Christopher Hitchens!
NO WAY!
Scratch him off that list…
In fact just delete the list altogether…
Who do I think suffers from Genius?
Every childhood perhaps…
Someone once said: If children grew up according to early indications, we should have nothing but geniuses.
An unfortunate Truth perhaps…but more insightful than any List!
y am i not on the list?
Chomsky is an American anarchist-turned-liberal who made his name with his theory of deep grammar, then he wrote that book about the five filters mass media goes through (I think it was called Manufacturing Consent). He’s a well known critic of US foreign policy in the classic leftist mould. He has recently been sighted fellating Michael Moore in a cubicle in a taco bar toilet in New York.
Fukuyama is a rightwing intellectual who was made famous by The End of History (and the Last Man), an article-turned-book that outlined the theory that liberal capitalist democracy is the best possible form of society and, having triumphed over Soviet Communism, had no real ideological enemy anymore, thus constituted the End of History. He then became a neoconservative and became involved with the current Bush administration, most obviously via PNAC.
His theory of the End of History was roundly rebuffed by poststructuralist Jack Derrida in his book Spectres of Marx. He illustrated how the logic of Fukuyama’s theory was essentially circular, and constituted an ideological confidence trick, i.e. that it succeeds if enough people believe in it, regardless of whether or not it is actually true at the time of writing.
So be it. Personally, I want to write about things in ways that people will understand, admire and be affected by, so I’m perfectly willing to use pop culture as a means to aiding their understanding of what really matters to me. You see, it’s a literary strategy, an application of Darko Suvin’s ideas on formalism, estrangement, ostranenie and so on to the liquid conception of the relation between high and pop culture that Barthes talked about. Then actually applied to the world, with varying success and failure.
But if you want to make a massive series of assumptions about me purely on the basis of me comparing Paris Hilton to Noam Chomsky then go ahead, make my day…
Your assumptions speak volumes for the emotional baggage you are bringing to this conversation. I’ve discussed these very ideas on this very forum…
They were the only two that I recognised with which I took issue. I refuse to discuss Searle, so I didn’t bother mentioning him.
You stick with making massive (and incorrect) assumptions about people with whom you argue. It seems to be the limit of your abilities with language.
You’re right. Hitchens gets editted out.
So you looked up and plagiarized some information on Chomsky and Fukuyama and posted it to mask your ignorance. Ric tells he’s banned, so for now, I’ll just speak for him. Only a weakling would give up and complaign to the administration to get someone banned over a disputed he started and couldn’t finish. And plagiarizing or using ghostwriters to mask your ignorance is transparent and I’m exposing it before leaving this forum to lame brained cheaters like you. As if you know a damn this about cognitive science, philosophy of language or John Searle. Say good bye to you ghost writer and to google.
Ric are you arguing with yourself here? Or did someone steal your pic?
To be honest, this is like a blind man writing a list of the best places to go sight-seeing…
Except for my candidate, Stephen Metcalf.
For the ones debating wheather intelligent people need to be analytics-
Even MENSA, the most authoritative on intelligence, holds that their measure of intelligence cannot be so accurate because it depends greatly on outcome. I’m smart because of how I arranged the blocks, rather than how I imagined the blocks to be arranged. I suppose someone like Steven Pinkler might advance that by revealing the genious within neural activity more than simply the actions of its host body.
There’s a lot of debate regarding the people whom perform well in a test and the people that refuse to participate because they see the flaws in the test. Reminds me of a kindergaten child I knew that refused to colour a page because his teachers wanted to see if he would stay within the lines. He was furious because (though not explained in these words) he didn’t think it’s fair to teach him to conform to these arbitrary rules.
No Scott. Ric and I are identical twins reared apart then reunited. Ric was banned when he reacted to “someonesatthedoor’s” outrageous abuse of a philosophy forum. I rent a suite from Ric and we’re both big Denett and Flair fans. I go by Lex, nothing to with Lugar but with lexicon. You can look to me just as if I were Ric. WOOOO!
I think you two have been getting into my stash.
TRIXIE
SATYR
JAKOB
ECMANDU
Tim Dorsey
Jim Carey
Oscar Wilde
Lester Holt
Wilde has come back from the dead? perhaps your mention, stirred him from his permanent slumber…
Who Are The World’s Top Living Geniuses? why those I tend to meet, of course… as well as those making things happen, all around the globe, for one cannot be a genius if things aren’t happening in your wake.
well regarding wilde, i have a problem with the copenhagen interpretation and do believe that right now in his casket, wilde is both dead and alive at the same time, and couldn’t be in only one state or the other unless someone observes him. now unless you wanna dig em up and confirm this for us, i suggest that you allow me to consider him alive for the purposes of this thread.
thank you, and have a good day.
Unfortunately,
It takes an extremely intelligent person to know genius when they see it.
I plan to up the ante on these boards, since, in no particular order, I was number 4 on surreptitious’ list.
Genius ultimately (as has already been stated) is about results. You can judge me from that!
I included you because you claim to have an IQ of I60 and Trixie because she claims to have an IQ of over 200
Trixie is no longer with us and so you are probably the most intelligent member here other than maybe Jakob
Oscar Wilde may have been a genius but that however was purely in the literary sense so his IQ could have been quite average
But as he is dead and not dead or alive like the cat in the box then we will never know unless Ecmandu invents a time machine
Now if Ecmandu did invent a time machine then he would be regarded as the greatest genius of all time
Greater than Socrates or Leonardo or Newton or Mozart combined so he would be the genius of geniuses
Go ahead… be my guest, but that still doesn’t make it true… as a person can only be alive if they are actually alive, and can only be dead if they are actually dead. The cat/box alive/dead thought experiment, wasn’t the best choice of example to show how quantum particles can exist in differing states at the same time and collapse down to a single state when interacting with other particles.
…but that is an unknown, and so merely speculative… something of which you like to do a lot, or so it would seem, from some of your submitted content.
You do seem to currently be having an ILP retro-thread revival… a good choice of threads to revive, I might add. ; )
I am not aware of how much I speculate but my opinions are of no real importance even to me
They merely represent a particular thought process at a point in time and that is all they are
I have zero need at my age to be dogmatic about anything for that is just a waste of energy
Reviving dead threads is done to stimulate debate but as the forum is empty most of the time that seems somewhat superfluous
At the moment it stands more as an archive than as a live site so I hope if it does eventually die that it can at least be accessed
The forum was apparently better back in the day but time travel is currently not possible so one has to deal with it as it is now
Even in my short time here three great thinkers have gone [ Turd / James / Trixie ] but least their posts are here for all to see
I have just noticed that the first line of your sig is so David Icke it could have been written by him
As infinite consciousness is his philosophy and so in that respect you are on the same page as he is
I am not familiar with Icke, but have heard of him… my quote relates and refers to all concepts and ideas,
in that there are endless combinations of anything we can imagine, which would require an expansive mind, but I am uncertain if that is the same as an infinite consciousness.
I may well have to read up on that part of Icke’s philosophical offerings.