Define Intelligence

Good one

Moments like this is why I have you on "follow user" Hex. You are always so scientifically accurate and I so admire your tendency to rely strictly on the facts.

The Pentacle Queen wrote:

Ok, I'll say why I think it's intelligent: because it highlights a really high degree of self perception I've seen demonstrated elsewhere, that what we term 'reality' is constructed by a mental effort to order our sense experience (through language).

Now you say why you think it isn't intelligent.

Think this beautiful rethorical ..ehh..thing may end up as a "The Emperor's New Cloth" category, a self delusion, wishful thinking.

Specially I base my conclusion on this thread http://able2know.org/reply/post-3653203/quote/

Love for the most time is the exact opposit of wisdom, it is foolish and idiotic.

The Pentacle Queen wrote:

I'm talking about love in a romantic sense, but also a 'love for the world.'
Bertrand Russell once said, 'love is wise, hatred is foolish.'

If this 'love' for the world is as profound as I think the implications are, then could love between two people (who think dualistically) in the romantic sense be this profound realisation 'manifest' or 'objectified' thus why it is so important to most human life?
How would a non-dualist 'love' in a romantic sense? Surely phrases such as 'I love you' or more importantly 'I do' are rendered meaningless.

I have read/been told on numerous occasions about love being central to wisdom, and each time thought it was pure sentimentalism and instantly dismissed it until I thought about it in this sense.

If anyone could help sharpen this up I would appreciate it.
pq x

Yeah, fair enough that post was a bit of a wanky one. I still maintain the predominant attraction is the illusion of a process of assimilation with another, I'm sure Fresco or Cy would be able to explain the impact on the concept of self better than I can.

Don't thank me, I like getting critiqued. I entirely admit my personal preference for large, philosophic generalizing statements which make tautologies over lists of qualities, it’s good to have someone to make me question why I immediately veered that way. As for the manner, I’m bloody used to it on this site; I don’t know why there are so many angry people on here.

The Pentacle Queen wrote:

Yeah, fair enough that post was a bit of a wanky one. I still maintain the predominant attraction is the illusion of a process of assimilation with another, I'm sure Fresco or Cy would be able to explain the impact on the concept of self better than I can.

Don't thank me, I like getting critiqued. I entirely admit my personal preference for large, philosophic generalizing statements which make tautologies over lists of qualities, it’s good to have someone to make me question why I immediately veered that way. As for the manner, I’m bloody used to it on this site; I don’t know why there are so many angry people on here.

It seems thata you don't see things in it's greater context, you only see the minor context where it's mere beautiful rethorics.

Actually, I don't agree with that. I'd say that the 'beautiful rhetoric' you describe articulate a larger world view than your manner of zooming in on the details, and, if there is indeed a problem with them then it would be that their scope is TOO great and doesn't provide enough of an intricate model of explanation. Also I would never describe any of the above posts as mere rhetoric. I acknowledged maybe I should pay more attention to factual posts rather than philosophic ones. I think that if you ruminate hard on the content of some of the above posts you will see that they are not as vacuous as you are making them out to be.

Please point out where Cy' has made anything useful that can be of any use in the real world, other than serve as mere mental mastrubation

O Cy' ..O Cy'! Oh why, Oh why!

PQ must answer, then we'll banter!

Then I'll invite you to a symphony of destruction..
then you can satisfy your compulsion..

It can be a war or a battle
choose amongst lambs or cattle

Pick a weapon, be a feather, sword or gun..
to me it doesn't matter, I'll join the fray for fun..

I'm not saying you belive in communism, but it's the same principles that lies underneath. You only see the "beautiful" aspects/intend of things, whith no rationallity, but in the end it can't be useful because the minor details are disregarded, ignored or overlooked, therefore it can only be mental mastrubation, and not used for anything useful.

Well since I majored in aesthetics I'm not going to deny the attraction to the 'beautiful' or even 'mental masturbation'. But I think you're missing the point.
If my posts are 'irrational' or full of pot holes then would you please point out said pot holes and critique them rather than just making a general offensive statement.
As far as I have seen, on this thread, you made one contribution at the beginning, which was a good 'factual' post description of different types of intelligence and then for the rest of it just tried to but heads with various people. You have demonstrated a preference for the 'factual' rather than philosophical in your posts, which I support, but you seem to be making an error in presuming that this constitutes rationality... it doesn't, it's just parrot-mouthed repetition. Rationality is the ability to construct logical arguments from given premises, not just cite the premises and call everyone else stupid.

I also think you are misguided on your concept of 'use'. What is useful? Was any of the work of any of the philosophers 'useful'? Does what they say become less profound if it is not useful? Is posting on A2K useful? Is posting facts from wikipedia onto A2K more useful than posting personal philosophical insights on A2K?

Rationality is the ability to construct logical arguments from given premises, not just cite the premises and call everyone else stupid.

HexHammer wrote:

O Cy' ..O Cy'! Oh why, Oh why!

PQ must answer, then we'll banter!

Then I'll invite you to a symphony of destruction..
then you can satisfy your compulsion..

It can be a war or a battle
choose amongst lambs or cattle

Pick a weapon, be a feather, sword or gun..
to me it doesn't matter, I'll join the fray for fun..

Well, that's just ******* stupid.
I feel A2K should be about growing, not winning.

I'm only saying this because if you accuse me of "mental masturbation" whatever you put into that term, you must have a simpler and more practical definition to show that my approach is only good for serving my need of confirmation of my intellect. If you don't, then you are the one who is jerking off.

Pretty worthless pursuit. People put too much into it as if it represent one ` s self-worth. Very unhealthy. It is better to focus on doing something good.