The Suicide Note to end all others

Page 4 of 5 [ 66 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

01 Oct 2010, 11:44 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Intelligence is a matter of cognitive processing, not conclusions,

OK, but his reasoning seems haphazard at best, so to the evidence available I don't see indications of particularly amazing cognitive processing either.

Besides, getting the wrong answer usually means you did something wrong along the way. Conclusions can at least hint at underlying cognitive processes, and crazy conclusions tend to indicate crazy thought processes.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

01 Oct 2010, 11:49 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Master_Pedant wrote:

Orwell, haven't you ever read that one essay by Michael Shermer on why smart people believe weird things?

As a matter of fact, I'm sort of harbouring this hypothesis that really absurd beliefs are held either by the incredibly stupid or the incredibly intelligent.

I agree with Master_Pedant on that hypothesis. I haven't read the essay though, so I would be glad if M_P could post a link.

I've never read the full essay (I don't think all of it's available on the web), just bits and pieces of this. An (I think condensed) version is available here:

http://www.michaelshermer.com/2002/09/s ... rd-things/

The main conclusion of Shermer is that smart people believe weird things because they're good at making post hoc rationalizations for beliefs they came to due to foolish reasons.

My own really vague causal mechanism for why it's either the extremely dumb or extremely smart that believe absurd things is because you either have to really oversimplify an issue (extreme stupidity) or really overcomplicate an issue (extreme intellect) to believe patently absurd notions.

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

01 Oct 2010, 11:56 pm

Fuller variant of the article:

http://www.skeptically.org/logicalthreads/id15.html

I the essay first appeared as a Chapter in Shermer's 1997 book "Why People Believe Weird Things".

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

02 Oct 2010, 12:18 am

Orwell wrote:

Besides, getting the wrong answer usually means you did something wrong along the way. Conclusions can at least hint at underlying cognitive processes, and crazy conclusions tend to indicate crazy thought processes.

The problem is that insanity isn't the same as stupidity. John Forbes Nash certainly had crazy thought processes, but I wouldn't call him an idiot.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

02 Oct 2010, 12:24 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Orwell wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Orwell, there is a difference between wrong and dumb. I mean, yes, that idea is incredibly stupid, however, I doubt anyone incredibly stupid would actually have managed to slog out a book of this length.

How is volume a better indication of intelligence than substance is?

There is a difference between wrong and dumb, but the two correlate between each other fairly well, especially when we're talking about ideas that are so profoundly wrong.

The substance also indicates high intelligence. It just indicates a lack of training, and that the author isn't *that* intelligent.

However, I still would hold that the author isn't incredibly stupid. Orwell, this kind of work is above the high school level, and the level of the average college student.

I would contend that intelligence is not necessarily determined by the content of the information. His mistakes are certainly mistakes but the conclusions that he draws from them and how he expounds upon them denotes a fairly high level of intelligence and at least enough discipline to create such a large work and actually cite everything. The work itself is actually very coherent as far as being a self-contained piece; meaning that despite the mistakes, he still draws a fairly straight line in his philosophical line of thinking.

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

02 Oct 2010, 12:26 am

Master_Pedant wrote:

The general concept is that the farther you are on either end of the intelligence scale, the farther away you are from "sane" thought. Right?

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

02 Oct 2010, 12:28 am

Orwell wrote:

Besides, getting the wrong answer usually means you did something wrong along the way. Conclusions can at least hint at underlying cognitive processes, and crazy conclusions tend to indicate crazy thought processes.

How much of it have you read to be commenting on his conclusions?

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

02 Oct 2010, 12:32 am

skafather84 wrote:

How much of it have you read to be commenting on his conclusions?

Enough.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

02 Oct 2010, 12:38 am

skafather84 wrote:

Master_Pedant wrote:

The general concept is that the farther you are on either end of the intelligence scale, the farther away you are from "sane" thought. Right?

I guess the notion I'm trying to articulate is that the further you go from the 50th Percentile on a bell curve of IQ scores, the more likely one is to harbour wacky beliefs for opposite reasons (oversimplification or overcomplication). I'd probably stop the "absurdity of belief" correlation around the 1st percentile (as a general IQ score, not as just one REALLY OFF subtest), just because I think the whole notion of beliefs gets gray there. I'll admit, though, IQ isn't a perfect measure of "intellect".

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

02 Oct 2010, 12:49 am

Orwell wrote:

It indicates extremely shallow and disjointed thought.

Not a refutation of intelligence though. A person with high depression and a lack of useful training will not have the strongest thoughts.

Quote:

Perhaps I have a skewed perception of what constitutes normal intelligence, but in this instance I prefer to retain my delusions of belonging to an intelligent species rather than admit how severely mentally underpowered humans generally are. Almost all of the people I interact with on a daily basis are in about the top 5%, and even the dumb ones are probably mostly in the top 10% or so. I like to imagine that the people I know are typical.

Orwell, holding to delusions is stupid. Frankly, I see no reason to respect self-imposed idiocy, and in doing this you show yourself as no better than the author himself. (and I mean "no better" in those negative terms you ascribe. Actually something so cynically solipsist is probably a lot worse)

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 02 Oct 2010, 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

02 Oct 2010, 12:52 am

skafather84 wrote:

His philosophical thinking actually seems rather inflated and untrained. However, this is not strange for a person who is not well-trained in philosophy. Generally speaking, I really would have to say that this seems like a much brighter student with a less-trained background.

The level of thoughts are just.... well... beyond what is to be expected from most people.

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

02 Oct 2010, 12:56 am

Orwell wrote:

But, Orwell, you're a self-described misanthrope. Why is it that when it comes to intellect you suddenly look charitably upon the human species?

Nadel
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 2 Jul 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1

04 Jul 2011, 9:59 am

It's the Myth of Sisyphus, once man realizes the absurdity of life he is faced with three choices. (A)Suicide, generally looked at by the philosophical community as cop out. (B)Faith, Heidegger, Descartes, and Kierkegaard's route to find meaning in a meaningless life, but a sort of philosophical suicide to Sarte and Camus. Or (C)Revolt, acceptance of the absurdity and realizing the freedom in it. The author of this tome seems to be caught in the struggle between point (A) and (B). He forgets that (C) exists.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 90
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Jul 2011, 1:57 pm

skafather84 wrote:

Suicide is nothing more than giving up on a problem at hand. The only time this isn't the case is normally when there is some noble act (such as throwing oneself on a hand grenade or any other such type of action).

.

In some cases it is a way of dealing with unremitting and untreatable pain.

ruveyn

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

04 Jul 2011, 2:28 pm

Nadel wrote:

Thanks for the bump.

Do you assume he forgot C exists? Or did he analyze and thought it was worthless to attempt it?

_________________
.

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

05 Jul 2011, 2:40 pm

My favorite suicide note is from a police report of a woman who threw herself out the window. It read, "life is complicated". Short, succinct, easy reading.

Page 4 of 5 [ 66 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Jump to:

The Suicide Note to end all others Post Reply New Topic

The Suicide Note to end all others