Carl-Richard

The thing that makes us human is highly complex social structures, language and culture, i.e. the ability to participate in distributed cognition (which is cognition outside your own mind). Chimpanzees actually have a stronger working memory than humans (the ability to hold numbers in your mind), but we're miles ahead in terms of intelligence for exactly those aforementioned reasons. If you don't take advantage of distributed cognition, you're essentially a chimp. Distributed cognition can be thought of as a form of collective intelligence (collective generalized problem-solving ability), but intelligence is not wisdom, as what makes us intelligent also makes us prone to self-deception and "bullshit". A big component of wisdom is the ability to take different perspectives; the balance of integrating and breaking frames and getting unstuck from these self-deception mechanisms. Likewise, if you don't participate in distributed cognition, you'll have a hard time gaining wisdom. As for its relevance to democracy, again, when the integration and breaking of frames (which is analogous to Wilber's "transcend and include") gets out of balance, we get the opposite of wisdom (foolishness). When integration becomes too strong, we get things like group-think. When breaking frames gets too strong, we get too critical and exclusionary. These things are characteristics of the culture war. As democracy is a collective intelligence, our job is to get it to collective wisdom. That is only possible through honest and open dialogue; not debate, but "theologos". Only then, we can arrive at a balanced collective frame integration and frame breaking.

You do the same for poop?

What function does a soul have other than remembering past lives?

Yes, for the 5th time, in a random sample of people, individuals with a higher IQ are statistically more successful. That doesn't mean IQ is necessarily the explanation for the success of a specific ethnic population. What you're doing is essentially this: "the size of a fish correlates with the amount of predators it can avoid, and therefore, a species of salmon in a specific river will necessarily avoid more predators than a small fish in a freshwater pond." You're then forgetting about the potential group differences, e.g. the insane amount of bears that eat salmon vs. the relative lack of predators in a tiny pond. Yes, individual fish are generally more likely to avoid predators if they're big, but you have to justify why size is particularly relevant for that specific group of fish, or else you're not talking about that group. When you're referring to a statistic about individuals, you're only talking about individuals. Just because it looks complex today doesn't mean it started out at that level of complexity. Reading the Torah is not that complex. Becoming a banker or a merchant 2000 years ago wasn't that complex. Maybe over the course of 2000 years of competition and innovation, it looks complex, but the population who mostly did that for a living would have gradually tracked that development of complexity. No need to start off with a massive IQ.

Imagine Leo goes on Lex Fridman and says "I'm the most awake person in the entire world". "Wow.."

I don't feel like it's a limitation, but it's not perfect. I've been improving a lot in the last few years on here. Caring about conveying clear thoughts and being understood. That leads to having a clear language.

People actually talk about past lives.

It's like you're trying to gaslight the entire thread ?

@Tyler Robinson It wasn't like a hallucination where I was staring at a literal bird in my field of vision. It was much more subtle than that. It was somewhere in between the solidity of an imagined image and a hallucination, and it lasted for maybe 1.5 seconds. The phoenix was ethereal and sparkly white with tiny hints of rainbow colors, and it was slowly and gracefully doing one huge flap with its wings as it took off, and then it evaporated, like blowing out a candle flame in slow motion.

I'm Norwegian I'm just terminally online. I guess you didn't read my DNA test thread

I learned English by playing RuneScape School was just practice.

Lmao. So success = genetics now? Let's get something straight here: you're the one who invoked IQ and substituted it for success so you could pigeon-hole it into your claim about it being due to genetics. The only reason I'm talking about IQ is because you kept butchering concepts from evolutionary biology, so I conceded to the IQ thing and worked from there. How is that so hard to imagine? Aren't you a redpill guy? Do you actually think low-status losers got more chicks in the past? ? ...listen, you absolute hypocrite. You haven't given direct evidence for anything at all either. When I conceded to the IQ frame, I also conceded to the frame of only giving hypotheticals (which is something I've criticized you for doing in the past). You created this. I guess I'm sorry for forcing myself down to your level. You don't make any assumptions?! ??? Right... except "success = IQ = genetics". An explanation being simple does not protect it from being wrong. ...or maybe they just had a very particular religious code that happened to involve reading the scriptures a lot which translates well into education and success. Yeah no.

So Leo's first spawn was a mouse.

There are creationists in the comment section ? What exactly did he tell the A.I? Because I don't trust clickbait.

I don't really know what you're asking. The trait arose in one individual 6000-10000 years ago due to genetic mutation. All people with blue eyes stem from that one individual. Whatever caused the mutation, it was still a genetic mutation.

The way in which they are associated with genetics are different. Blue eye color can be traced back to a single event of genetic mutation. The success of Jews can be traced back to the literacy obligation. Was blue eye color caused by genetics? Well, it was caused by a genetic mutation, so yes. Was the success of Jews caused by genetics? Well, it was caused by the literacy obligation, so no. Does blue eye color have anything to do with genetics? Yes. Does the success of Jews have anything to do with genetics? Yes.

I just expect a minimum standard of layout and delivery. I can appreciate a long and well-formulated post if it has actual substance to it and doesn't consist of mostly empty spaces and repeating the same points over and over.

You won't get banned, but please clean up how you communicate, or people will just give up talking to you. Don't use separate lines for every sentence, don't repeat yourself 6 times in one post, and respond to one point with one or a few points, not 12 points.

Why are you writing this in separate lines? It's one sentence. You're a pain in the ass to read.

I can't be asked with this Gish gallop brain rot. I made one simple point in a short 3-line paragraph, and you respond with 30 spaced out seizure-inducing sentences. Condense your writing.

Can you imagine parts of a song? I one time played an entire song from start to finish in my head (weed helped), and at one point, it almost felt like the sound was coming from the outside.

My first LSD trip when I was 18 was about dukkha. I had planned out a huge list of fun things to experience while on acid, and every time I tried to do something, I felt a huge void inside of me. I spent the last half of the trip lying uncomfortably in my bed staring at the ceiling while the others were having fun.

How you discover the truth of suffering is through seeing how having finite things does not fullfil you. You want the infinite thing.

I was talking about the first Noble Truth (dukkha) from which the other three are derived. It's literally the main teaching. The way you discover dukkha is by seeing how despite trying very hard to "have" things (experiences, objects, relationships, etc.), you're still left with the same persistent feeling of unfulfillment. Buddha's life as a prince is a metaphor for that.