Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
It's ****ing horrific. You might as well take the notion that the primary purpose of language is efficient communication, lead it gently behind the barn and shoot it straight between the eyes.
that notion is objectively false over IQ 70-75 though.
the vast majority of intellectual efforts in language are used to control other people.
the most credible theory of why our IQ grew more than we needed to dominate immediate environmental issues is internecine intellectual warfare among humans , 0 sum.wordcel games. the shaman convincing you after the hunt to give him the prime pieces of meat while he waited at home kind of thing.
Alarming and depressing. At least I understand the reaction to my thread better now. Iām out.
I think what you should be alarmed about is that about a dozen people are telling you something that you disagree with, and you stubbornly refuse to listen to them and assume you're right anyway. That doesn't bode well for your future endeavours, whatever they may be.
that notion is objectively false over IQ 70-75 though.
the vast majority of intellectual efforts in language are used to control other people
What now? So you're saying when I read A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking is trying to control me rather than convey some interesting ideas from modern particle physics and cosmology in an accessible manner?
that notion is objectively false over IQ 70-75 though.the vast majority of intellectual efforts in language are used to control other people.the most credible theory of why our IQ grew more than we needed to dominate immediate environmental issues is internecine intellectual warfare among humans , 0 sum.wordcel games. the shaman convincing you after the hunt to give him the pri
I think I recall reading somewhere before that it's widely accepted among anthropologists that language is the progenitor of thought, not vice versa.
What now? So you're saying when I read A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking is trying to control me rather than convey some interesting ideas from modern particle physics and cosmology in an accessible manner?
no I am saying that's not the normal use of intelligence, it's kind of the odd thing although it generated the vast majority of human progress.
in the parlance of the techbros, the autistics saved the world. being on the spectrum at least a little liberates your intelligence from the 0 sum struggle and attempt at dominating others for your benefit, and that is the engine of technological progress on a sense.
no I am saying that's not the normal use of intelligence, it's kind of the odd thing although it generated the vast majority of human progress.in the parlance of the techbros, the autistics saved the world. being on the spectrum at least a little liberates your intelligence from the 0 sum struggle and attempt at dominating others for your benefit, and that is the engine of tech
Ok, now I don't understand wtf you're trying to say. Snap out of craig mode, since you're now failing both to control me and to communicate with me.
Ok, now I don't understand wtf you're trying to say. Snap out of craig mode, since you're now failing both to control me and to communicate with me.
normal use of intelligence historically, normal way the higher IQ members of a group used their advantage, was to end up at the top of the local hierarchy.
the attempt to understand reality as it is, draw causal references systematically (what we formalized as science), trying stuff to get technology to work (engineering) and so on are historically niche uses of intelligence.
which is why we repeatedly had cases of societies coming SO CLOSE to the I dustrial revolution but giving up on the effort. Rome, China, and so on
you had 50 priests for one engineer ok?
uses typically made by people on the spectrum at least a little, people interested in "things" more than people, the "geeks", the "nerds"
normal use of intelligence historically, normal way the higher IQ members of a group used their advantage, was to end up at the top of the local hierarchy.the attempt to understand reality as it is, draw causal references systematically (what we formalized as science), trying stuff to get technology to work (engineering) and so on are historically niche uses of intelligence.whi
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but I fail to see how it supports your assertion that the primary function of language is to control people rather than to communicate effectively. If you recall, that was the assertion I was questioning. You seem to have gone off on a tangent.
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but I fail to see how it supports your assertion that the primary function of language is to control people rather than to communicate effectively. If you recall, that was the assertion I was questioning. You seem to have gone off on a tangent.
control people as fighting the 0 sum game to reach the top of the social hierarchy.
if you agree more intelligent people typically do that especially in small group you see what the evolutionary impulse is.
that is for language that goes above the basics you need to organize a hunt and so on (the iq 70 threshold I mentioned). that was for efficacy
normal use of intelligence historically, normal way the higher IQ members of a group used their advantage, was to end up at the top of the local hierarchy.the attempt to understand reality as it is, draw causal references systematically (what we formalized as science), trying stuff to get technology to work (engineering) and so on are historically niche uses of intelligence.whi
damn, chatgpt really sucks huh
control people as fighting the 0 sum game to reach the top of the social hierarchy.
if you agree more intelligent people typically do that especially in small group you see what the evolutionary impulse is.
that is for language that goes above the basics you need to organize a hunt and so on (the iq 70 threshold I mentioned). that was for efficacy
I wasn't suggesting "effective communication" was simply letting your wife you'll be home by 9pm. I am including the communication of complex, sometimes abstract ideas under that umbrella as well.
I've heard out your argument and I remain unpersuaded that the primary function of language is something other than effective communication. Even if I were to agree that control and manipulation is the primary goal of most communication (which I don't), it would still need to be effective in order to succeed.
I wasn't suggesting "effective communication" was simply letting your wife you'll be home by 9pm. I am including the communication of complex, sometimes abstract ideas under that umbrella as well.
I've heard out your argument and I remain unpersuaded that the primary function of language is something other than effective communication.
my claim is that the primary function of language isn't effective communication over a threshold we reached 50-60k years ago.
it was when we created a gap with previous **** species and all other mammals and so on
I ninja edited this in: Even if I were to agree that control and manipulation is the primary goal of most communication (which I don't), it would still need to be effective in order to succeed.
I ninja edited this in: Even if I were to agree that control and manipulation is the primary goal of most communication (which I don't), it would still need to be effective in order to succeed.
effective at convincing others not at transferring actual information about society.
a priest that convinces the masses of various bullshit efficaciously, and gains massively from that, isn't communicating about truth is he?
effective at convincing others not at transferring actual information about society.
a priest that convinces the masses of various bullshit efficaciously, and gains massively from that, isn't communicating about truth is he?
My claim was "efficient communication" not "efficient transfer of information". A pedantic distinction, but in the context of the ensuing discussion, it seems an important one.
5000 posts on efficient communication, beautiful
Either the edible I consumed was mislabeled or Luciom's account has been hijacked by jbutton.
"Reality check" is a great example because it has a very common meaning that is almost entirely unrelated to the way craig is using it.
I was thinking about this more and I have to ask:
What is the common meaning which differs?
A reality check is when your reality gets checked by a higher reality. What do people think is checking their reality? Or have they simply not thought about it?
