EPTThe World's Smartest Man(IQ 200) - Page 4
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
skyglow1
New Zealand3962 Posts
| ||
|
Tien
Russian Federation4447 Posts
On January 19 2008 14:34 samso.. wrote: Hello, fellow TeamLiquidians. I've only posted a few times here, but I've been lurking the boards for quite a while  But this thread caught my attention, so I figured I could share my thoughts:I've read quite a few of Langan's technical articles, and have spent the last several months doing a whole lot of study and research into his theories and their mathematical and philosophical foundations. I can definitely attest to the fact that he shows incredible insight into many of the most plaguing problems in philosophy and mathematics. He definitely seems to be pretentious guy though; So I'm not standing up for him in that respect. But I feel obligated to share my perspective and help give Langan the credit he deserves. The guy really is cool. As for his views on Intelligent Design, I would urge anyone who's argued against Langan's views here to read his articles on ID where he specifically qualifies his position and makes clear exactly what he thinks about it. He is definitely not a typical ID'er. His ideas on ID are very sophisticated and carefully refined in my opinion (and this is coming from me, a former Christian-theist-and-ID'er-turned-atheist/agnostic). Good post. I am very monetarily biased. | ||
|
BlackSphinx
Canada317 Posts
I'll take the Edward Witten kind of genius any day. | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
Almost as if, rather than determining intelligence through the abstract puzzles they use, the tests determine preference for and focus on abstract puzzles over practical matters or social interaction. Hmm... but that couldn't be, could it? | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On January 19 2008 15:04 skyglow1 wrote: Some people in this thread shouldn't be making such comments on this guy based just on a youtube video and a wikipedia article :/ Do a bit more reading of the stuff hes done before slamming him down so hard. And what stuff is that? | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
On January 19 2008 15:06 BlackSphinx wrote: I'll take the Edward Witten kind of genius any day. Until string theory turns out to be a waste of time? Well, at least he's famous. | ||
|
ilj.psa
Peru3081 Posts
On January 19 2008 14:52 decafchicken wrote: "im working in a bar because i need money" oh please if you have a fucking IQ of 200 you can find a higher paying job where you can do a shitload more. inteligence does not imply economic sucess nor fame nor power | ||
|
ilj.psa
Peru3081 Posts
On January 19 2008 14:38 Rev0lution wrote: he believs in the god of the gaps, what is more to say? the universe exist blah blah so who created the universe? haha LOL I g0t j00 there huh? therefore god exist. Do you even read what he said on the videos or did any research WHATSOEVER?  | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
| ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On January 19 2008 15:16 ilj.psa wrote: inteligence does not imply economic sucess nor fame nor power Why doesn't it, for you? Intelligence comes from the Latin for "choosing between". It is the capacity of rational discrimination, the ability to think clearly and make good choices. He whines and grumbles about having to work as a bouncer. Does that sound like somebody who makes good choices? There's a fine line between the power of rationality, and the power of rationalization. One aids, one hinders. One is intelligence, one is a self-indulgent love of artificial consistency. To solve puzzles, one only needs the power to find consistency. To solve problems, one needs the power to find truth. I hereby move that the Intelligence Quotient be renamed the Abstraction Quotient. There are too god damned many high-IQ failures at life for what they have to deserve to be called "intelligence." (This is the Committee of Naming Everything, right?) | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
| ||
|
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
On January 19 2008 15:40 Funchucks wrote: Intelligence comes from the Latin for "choosing between". It is the capacity of rational discrimination, the ability to think clearly and make good choices. This guy made it clear however that he could perform all his neccessary mental work doing this specific job, so is his job really relevant? | ||
|
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
On January 19 2008 15:41 Mindcrime wrote: This guy may be incredibly intelligent, but he's far less knowledgeable than he thinks he is. this little short piece didnt even scratch the surface of his knowledge, i'd rather see him go insanely detailed about some specific thing instead of just messing around like he did in this vid. | ||
|
Tadzio
3340 Posts
His ideas on how the world should be run are not new, and in many respects it's how the world is currently run. There is a popular belief among western intelligentsia and policy planners that the average man is an idiot who, once given proper democratic control over his own life, would destroy himself and his society as well. "...the common interests very largely elude public opinion [...] and can be managed only by a specialized class" --Walter Lippmann, 1921. This view, I think, is ridiculous and is merely a rationalization of power protecting itself. While it is true that your average man won't be tinkering around with unification theory, its also true that the vast majority of the world's most dangerous problems can be solved without any special technical thought. What are the current threats to the species? Were that the US had a functioning democracy, the "dunce" filled masses would've voted to be part of the Kyoto Protocol, which would help to mitigate global warming. They'd also have voted to dismantle much of the Pentagon system, as well as most of the US' massive nuclear arsenal, which would reduce the threat of global nuclear war significantly, and would make blatant militarism much less common-- while we may've still invaded Iraq, we'd also have left after the Iraqis had elected their new government. The US masses would overwhelmingly believe we should work within the confines of international law, which would further limit US militarism and would probably have prevented the invasion of Iraq altogether. Etc etc. To whatever extent pollution is a third threat to the species, by and large the most threatening pollution is created through industrial waste. Given the opportunity to vote on environmental regulations, the common man would, without a doubt, severely hamper industry's ability to pollute without consequence. If not banning the pollution outright, they would ask industry to shoulder the responsibility (and cost) for cleanup in the very least, which would have much the same effect as an outright ban. The average person won't perform a research project to discover that the ozone layer is failing or pursue the causes, that's true, but once told the causes and the potential fallout, they will gladly work to correct the problem, if given the opportunity. Democracy can handle the problem, we just need more of it. | ||
|
skyglow1
New Zealand3962 Posts
Samso's post for instance. He's obviously done some work, so you could doa bit of research on what he's done and stuff. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
The average person won't perform a research project to discover that the ozone layer is failing or pursue the causes, that's true, but once told the causes and the potential fallout, they will gladly work to correct the problem, if given the opportunity. Oh, and whose job is it to inform everyone about the causes, fallout, likelihood, etc.? Because there's probably at least a hundred million people who would like to give you their unique opinion and 1) we don't know who is correct 2) being correct isn't enough to convince people. Not to mention you've just created a hierarchy by relying on intellectuals to supply data (that will surely be manipulated) for the masses, thus destroying your perfect democracy where everyone is equal. There's a lot of problems with politics in the US, but the representative republic format is the least of them. | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On January 19 2008 15:58 skyglow1 wrote: Samso's post for instance. He's obviously done some work, so you could doa bit of research on what he's done and stuff. Why should I do research on a smug, ridiculous bouncer who believes in intelligent design? samso didn't post any of his stuff, he just expressed admiration. You'll notice he didn't give so much as a quote. Apparently, he didn't find a single original idea worth repeating. Apparently, you didn't either. A: "Hey, this random nobody is incredibly smart and important!" B: "Bullshit! He's a random nobody!" A: "Hey, you can't just make a judgement like that. Go and spend days or weeks seeking out and reading all of his stuff! Then if it turns out you were right, you wasted all that time, you can come back and tell me I'm wrong. Don't expect any help from me! You have to make all of the investment in disproving my outlandish claim, or else acknowledge my point. Don't expect any more from me, I already asserted my viewpoint to be correct! Get to it!" B: "LOL STFU" Ergo: LOL STFU | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On January 19 2008 16:07 Jibba wrote: There's a lot of problems with politics in the US, but the representative republic format is the least of them. Don't worry! They'll all be solved by unilateral disarmament and the Kyoto Protocol! | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Tadzio
3340 Posts
| ||
| ||
