Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Postby heavenly_demonic » Sun May 20, 2007 8:41 pm

y am i not on the list?
User avatar
heavenly_demonic
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:24 am
Location: Peru

Postby someoneisatthedoor » Sun May 20, 2007 11:00 pm

RicDemian wrote:
someoneisatthedoor wrote:I'd strongly dispute Chomsky and Fukuyama on that list. If you're going to include them, you might as well stick Paris Hilton up there.

In terms of literature you should probably include Brett Easton Ellis and Michel Houellebecq.


What in the world would you know about Chomsky or Fukuyama? Recount to us a line or two about their respective work.


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.

I know nothing, zip, about Paris Hilton, and proud of it.


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...

The other name is completely new to me. As if you're familiar with Chomsky's theory of transformational generative grammar, or have read any of Fukuyama's neo-liberal accounts of the West's place in the post-Cold War world.


Your assumptions speak volumes for the emotional baggage you are bringing to this conversation. I've discussed these very ideas on this very forum...

Maybe those were the two only names on the list you even recognized.


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.

Stick with the pop culture. You seem up on that.


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.
User avatar
someoneisatthedoor
threshold darkener
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:54 pm
Location: A land of silk and money

Postby RicDemian » Sun May 20, 2007 11:37 pm

Colinsign wrote: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!


You're right. Hitchens gets editted out.
In the name of tolerance we reserve the right not to tolerate the intolerant (Popper).

Why are philosophers intent on forcing others to believe things? Is that a nice way to behave towards someone? (Nozick)

I do not pretend to start with precise questions. I do not think you can start with anything precise. You have to achieve such precision as you can, as yo go along. (Russell)

Your World Champion shows you WHAT'S CAUSING ALL THIS!!! WOOOOO!!! ( Flair)
User avatar
RicDemian
BANNED
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:05 am

Postby Lexador » Mon May 28, 2007 4:55 am

someoneisatthedoor wrote:
RicDemian wrote:
someoneisatthedoor wrote:I'd strongly dispute Chomsky and Fukuyama on that list. If you're going to include them, you might as well stick Paris Hilton up there.

In terms of literature you should probably include Brett Easton Ellis and Michel Houellebecq.


What in the world would you know about Chomsky or Fukuyama? Recount to us a line or two about their respective work.


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.

I know nothing, zip, about Paris Hilton, and proud of it.


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...

The other name is completely new to me. As if you're familiar with Chomsky's theory of transformational generative grammar, or have read any of Fukuyama's neo-liberal accounts of the West's place in the post-Cold War world.


Your assumptions speak volumes for the emotional baggage you are bringing to this conversation. I've discussed these very ideas on this very forum...

Maybe those were the two only names on the list you even recognized.


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.

Stick with the pop culture. You seem up on that.


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.


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.
There is no denying that Darwin's idea is a universal solvent, capable of cutting right to the heart of everything in sight. What does it leave behind? Once it passes through everything, we are left with sounder versions of our most important ideas. Some of the traditional details perish, and some of those losses are to be regretted, but good riddance to the rest of them. (Dennett)

Whether you like it or you don't like it, sit back and watch it, because it's the best thing going today! WOOOO!!! (Flair)
User avatar
Lexador
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 4:22 am
Location: The Heart Of The Sun

Postby Mr Reasonable » Mon May 28, 2007 5:43 am

Ric are you arguing with yourself here? Or did someone steal your pic?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25953
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Postby Impious » Mon May 28, 2007 6:27 am

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.
Let the music get you angelic just to gain that bliss. :)
User avatar
Impious
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Australia, Sydney

Postby Gaiaguerrilla » Mon May 28, 2007 6:54 am

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.
Image
User avatar
Gaiaguerrilla
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:25 pm

Postby Lexador » Mon May 28, 2007 8:12 am

ScottMears wrote:Ric are you arguing with yourself here? Or did someone steal your pic?


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!
There is no denying that Darwin's idea is a universal solvent, capable of cutting right to the heart of everything in sight. What does it leave behind? Once it passes through everything, we are left with sounder versions of our most important ideas. Some of the traditional details perish, and some of those losses are to be regretted, but good riddance to the rest of them. (Dennett)

Whether you like it or you don't like it, sit back and watch it, because it's the best thing going today! WOOOO!!! (Flair)
User avatar
Lexador
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 4:22 am
Location: The Heart Of The Sun

Postby Mr Reasonable » Mon May 28, 2007 9:01 am

I think you two have been getting into my stash.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25953
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:20 am


TRIXIE
SATYR
JAKOB
ECMANDU
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby promethean75 » Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:02 am

Tim Dorsey
Jim Carey
Oscar Wilde
Lester Holt
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby MagsJ » Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:38 am

promethean75 wrote: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.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


The Lions Anger is Noble
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19439
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Nobilis Est Ira Leonis

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby promethean75 » Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:23 pm

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.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:41 pm

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!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9485
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:35 am

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
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby MagsJ » Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:54 am

promethean75 wrote: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.

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.

surreptitious75 wrote: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 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. ; )
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


The Lions Anger is Noble
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19439
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Nobilis Est Ira Leonis

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:26 am

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
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 12:11 pm

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
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby MagsJ » Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:45 pm

surreptitious75 wrote: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.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


The Lions Anger is Noble
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19439
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Nobilis Est Ira Leonis

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:14 pm

A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby Meno_ » Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:04 pm





The guy sounds like a pan psychist , and that is a familiar theme by now.
It is also an old sign of tautological thonkong, in more general terms.

Even Descartian dualism implies the idea of certainty of everything subjective and objective arising out of thought , which has hidden undergoes of connections to the general idea of absolute thought, in God, who or what is a spirit.

Pan psychism has these roots, it is only the loss of the gods, that brought about the idea of individual. consciousness, as everyone and anyone fears the beyond brought about by the death of certainty.


Solipsism solved similarly the problem of the critically subjective ego, by a general enclosure within an absolute, and pan psychism is a parallel effect of an
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:16 pm

I have read one of his books the 762 page Everything You Need To Know But Have Never Been Told

It covers many subjects including : psychology / biology / physics / math / energy / symbolism / levels of consciousness / reptile forms
It is very deep and diverse but I do not agree with a lot of what he says or even most of it but I still read it and will probably do so again

I do not for example think that the moon is an alien artifact or that Saturn was the original source for pagan worship but I read it anyway
I am more interested in his take on advancing human psychology by removing the labels we give ourselves and acquiring infinite awareness
I do not think this can be achieved universally but do think that we can individually self improve if we have a sufficiently open mind to do so

His own summary of Everything You Need To Know But Have Never Been Told :

I want to make it clear before we start what the title represents . Everything You Need To Know But Have Never Been Told does not refer to all that people need to know in terms of information or knowledge . How could you put all that between two covers ? Religious books claim to do this but they are works of self delusion and perpetual imprisonment . Everything You Need To Know in this case refers to the information necessary to open entirely new ways of thinking and perceiving reality both in the seen and the unseen from which everything else will come . This book is a start not a finish . It is written in layers with information placed upon information that together reveals the picture connecting the parts . The parts are fascinating but the picture is devastating . Prepare for an energy reboot .
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:35 pm

surreptitious75 wrote: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


When I read this, at first I chuckled, because... we already live in a time machine!! We travel forwards through time every moment! Memory is also a time machine to the past!

But! I assume you mean being able to travel to the past to change the present you left from.

Who on earth would want to do that?!?! You’d obliterate yourself and all present beings!!

I gear my mind towards real problems... how can we live in hyperdimensional mirror realities, travel to the past and not effect either ourselves or others detrimentally?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9485
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby Meno_ » Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:52 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
surreptitious75 wrote: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


When I read this, at first I chuckled, because... we already live in a time machine!! We travel forwards through time every moment! Memory is also a time machine to the past!

But! I assume you mean being able to travel to the past to change the present you left from.

Who on earth would want to do that?!?! You’d obliterate yourself and all present beings!!

I gear my mind towards real problems... how can we live in hyperdimensional mirror realities, travel to the past and not effect either ourselves or others detrimentally?



I think we are doing it already 'subconsciously' AI has expanded the unconscious to an awareness that makes Your realization effective, that is why the popularity of the current cliche: ' It is what It IS'.


Does a primordial realization of this require genius? Maybe, but it may be only an external answer to an internal question.

So if external, the genius is most prone to affect by IT, not that the reception is of IT is consistent with less capacity, by it.

Here the distinction between subconscious and unconscious becomes a narrower gate of sensing this difference, concurrently as well.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Who Are The World's Top Living Geniuses

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:23 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
I gear my mind towards real problems how can we live in hyperdimensional mirror realities travel to the past and not effect either ourselves or others detrimentally ?

You cannot travel to the past without affecting someones existence but the point is academic as it is not actually possible
And you still have not created a hyper dimensional mirror reality even though you apparently think you can
What about infinite consciousness / infinite awareness where you are only limited by your own imagination
For at least that can be done in small stages whereas hyper dimensional reality only exists inside your head
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users