be quite debilitating. interacting with people can be difficult sometimes as well. i'm not a recluse and i get along with people well, but it often doesn't feel intellectually-stimulating and their interests and views differ greatly from mine, making it difficult to converse at times.

other times, it's quite advantageous. i excel in many areas and learn things very quickly. for instance, coupled with being in pretty good shape, my intelligence allows me to excel in many sports. i can play almost all sports pretty well, and i attribute it more to my intellect than my athleticism. this same trend carries over into video games. i get quite proficient pretty quickly. this aspect spans many areas as well, for example, music.

these have obviously been documented and reported in research and other sources, but i thought i'd provide an idiographic testament.

genius (in broad terms) is a combination of many factors, but the two biggest ones are intellect and drive.