Amergin
New Member
Posts: 13
Likes: 6
|
Post by Amergin on Dec 20, 2019 19:27:14 GMT
What cultural conditions are required for the development of the highest human types? In answering please describe what you think the highest human types are(I assume you have moral and aesthetic preferences) and how the cultural conditions that you advocate would bring about the realisation of these types, assuming of course that bringing them about is something that you'd want.
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Dec 20, 2019 20:51:57 GMT
What cultural conditions are required for the development of the highest human types? In answering please describe what you think the highest human types are(I assume you have moral and aesthetic preferences) and how the cultural conditions that you advocate would bring about the realisation of these types, assuming of course that bringing them about is something that you'd want. A-Students Must Become Alpha Males; Nerds Must Be Driven to Suicide
Cut off the children of the rich from Daddy's money at age 18. If we have to do it on our own, so must they. In the present terminal aristocratic decadence, they block the way of the talented and must be forcibly removed. Leftover wealth must go back to the general public, which helped create it. Sacrifice has no merit; it is merely brown-nosing. Asking the talented to sacrifice years of their lives in unpaid study is an insult to intelligence. High IQs created everything that prevented the rest from living like wild animals. But illegitimate predatory power brainwashed its subjects to become ungrateful to those who provided everything, including all the wealth of the wealthy and their undeserving descendants. High IQs also created all the world's weapons and must use them to get back what the self-appointed ruling class stole from their predecessors. The few who qualify for college must receive the same allowance and paid-up tuition that the children of multi-millionaires get now. Actually, superior athletes also get that: Derek Jeter got a million dollars up front to put himself through baseball's equivalent of college education (Any jealous genius-hater who thinks it is not equivalent must be squashed). Over and above that and his salary for 20 years, his employers earned $250 million dollars. That's the kind of payback the whole human race will get once the predators who brainwash everybody are wiped out. So High IQs should quit helping business or society until they have used their brains to eliminate the enemies of human progress.
|
|
Amergin
New Member
Posts: 13
Likes: 6
|
Post by Amergin on Dec 20, 2019 22:00:20 GMT
Ha, ok, cool... You've talked about the cultural conditions that you want but I'm still unclear about what the highest types are for you. High IQs come across as vague to me. And then there's the nuances of how the cultural conditions you've described will bring about those highest types.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 21, 2019 5:36:48 GMT
Well, I think of two things when considering the highest human types.
1.Highest human types in terms of morals The society would have to esteem morals fairly highly in this case and even reward the above achievers. This will get people motivated and reach their highest potential.
2. Highest human types in terms of power Power usually comes with a lot of money. The rich and wealthy types. These people are fairly praised now but the downside is we have people of povery. Would be better if society focused on everyone having money and some power at least in my opinion but then this would require the rich and powerful to share. Except, greed usually follows them so the society usually ends up corrupt.
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Dec 21, 2019 17:17:50 GMT
Ha, ok, cool... You've talked about the cultural conditions that you want but I'm still unclear about what the highest types are for you. High IQs come across as vague to me. And then there's the nuances of how the cultural conditions you've described will bring about those highest types. If They Swallow Their Pride by Submitting to Unpaid Schoolwork, They Will Choke Their TalentJust think of what is done to motivate those with superior athletic talent. Using that forbidden analogy, classes will be divided into teams with IQ parity among them. The team with the highest score will get Friday off, the lowest will have to come in on Saturday. Individually high-scoring students from four grades older will get paid to teach the Saturday classes. Under this change of goals, the smartkid on the team, instead of being treated like a freak and loser as he is now, will have the same clout among his fellow students as someone who hits a game-winning homerun. Or, to save his team from having to come in on Saturday, he will receive the same social respect as the kid who makes the game-saving catch. Just like the jocks do, the prettiest girls will come on to him. Only a suicidal self-hating wimp would think letters on his report card or transcript are anything but a reward for six-year-old Mamas' Boys. The reason geeks act that way today is because their parasitic plutocratic enemies control the way they are treated in school. In college he will get the equivalent of what the football players get: not only free tuition, but $500 week, which covers the athletes' expensive housing, expensive food, expensive entertainment, and fake but high-paying summer jobs given to them by doting alumni football fans. You haven't been taught on how to debate. You should object specifically; for example, rebut my statement about the benefits of encouraging the intelligent by claiming something like, "High IQs are useless nerds, or only benefit themselves, or can just as easily be evil geniuses and harmful to society."
|
|
Amergin
New Member
Posts: 13
Likes: 6
|
Post by Amergin on Dec 24, 2019 23:01:43 GMT
You're right that I haven't been taught how to debate and what skill I have in the discipline is self taught and imperfect, although it's my intention to have more of a discussion than a debate. With my previous comment I was attempting to get a better understanding of your thinking before disagreeing with any part of it. I'd be interested to see the schooling structure you described put into practice. Some amount of competition is definitely healthy but I can't imagine enjoying that type of environment, still, maybe the sacrifice of my particular type is necessary to the development of the highest types as such (I don't believe this but it is conceivable). What do you envisage as being the content of the lessons the students would be learning? Would everyone take the same lessons or would the children be divided by aptitudes? At what age? I believe that the current structure of western style education wastes a good amount of energy teaching knowledge that will never be used by most- to the most talented and the least. It would be better for everyone if the less able could leave formal education earlier to start into whatever work that they are suited to. The more talented- intellectuals, artists etc. are the ones who can benefit from a greater amount of education but it would have to be the right kind of education. -Ennobling. Also on a minor note, to my mind, physical excellence is as important as mental/spiritual excellence and the highest types would have both. Healthy body, healthy mind.
|
|
Amergin
New Member
Posts: 13
Likes: 6
|
Post by Amergin on Dec 24, 2019 23:20:09 GMT
Well, I think of two things when considering the highest human types. 1.Highest human types in terms of morals The society would have to esteem morals fairly highly in this case and even reward the above achievers. This will get people motivated and reach their highest potential. 2. Highest human types in terms of power Power usually comes with a lot of money. The rich and wealthy types. These people are fairly praised now but the downside is we have people of povery. Would be better if society focused on everyone having money and some power at least in my opinion but then this would require the rich and powerful to share. Except, greed usually follows them so the society usually ends up corrupt. In terms of morals: Agreed, some social mechanism of reward would need to be brought about. The opposite is the norm today across much of the world. In terms of power: I don't think that wealth and power are a problem in themselves but most of the wealth and power we see today is so crass, short sighted and self-serving, certainly among the middle class, and even in most of the ruling class don't seem to be seeing very far. There will always be those with more wealth and power, the trick is getting to a situation where those more deserving reach the positions of wealth and power.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 25, 2019 20:22:37 GMT
Language (L)(for understanding each other), tools (T)(for some empiric works that are needed too), enemies (E)(to fight and win them). The more higher the product of (L)&(T)&(E) is, the more chances to reach the goal.
|
|
Amergin
New Member
Posts: 13
Likes: 6
|
Post by Amergin on Jan 3, 2020 17:36:36 GMT
Language (L)(for understanding each other), tools (T)(for some empiric works that are needed too), enemies (E)(to fight and win them). The more higher the product of (L)&(T)&(E) is, the more chances to reach the goal. In the broad strokes I agree with you but what about the details? Nearly all peoples who have ever existed have had these three things, certainly the first two and only in unusual, temporary, circumstances have they lacked the third. So I'm not clear on what you mean by "higher the product". Could you elaborate? //What form must the language take? -Separate strains? -An intellectual dialect? //We can see today that tools can dominate people -and peoples- and lower them culturally. -What kind of tools are necessary and what if any must be avoided? -Or is this lowering something that needs to be experienced and overcome in order to reach the highest outcomes? //Enemies is quite self explanatory.
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Jan 4, 2020 5:57:23 GMT
Development can be judged by intellectual output and increase in standard of living.
Required cultural conditions: Stable religion to preserve successful traditions. Strict reproductive monogamy. Must reject rationalism which produces arrogance and instability. Ideally should implement noncoercive eugenics, for example by paying the poor not to reproduce. Avoid universal democracy, the average moron has no business participating in politics.
|
|
|
Post by karl on Jan 4, 2020 8:57:29 GMT
Development can be judged by intellectual output and increase in standard of living. Required cultural conditions: Stable religion to preserve successful traditions. Strict reproductive monogamy. Must reject rationalism which produces arrogance and instability. Ideally should implement noncoercive eugenics, for example by paying the poor not to reproduce. Avoid universal democracy, the average moron has no business participating in politics.
How do you define rationalism within this context?
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jan 4, 2020 18:56:34 GMT
Language (L)(for understanding each other), tools (T)(for some empiric works that are needed too), enemies (E)(to fight and win them). The more higher the product of (L)&(T)&(E) is, the more chances to reach the goal. In the broad strokes I agree with you but what about the details? Nearly all peoples who have ever existed have had these three things, certainly the first two and only in unusual, temporary, circumstances have they lacked the third. So I'm not clear on what you mean by "higher the product". Could you elaborate? //What form must the language take? -Separate strains? -An intellectual dialect? //We can see today that tools can dominate people -and peoples- and lower them culturally. -What kind of tools are necessary and what if any must be avoided? -Or is this lowering something that needs to be experienced and overcome in order to reach the highest outcomes? //Enemies is quite self explanatory. You're definitely right about lack any details in my comment. Well... I'm on empirical side. So, it's good for me to just make some variable tablets of many previous nations to get some results that correlate in the fields I've narrowly described. I can't say which predicates or relations it might require, but I'm sure getting closer empirical side, i.e. historical facts, not interpretations of it, it's the way to obtain the higher result.
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Jan 4, 2020 21:38:21 GMT
You're right that I haven't been taught how to debate and what skill I have in the discipline is self taught and imperfect, although it's my intention to have more of a discussion than a debate. With my previous comment I was attempting to get a better understanding of your thinking before disagreeing with any part of it. I'd be interested to see the schooling structure you described put into practice. Some amount of competition is definitely healthy but I can't imagine enjoying that type of environment, still, maybe the sacrifice of my particular type is necessary to the development of the highest types as such (I don't believe this but it is conceivable). What do you envisage as being the content of the lessons the students would be learning? Would everyone take the same lessons or would the children be divided by aptitudes? At what age? I believe that the current structure of western style education wastes a good amount of energy teaching knowledge that will never be used by most- to the most talented and the least. It would be better for everyone if the less able could leave formal education earlier to start into whatever work that they are suited to. The more talented- intellectuals, artists etc. are the ones who can benefit from a greater amount of education but it would have to be the right kind of education. -Ennobling. Also on a minor note, to my mind, physical excellence is as important as mental/spiritual excellence and the highest types would have both. Healthy body, healthy mind. Under the Present System, STEM Students Should Use Their Brains to Make Money and Reject School Subjects
Kids go through the same stress in sports and thrive on it. Also, they play the same game no matter what their talent. You can't really believe the high scorer gets bored, which is indicative of failure to see analogies. Abstraction literally means taking out one similarity and focusing on that. The way Americans are miseducated, they'd ask, "But jocks beat up smart kids, so how could we use them as a model on how to develop talent?" What is abstracted is how people with superior talent are treated and motivated, no matter what the field or their dissimilarities in other factors. The content is a different matter. I'll skip that, because it is urgent to motivate the smartest, just as we have successfully motivated almost all superior athletes. Any country that pays students for their grades will lead the world economy; slave-education America will drift downward. We can develop far more of our most potentially powerful human resources even under the same irrelevant and wasteful content. Students will be motivated by getting Friday off or avoiding having to come in on Saturday, no matter what schoolwork they have to do to get those rewards. Also remember that, from 5th Grade on, the highest individual scorers get paid to teach the Saturday classes. Always, always compare school to sports. Most of the boys can compete in the Little League, only 10% in high school, a very tiny minority in college and the pros. In college, players of equal talent will get the same "scholarships," no matter what their race or parental income. High IQs are worthless self-hating weaklings if they oppose "racism."
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jan 4, 2020 22:37:16 GMT
What cultural conditions are required for the development of the highest human types? In answering please describe what you think the highest human types are(I assume you have moral and aesthetic preferences) and how the cultural conditions that you advocate would bring about the realisation of these types, assuming of course that bringing them about is something that you'd want. Good question! However, traditionally speaking, there is a more general question: What is a GOOD human life? For instance, health is always considered one characteristic of a physical good life, in the sense of both lack of pain and lack of physical disabilities. More positively speaking: the actualization of one's potentials. In the history of theories of education, Plato stresses the selection of children according to their abilities (which are recognized in early childhood). In this line of thought, I would like to write a book, not easy to develop: "Self-Management of Life -- for male adolescents", which deals with all sorts of SOCIAL situations and includes moral and legal issues. It is even more difficult to determine what cultural environmental conditions are conducive to the formation of a good life, and certainly our present "culture of violence" through television, movies, and video-games, is not conducive to anything good. For one's own care of potentials, the Montessori method of education s something Plato would be proud of. But as an individual grows in love with a certain type of activity or pursuit, we have the issues of freedom and of financial capability, while Time (the biological age) has its own demands and is not subject to one's own management. For me, the higher types of humans are the creators in any field -- mathematics, art, technologies, etc., which should be everybody's concern.
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Jan 5, 2020 4:50:34 GMT
How do you define rationalism within this context? The idea that deductive reason can produce truth about reality.
|
|