response to overgenius

The origins of the imperative, "know thyself", are lost in the sands of time, but the age-old examination of human consciousness continues here.

Moderator: MagsJ

response to overgenius

Postby Ultimate Philosophy 1001 » Sat Feb 04, 2017 7:59 pm

response to overgenius

I mean, I have almost zero respect for almost anyone on the planet. These people post in the genius forums, claiming to be some kind of sage.

genius forums wrote:The cantina bar scene was too cute...Couldn't take it.

How many of these fucks do we have to take seriously? How long to we have to sit down, and pretend to say that someone saying a bar full of buttugly aliens, where one get their arm chopped off and someone gets shot, is too "cute", is some kind of "genius"? How long to we have to pretend they are some kind of sublime sage, and not say it for what they are, that they are batshit insane, that their brain is full of messed up neurons? How long do we have to revert to the Einstein statement about how crazy people are simply misunderstood genius, and how long do we have to respect Alzeheimer's patient's delusional babble and pretend there is actually something there? They post that a bar full of buttugly aliens where someone gets shot and arm chopped off is "too cute", and we have to pretend their statements are some kind of "sublime genius" beyond worldy understanding. Next we'll being saying Nikki minaj is some kind of englightened sage and genius...

genius forums wrote:I went to the original starwars in 1970, had to leave after 20 mins, just couldn't take it

How long do we have to pretend that a person who doesn't even have the patience to watch a great film for 20 minutes is some kind of enlightened sage...? Buddhist monks sit and stare at walls for fucking hours...but this guy can't even the patience to sit and watch a great film for more than 20 minutes, and we have to sit here and pretend he is some kind of enlightened sage with infinite wisdom...For crying out loud...

These people tote their disease as a health, their sickness as a strength...They lack a basic ability of suspension of debelief, the basic ability of enjoying a movie, and they tote their disease as some kind of "superpower". They aren't even conscious of what suspension of disbelief is, in order to even understand what the basic thing that they lack is. It would be like some pompous alien coming down to earth and catching us all sitting at an orchestra, and being like ... "What fools, these foolish humans sitting and listening to this sound noise....What delusional fools...I am so superior to them. I don't eat, don't sleep, don't dream." It's like this delusional schizophrenic who keeps telling you he has a "super power" and I'm like "Whats your superpower" and he's like "I can hear sounds...that noone else can hear...I can make the sound's appear with my mind...". Fuckin genius, whats your superpower "I can go to a great film that many people enjoy, but not enjoy it, because i am a total psychopath that doesn't have the ability to enjoy it...this makes me superior to them" Get the fuck out, doors this way->
User avatar
Ultimate Philosophy 1001
the Grandmother.
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:57 pm

Re: response to overgenius

Postby -1- » Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:03 pm

How long... how long.

"Quo usque tandem abutere, Katerine, patientia nostra?"

There is nothing new under the sun.
-1-
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: response to overgenius

Postby Arcturus Descending » Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:35 pm

-1- wrote:How long... how long.

"Quo usque tandem abutere, Katerine, patientia nostra?"

There is nothing new under the sun.


Does that include those things which have not as yet been discovered/uncovered?
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14532
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A snowy dark luminous landscape bathed in solitude

Re: response to overgenius

Postby -1- » Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:45 pm

Arcturus Descending wrote:
-1- wrote:How long... how long.

"Quo usque tandem abutere, Katerine, patientia nostra?"

There is nothing new under the sun.


Does that include those things which have not as yet been discovered/uncovered?


It's a Bible quote for godssakes. Do you expect wisdom from that book? It just sounds good.
-1-
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: response to overgenius

Postby Arcturus Descending » Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:07 pm

-1- wrote:
Arcturus Descending wrote:
-1- wrote:How long... how long.

"Quo usque tandem abutere, Katerine, patientia nostra?"

There is nothing new under the sun.


Does that include those things which have not as yet been discovered/uncovered?


It's a Bible quote for godssakes. Do you expect wisdom from that book? It just sounds good.


I'm an agnostic but I've come across a lot of wisdom in the bible. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater or were you being ironic?


There is nothing new under the sun.

Does that include those things which have not as yet been discovered/uncovered.


That's a legitimate question to my way of thinking.




What has been will be again,what has been done will be done again;there is nothing new under the sun. Ecclesiastes l.9
So you don't see wisdom or truth within those words?
They kind of speak to stoicism to me in a way or amor fati - in others words, embrace that truth.
Que sera sera.

Anyway, that writer was speaking of something other than what I was trying to get across...my thought which was more in line with Hamlet's words to Horatio...

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14532
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A snowy dark luminous landscape bathed in solitude

Re: response to overgenius

Postby -1- » Sat Feb 04, 2017 11:50 pm

Arcturus Descending wrote: I'm an agnostic but I've come across a lot of wisdom in the bible. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater or were you being ironic?


I'd be quite happy to throw that baby out with that bath water. Wisdom is not owned by the bible; or by anyone else. Anyone can arrive at wisdom in his or her own, special, personal journey. The bible is so replete with other non-wise stuff, that I wish to throw it away. I can get my wisdom elsewhere, thank you very much.

Human wisdom is finite. Everyone accumulates about the same and the same amount. Some people SEEM to be more wise, but that's just due to their ability to express themselves better.

The bible is a book the uselessness of which way outweighs its usefulness. Let's throw it way away.

Or are we in the religion forum? Then I don't have the right to say that here. What forum are we in?
-1-
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: response to overgenius

Postby Arcturus Descending » Sat Feb 11, 2017 6:51 pm

-1-


Wisdom is not owned by the bible; or by anyone else.


I never said that it was. But there is wisdom within the bible. That wisdom was owned at least for a time or possessed by some of those who wrote the particular words.

I think that we can say that some "own" wisdom. They possess it and it can be an integral part of who they are.

Anyone can arrive at wisdom in his or her own, special, personal journey.


Here is where I most definitely disagree with you. Not everyone can. Some never seek out wisdom or could care less about obtaining it.

The bible is so replete with other non-wise stuff, that I wish to throw it away. I can get my wisdom elsewhere, thank you very much.


lol Well you can certainly do that and I do agree with you. There is other "stuff" in the bible which is quite ignorant. But then again, many of us moderns still live in biblical times of a sort.
There are many places where wisdom can come to us. We just need to learn how to recognize it.

Human wisdom is finite. Everyone accumulates about the same and the same amount
.

Yes, wisdom is finite but I disagree with your last statement. That would more depend on consciousness and how we see things and how we take advantage and use what wisdom has to offer.

Some people SEEM to be more wise, but that's just due to their ability to express themselves better.

You may have a point here but I also think that the proof is in the pudding...based on our behavior and how we live our lives...not necessarily how we are able to express ourselves.
Even a charlatan can do what you said.



The bible is a book the uselessness of which way outweighs its usefulness. Let's throw it way away.


I think that in order to know THAT for sure, it would have to be studied more. But the unbiased scholars might be able to tell us how true what you say is.


Or are we in the religion forum? Then I don't have the right to say that here. What forum are we in?

The discussion evolved out of a quote which came from the bible (which may have actually been taken from some wise philosopher centuries and centuries before) but I wasn't speaking about the bible.

Would you throw most philosophical quotes out before examining their validity and usefulness?
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14532
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A snowy dark luminous landscape bathed in solitude

Re: response to overgenius

Postby Meno_ » Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:23 pm

Arc, the trouble with wisdom, and throwing the baby out, is, that most babies need to experience for themselves that, which has wisdom tried to convey for posterity, albeit without success. Does not every kid defy the words of wise parents, only sadly discovering too late, that they should have followed wise advise?

No , everything has happened already over and over, but babies insist on their notion of learning, that the old stuff is irrelevant, the new world they experience is different, revolutionary, out with the old stuff.

Is this why wars will never end, and we have to perpetually repeat it for not having learned it's lessons? Perhaps, very likely. The thing is, as much as I would like to believe in it, the past is past, and it does take constant re learning, for, wisdom is transferable only from one mature mind to another.

This is why I'm split on infinite recurrence, not that it is not factual on its face, but it is irrelevant in practice. Kids simply don't believe it, therefore marginalizing it, thereby making it irrelevant.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: response to overgenius

Postby Ultimate Philosophy 1001 » Sat Feb 11, 2017 10:34 pm

No no no, you've got it all wrong. War is a mathematical function.

It's like the chinese, can't be reasoned with, continue to abuse animals. Can't reason with them, just like meat eaters, can't reason with them and tell them to stop abusing animals. Humans are inherently selfish creatures, they dont care about suffering long as they get wealthy from it somehow. There is no wisdom to fix selfishness.
User avatar
Ultimate Philosophy 1001
the Grandmother.
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:57 pm

Re: response to overgenius

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:48 am

-1- wrote

How long... how long.

"Quo usque tandem abutere, Katerine, patientia nostra?"

There is nothing new under the sun.


It's a Bible quote for godssakes. Do you expect wisdom from that book? It just sounds good.


Is it. Where can it be found?
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1725
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: response to overgenius

Postby Meno_ » Sun Feb 19, 2017 2:25 am

Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:No no no, you've got it all wrong. War is a mathematical function.

It's like the chinese, can't be reasoned with, continue to abuse animals. Can't reason with them, just like
meat eaters, can't reason with them and tell them to stop abusing animals. Humans are inherently selfish creatures, they dont care about suffering long as they
get wealthy from it somehow. There is no wisdom to
fix selfishness.


This opinion I can live with, and bases cognition over and above it's emotional content. To play chess one needs a disconnect, a sine quo non , with its emotional baggage. It is not guided by a temporal question of precedence, but a formative cognitive one. But, can actually be distinguished on the field by soldiers of fortune? Or, rather, it would be the priority of Kings, Queens, Rooks, Bishops, and Kinghts?

Emotionalism in practice belong to the soldiers whose brain is occupied by nostalgic feelings of returning home. Only the very few, if any pawns, cangloriously turn into Queens, and return the entire field if the wish to.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am


Return to Psychology and Mind



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users