MysterionMuffles
-
Posts
1,693 -
Joined
-
Days Won
11
Posts posted by MysterionMuffles
-
-
On 6/13/2018 at 12:30 AM, smarterthanone said:
So there are lots of high IQ people having a hard time connecting with people, getting dates, making close relationships, etc.
If you are so smart, why don't you just do it? Like aren't you smart enough to see why you aren't having success and then do something about it?
I naturally have had a hard time with that stuff and have a high IQ, but I just like turn off things and turn on others and then I fit in just fine. In fact I dislike socializing with most really high IQ people because I find them so awkward even though I do love to talk about things with them, I just can't stand THEM. Part of it is they remind me of how I could be if I wasn't aware enough to not be that way.
Aren't they smart enough to realize "I cant geek out on math right now because the audience is not going to be receptive to this topic" yet I often see these intelligent people doing just that and people getting like "ugh, not feeling it". So shouldn't an intelligent person be able to see these patterns and then adjust?
Also if you are so intelligent, shouldn't you be super confident because you know you are the smartest in the room? Once I took my IQ test the first time, I looked at the stats and was like wow, typically in any normal setting I am the most intelligent person here, you know like in a bar or at a party or in a typical undergrad college classroom. Made me feel more confident. But it usually is the reverse for most intelligent people, like they often are not confident at all and let dumb people come up with the ideas instead of jumping in like "YO, thats just stupid bro".
Bit of a rant but for real I always wonder this. It seems rare for very intelligent people to break out of these characteristics.
You might enjoy my thread about this, except I don't think intelligent people are "stupid," though they are often unwise in terms of social decorum.
-
On 6/13/2018 at 7:32 PM, RichardY said:
Really, where?
Why not just focus on the mind for the sake of it? Plenty of bodybuilding forums. But, how many decent philosophical ones? Do it purely out of entertainment, desire for certainty.Watching the Superbowl and drinking beer was more of an archetype for the general pass time people engage in. It could be any sport or any other "mindless" endeavour an intelligent person would deem as not worth THEIR time, which they are absolutely right about. When FDR had an official chatroom and I used to frequent it, there was a handful of denouncing conversations regarding sports and the weather. And I'm sure if you browse the self knowledge section alone, you would find a fair share of people who express feeling isolated and in need of "more meaningful conversation."
As you said there are plenty of bodybuilding forums, but that's what THEY value. To them, that's what they find meaningful: knowing the right diets and the work out regimines.
For you and everyone else in this thread, and I guess the whole community, value IDEAS and so they frequent this forum.
The point I've been trying to make in this entire thread is this: just like any other human interest, there are people who have more of a proclivity to gravitate toward one category over an other. IE, intelligence over physical longevity. The trouble intellectual people often face is not finding enough people who can comprehend the giant ideas they wish to talk about. This often leads to transformation ego wherein they start to see others as unworthy of their time solely because of the mismatch in interests.
When in reality, your typical body builder who doesn't listen to The Joe Rogan Experience, would usually see philosophical conversation as a waste of THEIR time.
When it comes down to it, we are tribal creatures. We just need people in our lives who match our values and interests. Just because we're of the intellectual kind of people, it doesn't make us any better than your typical bodybuilder or hunting enthusiast, or what have you. At the individual level, we all have different values and interests, some of which can criss cross among categories, and so to focus more on attracting like minded people, as opposed to denouncing those who don't share the same level of intellect, is how intellectual people can and should be trying to conduct their lives.
TL:DR
If you're a chess player, enter a chess club, not the football team.
If you like both, feel free to associate with either one and feel free to expand your social circle accordingly.
Otherwise, football players are not beneath you just because you would destroy them in chess. They would definitely destroy you in football, and unfortunately not in any metaphorical sense.
-
On 6/12/2018 at 4:20 PM, barn said:
Please, keep them for those that seek superficiality.
With different words but... yeah, I have that written up on my 'parched itinerary', glad we agreed... again
lmfao ok...yeah I only dropped the cliche because I'm stifling my usual habit of asking too many questions to know the details of someone's life circumstances whether they want to share or not. Usually it's just to let them express themselves, but it sounded like you didn't want to share anything specific and keep it vague so I decided to respect that. But in the end I would have said the same thing but with more specific condolensces and/or action steps in regards to your unique situation.
So that's kinda why I just said what I said as a less detailed version of what I would have otherwise.
-
On 6/12/2018 at 4:16 PM, barn said:
Monotonous, impulse lacking activities are a torture for the more gifted had they been forced (or put by themselves) into, they nevertheless can 'scale down' and do a 'good enough' job if they choose to.
A person struggling to read between the lines of a potential customer sharing personal incentives will fail to improvise in a situation (i. e. - flight control, surgeon, entrepreneur, 'good' charity fund manager) where the lain groundworks are insufficient and the solution is outside of prior documented occurrence... or the chances are, he/she will fail. Not unexpected.
I'm convinced, the objective probability of a more gifted individual out competing any (normalised for physique) less gifted individual... the only remaining option being choice.
That's my argument.
Ah ok I think I get what you mean. Higher IQ would mean making a choice to improve at any task, even unfulfilling ones like working at a warehouse pushing boxes around, and that is what would make them superior in a sense? Is that what you mean? Vs the Average Joe who will do good enough to get by without choosing any better way to go about their job or lives and so they just coast along without any significant improvement along the way.
-
13 minutes ago, barn said:
It does. It's been proven. (physics 'n all...)
This and what came before are good sentiments or guiding principles, subscribe to them consciously, as in 'me too'.
Intellectually I understand the 'makeup' of a 'desert', what's more I wouldn't want to be anywhere else... it's just the motions that I'm engaged in that leaves little place for hope other than the 'candid-breath' of candle-light I'm guarding with unrelenting determination against the sandstorm...
(Appologies for the explosion of detail, when too symbolical or vague, I can switch to 'regular-speak'... it's more compact this way)
I take it that you're in a situation that challenges your ability to grow, let alone enjoy yourself. You don't have to share the details if you don't want, but if I may drop some cliche encouragement, I'd say that whatever you're facing right now is THE challenge you need to grow in the particular ways you need to. So I hope you manage and triumph over that shit, find yourself your oasis and stear cleer of any mirages.
-
5 minutes ago, barn said:
... Well, in which group do you see more 'blind-faith' coupled with 'against all odds' even when facing 'the immovable object' play out usually with varying degrees of failure... I'd put my bet on the less gifted, but do tell.
lol I was asking you XD I don't have much else to tell since I'm curious about what you think now.
The most I can share for now is how important it is to simply FIND some worthwhile pursuit in life that you can measure the results of on a regular basis. What you measure improves. And I think that engaging in a new field of study where you're a complete noob is where you can become totally humbled and taught how to be as objective as possible in regards to your status at that said pursuit. That, to me, is a better use of time as opposed to attempting intellectual conversation with either those who are incapable, or the ones who ARE capable, but have no real interest in learning from the argument--rather making it all a condescending shit show to prove who's smarter and more enlightened.
-
1 minute ago, barn said:
What do you think about @MysterionMuffles
, for example envy being a much stronger phenomenon amongst the less gifted as they know they'd never had the chance to try for it from the start, as with the more intelligent is rather a matter of choice and level of coercion they had to survive?
That's a damn good question...
Do the less gifted REALLY no they never had a chance from the start, though?
It seems like they can fool themselves into believing enough in their abilities to give things a shot. Recently a pro wrestler named CM Punk has fought a couple times in the UFC and has gotten destroyed twice. I don't think he KNEW he never had a chance. He's definitely a capable athlete in the squared circle, but in the octagon and within his own mind, I think he's a little delusional and overshooting his ambitions. Unless of course it's the fault of upper management making him fight PPV matches instead of giving the opportunity to fight in the amateur leagues first.
As for intellectuals, do they well see ability as a choice? I've seen enough intellectuals with equal if not worse overshot belief in themselves similar to CM Punk's, so I don't know.
What do you think? How does ability, choice, and envy relate in your own life? How do you feel measured up against others and even your past self with how you are--I would assume--honing your abilities in something you find meaningful and engaging in your life?
-
16 minutes ago, barn said:
I think your recent post is a good one, perhaps we see eye to eye on many points.
Did you deliberately leave out 'underdeveloped social skills' or the 'unprocessed resulting in barriers' from the 'equation' you put forward ?
I'd assume, for hyper-intellectuals (don't think I'm one one of them) it's much harder to 'connect' or to untie emotional knots given the ease at how they can get excluded in general from social groups due to the general population being more resentful, less forgiving. Am I being lopsided?
AH that's what I was reaching for, thanks! Underdeveloped social skills and I guess a new one for me is unprocessed resulting in barriers.
Nah you're not being lopsided, I think you expanded on my point quite well. Proper socialization and self knowledge is still very new to our species, I think, so it's tough for us to blend with each other.
This goes for hyper intellectuals, Average Joes, or even people of low IQ. It's hard to find the middle ground between a philosophy loving nerd and your typical football loving beer drinker. Though it isn't impossible, I don't think.
Hm...I'm not sure about the general popuation being more resentful. In my experience, it seems to be people with higher intellect who can become more resentful and less forgiving than the general populace, because within their ability to strongly argue for things, nihilism and cynicsm are very very easy things to argue for. Couple that with intellectual backing, it's no wonder a lot of intellectuals find themselves feeling isolated and unable to find partners, let alone friends.
This is why I think Jordan Peterson's advice in my original post is so important. While you do want to make an impact and inform other people about what you know, you also want to take the time to relax and actually enjoy yourself. I often see intellectuals incredibly infuriated with how people shouldn't be watching the Superbowl and drinking beer when the world is going to shit, and claiming that THESE mindless drones are the ones who are ruining the world. I don't mean to fully engage in just pure self pleasure, but there's a balance to be found for intellectuals. Not sure if I can count myself as one--except for how say, I may seem like one in comparison to a lot of the people I know--but if I were tount myself as one, I would say that there's value in "meaningless" fun. Because at least football loving beer drinkers are still connecting with each other at the level they match up with each other. And sure they will argue over stats and who's the better team...but much like the intellectuals, it's important to find those who can reach your level. Not that it's higher than anyone else, rather it's just A level among several levels in which people operate.
-
We're all "better" than each other in too many countless realms of expertise. This can go from critical thinking to societal contributions. I'm not pointing at anyone specific, but being all red pilled and philosophical doesn't make anyone better than your Average Joe who works 9-5 providing market value. You may be better intellectually, but you could very well be living on welfare, arguing with people on the internet, and may just be right about everything you believe in, but Average Joe could be building machines that mass produce candy, food, or even other machines that actually provide value to society.
Intelligence is definitely important and we do need it to advance as a species, but I think it's not the only basis to which one can derive personal value from.
Obviously there's highly intelligent people out there in high powered jobs that are providing value to others by serving a bunch of needs: selling their products, providing jobs for said Average Joes, and just overall putting their intellect to use.
I think the problem arises when someone gets into this cycle of being highly informed about intellectual things, but not really providing any value other than to argue with people either on the internet or with those around them, and for no reason but to stroke their own egos. When practically, they could be better off using their gifts by connecting with other equally intellectual people and CREATE things of value that also provide value in return.
I've noticed this a lot in some people here who are hungry for higher levels of conversation with their family or friends and getting disappointed. It's like, again, I feel for your disappointment because I've been there, but you gotta meet people where they're at. Just as much as they can't grasp your intellect, you might very well be unable to grasp the simple joy they experience in their lives because you're too fixated on what's so wrong with the world and how no one just seems to understand because they haven't read books x, y, or z, or listen to this intellectual guy or that other intellectual guy that happens to be making a difference in YOUR life.
-
On 26/01/2018 at 6:24 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said:
Hopefully folks who like Jordan Peterson also listen to Stefpai because, at least as someone who heard and read a lot of data on how horrible it is to use force against one's own children from Stefpai, Mr. Peterson obviously isn't perfect and makes big mistakes like what you're pointing out.
That being said he IS a genius and I'd take anything else he says very seriously, especially what he said how--as a motivator--to imagine a "Hell scenario" of what (my for example) life would be like if I fail to do what I must within 5 years versus a "Heaven scenario" of what success looks like.
Very easily an equal or perhaps even superior to Stefpai, at least as far as debating and speaking skills go and their shared ability to make sound and correct arguments. Perhaps they ought to debate this subject. I'd like Stefpai to school Mr. Peterson a bit so he can rough out his edges.
While I don't agree with his reasoning toward minimal and least amount of force when it comes to spanking (he eqauted it to a dog bite vs a tiny nip when a dog playfully defends its terrirtory and accidentally causes more harm than intended)--I think he made a good case for how a lot of non-violent actions taken upon children and humans in general can trigger the same pain in the brain anyway.
After all the peaceful parenting stuff I've listened to from Stefan, John Bradshaw, and Dayna Martin to name a few, I still find it impossible and irreedemable to hit my children or the other children in my family. Even if me giving the cold shoulder to a misbehaving child causes stress in their brain, I think that's all I can muster sacrificing on the side of my conscience.
I do hope one day Jordan Peterson does check out the studies on spanking that nearly prove how detrimental it is. (Has it been fully proven or is the evidence seemingly solid enough that it might as well be objective fact by now?).
-
On 26/01/2018 at 5:58 PM, shirgall said:
Unfortunately it has a little bit less peaceful parenting than I'd like. From the section "Minimum Necessary Force"...
I'm still reading.
Yeah it's a shame that not only does Jordan Peterson support spanking--even if it is with the least amount of force/last resort--and that he is very dodgy about his religion.
But these are minor flaws that get well over shadowed by all the other value he has to bring to self-knowledge, egaltarianism, and overall political commentary.
I've only skimmed through the titles of each Rule of Life and I am goddamn excited to have the rest of them elaborated more on (the child discipline one I only read the last few pages to see what his thoughts were on spanking).
How far into it are you and what value have you gleaned from it so far?
-
I've been interested in Jordan Peterson's work lately and this video has struck me. Taking the red pill seems to give people, myself included, a sense of transformation ego.
While I think it's important to respect your intellectual capabilities, it's even more important to respect the intellectual incapabilities of others.
We talk about some really out there abstract ideas that are still foreign to the common populace, but that in no way makes us superior to them.
Rest assured if you find your tribe you're good.
-
Hm, I didn't know the concept of personal responsibility and learning how to manage your reactions to things out of your control was sentimental.
I don't follow Alexi Panos' stuff anymore, but the idea put forth in this video has been helpful ever since.
lol I don't get why it's so difficult for some people in this thread to accept that. Instead the attention is towards the fact that she's a semi attractive woman in short clothing in what appears to be a hot location *gasp* must be an attention whore.
We either cause or allow the bad things that happen to us, and we're responsible for how we decide to handle life's random unpleasantries. Not a difficult concept to understand, especially in a self knowledge forum, so I'm surprised by the push back this video continues to cause, especially considering I posted it such a long time ago.
-
The argument was that women need men who give a shit. Men who can put an effort into something as it is a sign of someone who can acquire and provide resources to a woman. They also want men who have values and moral integrity.
If that's what you think the definition of a mangina is, then I'll gladly call myself a fellow mangina.
-
If you haven't heard of Owen Benjamin, succintly put, he's an up and coming philosophical comedian.
He also thankfully makes vlogs to delve deeper into what he thinks about so they're just not limited to needing punch lines!
-
I'm sure they'd feel the same trying to argue for their side with yourself refusing to accept their points. Valid or not.
With these friends of yours, have you taken the time to understand why they support the Women's March? The practical or emotional reasons why they're going?
-
-
-
The likes and comments from people is a drug. People want more of the drug to get the highs.
I am thinking that youtube, fakebook, instagram, can prevent alcoholism, smoking, and other drugs.
Prevent? More like replace lol.
How can something full of cat pictures possibly ruin anyone's life?
It's a plot to steal your soul. Every time you look into the eyes of a kitty, they are draining your life force and harvesting it to turn your brain into mush that only responds to cuteness and nothing else.
-
It feels in congruent with the difficult task of actually accepting fault. It's not an easy task someone can smile at you and remind you of, it a real life relationship as opposed to a bite sized YouTube video, you would want someone more sympathetic to tell you where you may be wrong.
Would you mind explaining what you meant here? I find the phrasing confusing and I want to make sure I understand exactly what you mean.
Face to face, it would be preferable for someone to be sympathetic when letting you know that something is your fault. I can see why the video wasn't effective for you as it was a detached experience being a YouTube video first of all, and that she was smiling about it. It lacks the congruence of delivering such a message.
At the same time, as an adult, when you become aware of your PAST victimhood, there is the temptation to hold on to that as your present life and get attached to that.
I do not think that this temptation is intrinsic, though I think this might be a general trend due to the feeling of helplessness and fear a lot of people experience when they start examining their past.
But this would be by no means a good argument for avoiding that PAST.
I never said anything about avoiding the past. The past has its uses if you examine it at several angles, but in the end it's what lessons you learn from it and you move forward from there that matters.
Of course I sympathize with victims of child abuse, an am aware of all the negative effects ACE can have on someone's development--but once you become aware of how much of a disadvantage your childhood has given you, I think it does become all up to you whether or not you make something more of yourself.
Exactly. And this was my criticism towards the approach that segment of life coaches/motivational speakers employ. They do not encourage or even mention what you said above.
Actually they do. Lots of the life coaches in my area (not all of them of course) make a point to have their clients examine where they may be lacking in their childhood. It becomes the basis of what they need to give to themselves in adulthood like more direct affection, ability to be vulnerable with others--and I would even go insofar as to mention another guy who started off as a life coach but went on to become a parenting coach.
Tony Robbins also talks about how much suffering he faced as a kid and how much of that has influenced how he wants to help others mitigate their suffering.
Eckhart Tolle talks about how much his parents used to argue a lot and how all the noise made him sensitive to sound. He even goes insofar as to develop a term he calls the pain body, which is a collection of pain from our histories that manifest in the present. Once you become aware of how long certain types of anxieties have existed in you all your life, he reminds you that it's up to you to relive it or start fresh.
If you watch the video again, she doesn't say that everything is 100% your fault.
I rewatched and indeed she does not directly say that but the first time I watched it I think I got the impression that she said that because towards the end she says "find the areas in your life that are not working and figure out how you CAUSED that or ALLOWED that". To me this sounds no different from it is 100% your fault.
There's a difference between causation and allowance. If you push good people away from you, you are causing a lack of healthy relationships in your life. If you have shitty people around you, you're allowing them to be in your presence. Unless you're a child, you have the choice to associate with whomever you want.
This is also the statement that bothered me the most in the whole video. Even if I try hard to make the most of this statement it still hits me as victim-blaming. What a 15 old who was sexually abused by his parents or someone who was abandoned as a child in a foster care etc...is being told this? That his life situation in that moment is either due to him having caused the situation or that he allowed it to happen? Would it not be the case that the state in which he finds himself is mostly other people's faults, rather than his/hers?
Not everyone is dealt an equal hand of cards.
Again, she says there are things that are out of our control. This extreme situation you just described would fall into that category.
People should indeed take responsibility for that which was their fault but I am afraid that statements like "your life is not working because you either CAUSED it not to work or you ALLOW it not to work" are more likely to make people believe that even the things which were not their fault, are their fault.
So let's take this sexual abuse victim you've described. It wouldn't be their fault to cause or allow having been molested as a child. They were a child and being a child means a diminishment of choice. As an adult, though--with freedom to earn a living of their own and live in a home of their choosing--being around people who continue to sexually exploit them would be their fault. Even more so if they know how their childhood has set them up for further exploitation. If they think nothing of their molestation and continue to engage in exploitation as an adult, then that's not their fault since they don't know any better and haven't had the sufficient insight or revelation to realize that the exploitation is not normal or moral. But if they wake up to that fact and still continue to engage, then call it victim blaming, I call it taking personal responsibility.
If someone perceives to have knowledge they don't, then they will stagnate in their personal development, because they will perceive themselves closer to a truth than they actually are.
This seems like a tautology itself. This sounds like it could be seemingly undeniable too, but I'm not sure if it's true. Can you elaborate?
If someone has the claim to have certain knowledge and they use it for themselves, and they indeed grow and function better in the world, is that really stagnation in personal development? Let's take something as wild as believing in the idea that the universe intends on certain things to happen to you. For better or worse, when something happens, someone believes that the universe is causing these things to teach that person a lesson. Seems irrational because the universe isn't an omniscient being who cares about your well being and has plans for you and signs for you to adhere to--but imagine you have this belief.
Would it really be a stagnation in personal development if every time you fail, you take it as the universe trying to tell you something about where you are as a person? Didn't get that job you applied for? This must mean the universe wants you to go for another one or try again. Didn't get that second date with that girl you were super into? The universe must have someone better in mind for you. Couldn't succeed with that business you started? Guess the universe is telling you that this wasn't the business you were meant to run.
And in the end, taking these shortcomings in this way and then redirecting your course, I think, would still count as personal development even if you would be claiming to have knowledge of what you don't really know. IE claiming to know the secret to life, as if it applies to everyone else and works just the same, when really it's just the lens you see it through.
-
-
A bunch of people spending all their time and attention on a belief that humans can exist in different, opposing moral categories, that writing things down an alter reality, taking a poll to see who should enslave us all... Nothing about any of that is reality or Truth.
I would thumb this up a million times if I had the privilege still.
-
I know this thread was many months ago back in the summer, but I just want to reiterate how effective it was to use that salesman approach I described before. I was at a party maybe a month or two after making that post, and I put it into practice. Needless to say, I got about 10 people to listen to me make my side of the argument, with about 5-7 of them changing their minds on government and/or parenting. The parenting one I think was even more important because there were a lot of young couples there, some of which were on the verge of getting married soon and starting families.
Everyone started off with the initial need for force in both cases, so I took the time to see if they had a moral stance on it, an emotional one, or a practical one, and then proceeded to make my arguments toward that vein.
Can I get a what what?!
-
1
-
-
Here's an amazing article I read this morning about Researchers Revealing 4 Rituals to Ensure Happiness.
In a nutshell:
- Ask What You Can Be Grateful For
- Put a Name to Your Negative Feelings
- Make Your Choices and Take Action
- Touch People (But Not In No No Areas...unless they want you to)
Summed up and from my own musings:
- Being grateful for things, even if you don't have much at the moment, is important for retraining your brain to think positively. Plus, Socrates did say that "he who cannot be contented with what he has will not be contented with what he would like to have." Thinking what you don't have is going to make you happy while completely neglecting what you have right here, and right now, sets you up for having an unsatiable black hole that just sucks everything up. Be thankful, and even if you can't find anything specific, the searching is more important than the stating.
- Once you name your emotions and put some reason and evidence behind why you feel a certain way, the less you identify with it. This is why journaling and therapy help a lot. Expressing what's locked in your heart sets it free, thus setting you free. You are no longer that feeling. You're no longer sad. You have sadness in you, but it doesn't define who you are. Defining your feelings also activates you prefrontal cortext and shuts down your limbic system so that your brain can start functioning from a higher level.
- Sometimes anxiety is built around a myriad of choices we need to make in our lives. Can't stop weighing those pros and cons? Make a choice and take action, and even if it doesn't turn out in your favour, you're at least one bad choice away from the right one. Ever heard of paralysis by analysis? That's what you suffer from being in a constant state of ambivalence. Once you make a choice, you train your brain to search and create for solutions to your problems instead of just dreading either outcome.
- We are social beings and physical contact reminds our genes and DNA that we are not alone. Hugs are also known to release euphoric endorphins in our brains because it's one of the truest ways to literally feel acknowledged. But you don't have to go so far as to hug or make love to someone, a simple rub on the back or arm, it's just good to validate you exist from knowing you can feel others. (I tried my best not to be pervy with this one. How did I do?!)
-
2
-
1
re: [Podcast] 4187 Wrong About... - 2nd caller
in General Feedback
Posted
Nice guys are useless. Women prefer men who can be assertive and go after what they want. Unfortunately it's usually the unruly douchebags that have a lot less self consciousness to do that. It's a tricky balance, but you can definitely be nice with women without being a doormat. Be kind, but make your dominance known. Whether it's over other men in your vocational field or even that part of her that challenges you to look at yourself and your flaws.