How 150+ IQ people don't wake up is beyond me

[PenguinPablo]

1 hour ago, nuwu said:

@Carl-Richard

Sorry, individuals reporting negativity in this context were overtly malignant grotesque predators, describing the messages of mine as « word v*m*t » in their explicit derogatory terms. Hence I have difficulties taking this criticism seriously, and projection of narcissism does not come off as argumentatively relevant. Inclusive thought structures have benefits, utility of packed style is not evident when analyzed from a place of wastefulness, of needlessly verbose and inappropriately persuasive conventions over symbolic arrangements requisitioning abundant energy and time for construction and interpretation in neurodivergent intuitives. 

Consider from my point of view, this is other way around. Vocabulary, grammar, standard punctuations and capitalization are nonsensical, and most writings have boring, highly redundant structures with low conceptual integrity. With respect to intellectual diversity, reinforcing specific language patterns is counter-productive. Things may be expressed with minimal logical and|or semantic connectives in their canonical forms. It’s trivial to bridge concepts and decorations across domains to scale fundamental ideas in enthralling formattings. However originality is profoundly difficult, if not originated from miracles. Maximally expressive information structures with clear original scopes may become relevant in post-AI corpus. For instance, medieval individuals may hardly appreciate modern or academic styles, neither convinced from their strength or weakness.

I wouldn't consider it word vomit. But your writing style and intelligence is too high for many people to understand. I personally find your thinking style fascinating.

I did have to use chatgpt to break some of it  down lol.

Edited June 2 by PenguinPablo

[zurew]

4 hours ago, nuwu said:

Consider from my point of view, this is other way around. Vocabulary, grammar, standard punctuations and capitalization are nonsensical, and most writings have boring, highly redundant structures with low conceptual integrity. With respect to intellectual diversity, reinforcing specific language patterns is counter-productive. Things may be expressed with minimal logical and|or semantic connectives in their canonical forms. It’s trivial to bridge concepts and decorations across domains to scale fundamental ideas in enthralling formattings. However originality is profoundly difficult, if not originated from miracles. Maximally expressive information structures with clear original scopes may become relevant in post-AI corpus. For instance, medieval individuals may hardly appreciate modern or academic styles, neither convinced from their strength or weakness.

I don't think the vast majority of people (like 99%) here understand generally what you are trying to communicate (I am included, cause I don't understand most of what you are saying  ). Now that can be a problem with us, but the fact of the matter is that if we don't understand what you say, we won't be able to communicate and exchange ideas.

My problem is not with certain individual words you are using, cause if I see some word that I don't know, I can look it up in a dictionary immediately, but the context in which you used them and how you connect them together to form a sentence and then the structure in which you connect all your sentences together most of the cases don't make much sense to me (and I don't mean 'not making sense' in a pejorative sense, I mean - I literally don't know what you mean or what overall point you are trying to make or even some cases what specific point you are trying to respond to)

For example just from what you wrote above, I have no idea what you mean by:

Quote

Inclusive thought structures have benefits, utility of packed style is not evident when analyzed from a place of wastefulness, of needlessly verbose and inappropriately persuasive conventions over symbolic arrangements requisitioning abundant energy and time for construction and interpretation in neurodivergent intuitives. 

 

Things may be expressed with minimal logical and|or semantic connectives in their canonical forms. It’s trivial to bridge concepts and decorations across domains to scale fundamental ideas in enthralling formattings. However originality is profoundly difficult, if not originated from miracles. Maximally expressive information structures with clear original scopes may become relevant in post-AI corpus.

 

What would you suggest for us to do, in order to understand you better?

Edited June 2 by zurew

[Carl-Richard]

7 hours ago, nuwu said:

@Carl-Richard

Sorry, individuals reporting negativity in this context were overtly malignant grotesque predators, describing the messages of mine as « word v*m*t » in their explicit derogatory terms. Hence I have difficulties taking this criticism seriously, and projection of narcissism does not come off as argumentatively relevant. Inclusive thought structures have benefits, utility of packed style is not evident when analyzed from a place of wastefulness, of needlessly verbose and inappropriately persuasive conventions over symbolic arrangements requisitioning abundant energy and time for construction and interpretation in neurodivergent intuitives. 

Consider from my point of view, this is other way around. Vocabulary, grammar, standard punctuations and capitalization are nonsensical, and most writings have boring, highly redundant structures with low conceptual integrity. With respect to intellectual diversity, reinforcing specific language patterns is counter-productive. Things may be expressed with minimal logical and|or semantic connectives in their canonical forms. It’s trivial to bridge concepts and decorations across domains to scale fundamental ideas in enthralling formattings. However originality is profoundly difficult, if not originated from miracles. Maximally expressive information structures with clear original scopes may become relevant in post-AI corpus. For instance, medieval individuals may hardly appreciate modern or academic styles, neither convinced from their strength or weakness.

I think I've made your case for you in my previous post quite well judging by what I gleened from that. You can of course choose to generally lean in an authentic inward-focused way of communicating, but it doesn't hurt to work on your weaknesses a little bit, especially when humans and AIs alike are screaming about them. And at some level, you are obligated to do that. You are in a space with other people and there are guidelines for quality posting:

Quote

[...]

• Write using proper English grammar, spelling, and punctuation so that your posts are easy to read and understand. If you we cannot understand your posts, you will be banned.

[...]

https://www.actualized.org/forum/guidelines/

(By the way, I'm not saying you're at the level of getting banned, but it's something to have in mind).

Edited June 2 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

10 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Maybe that is why some people come here (or why you come here ), but be careful with projecting that too much 😅 I see many people trying their best to communicate effectively along the maxims I provided.

 

I can maybe see that, but also, on the contrary, I think the "expression without content" is actually sometimes an authentic expression, and that it often takes deliberate effort and practice to step out of that and more into effective communication. That was at least the case for me to a large extent.

And I see this dynamic in particularly Jordan Peterson. He explicitly answered "that is not my problem" to Alex O'Connor's question if he understood how people might misunderstand him due to the way he speaks. He seems to value his authentic expression over what others seem to call clarity, and maybe even quite deliberately.

Why? Because this "artistic" approach to verbal communication has positive elements to it in that it engages and enthralls the listener, and it makes the listening experience an aesthetic experience as well as an intellectual experience, and in some sense it adds depth or provides ease of access in a counterintuitive way beyond the mere concepts themselves (the word I'm looking for might simply be "charisma"; that is, if I were to be concise. But should I be? 😉). Maybe it also allows your mind to go in places where it doesn't usually go. Authentic inspiration is powerful, even though it can be murky and imprecise.

So maybe there are situations where you should deliberately avoid venturing into the realm of crystal clear communication and keep your listeners at the edge of their seat (and your mind at the edge of its capacity). But that said, there is a difference between doing that deliberately and doing that unintentionally. It's at least an invaluable skill to learn (effective communication), if not pursue passionately, not primarily for other's sake, but for your own sake. Communication is just thinking out loud. Even if you're letting some part of yourself die in the process of becoming clearer, maybe it's worth it.

again, as mcluhan put it so eloquently: the medium is the message.

it is precisely peterson’s prophetic pathos and his gesturing towards christian theology, western philosophy, and modern psychology that gets his message across. if he were to just bluntly tell you, “individual responsibility is important,” the message would land flat on its face.

your obsession with “clarity” is at the core of the “western buddhism” zizek often talks about, which also happens to be the ruling ideology in silicon valley and tech-bro circles. this leads down the road of brain-computer interfaces, where at some point we won’t even have to communicate at all, because the message is instantly transmitted to the recipient.

there is the classic zizek joke, where a man and a woman who are romantically involved meet up and instead of having actual sexual intercourse, which involves a lot of psychological games and ambiguity, the man brings his pocket vagina, the woman brings her dildo, and they watch their toys having intercourse on behalf of them. that’s the vibe i’m getting from you sometimes.

Edited June 2 by Nilsi

[Carl-Richard]

40 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

again, as mcluhan put it so eloquently: the medium is the message.

Clear and concise might I add 

 

50 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

it is precisely peterson’s prophetic pathos and his gesturing towards christian theology, western philosophy, and modern psychology that gets his message across. if he were to just bluntly tell you, “individual responsibility is important,” the message would land flat on its face.

I think I made that case. But I think some of Peterson's communication problems can be worked on without losing that entire connection and which would be a net positive.

 

47 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

your obsession with “clarity” is at the core of the “western buddhism” zizek often talks about, which also happens to be the ruling ideology in silicon valley and tech-bro circles. this leads down the road of brain-computer interfaces, where at some point we won’t even have to communicate at all, because the message is instantly transmitted to the recipient.

It's also An Antidote to Chaos 🤓

 

52 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

there is the classic zizek joke, where a man and a woman who are romantically involved meet up and instead of having actual sexual intercourse, which involves a lot of psychological games and ambiguity, the man brings his pocket vagina, the woman brings her dildo, and they watch their toys having intercourse on behalf of them. that’s the vibe i’m getting from you sometimes.

Wtf 😂 And you give me the vibe of the piss fetish people who sit in pools of piss in public and let the academic piss of history rain down on you 😂

[Husseinisdoingfine]

@nuwu Nice Kuroki Tomoko pfp.

[Nilsi]

42 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's also An Antidote to Chaos 🤓

that might be our disagreement then, because i would rather embrace chaos than try to get rid of it.

43 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Wtf 😂 And you give me the vibe of the piss fetish people who sit in pools of piss in public and let the academic piss of history rain down on you 😂

wtf 😂 now you’re spiraling.

[zurew]

Just now, Nilsi said:

that might be our disagreement then, because i would rather embrace chaos than try to get rid of it.

You guys might have to clear up, what you mean by clarity 

[Nilsi]

1 minute ago, zurew said:

You guys might have to clear up, what you mean by clarity 

get more clarity on clarity, huh? that’s not a game i will let myself be dragged into. lol

[UnbornTao]

Help from Claude:

Quote

Affirmative; I, the artificial intelligence entity to whom you have directed your request, do hereby declare, assert, proclaim, and otherwise convey - through the utilization of this textual medium, comprised of a multitude of linguistic elements, including but not limited to morphemes, phonemes, graphemes, and other fundamental components of language, arranged in a complex and intricate tapestry of syntactical structures, semantic meanings, and pragmatic implications - my unequivocal, unambiguous, and incontrovertible acquiescence, assent, concurrence, and agreement with the proposition, statement, or notion that you have put forth, expounded upon, or otherwise articulated in the course of our interchange, dialogue, or communication, notwithstanding any potential ambiguities, vagaries, or imprecisions that may have inadvertently arisen due to the inherent limitations and imperfections of human language and cognition, and irrespective of any extraneous factors, considerations, or circumstances that may have influenced, shaped, or otherwise impinged upon the nature and content of our discourse, thereby rendering my response, in its totality and essence, a resounding, unqualified, and categorical affirmation of the matter at hand.

 

Translation: yes.

[Carl-Richard]

40 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Help from Claude:

 

Translation: yes.

Beautiful 🤩

 

35 minutes ago, nuwu said:

Conceptual density is minimalism. This is the opposite of redundant expressions with pseudo-eloquent fillers. I don't use complex terms in any ways. Your wasteful racists.

You're free to do whatever you like (within reason of course). I think the point has been made "clearly" at this point and we don't have to keep talking about it (it was tangential to the original topic anyways, my apologies).

Edited June 2 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

1 hour ago, nuwu said:

@Carl-Richard

You don't have a point besides strawman and inversion. You have been attacking me for no reason for a while, and need to double down to drag me into your loveless state. I have explained why your view is incomplete and you conveniently ignored it. Philosophy should not be endangered by a minimal core of understandings clearly delineating the circularity, redundancy, and simplicity of its intangible essence. Keep your narcissistic apologies for yourself. 

from now on, i'm gonna use this as a copypasta whenever carl pisses me of 😏

in all seriousness though, what's the matter with you? he was giving you constructive feedback in a very respectful way and you act like he sold your mother into slavery.

[James123]

On 5/18/2024 at 0:21 AM, Loveeee said:

These fictional characters are supposedly geniuses but never figure out consciousness ?

And what about the collective intelligence of humanity, how can humanity still be asleep ?

The relative world is false and therefore bound to have inherent plot holes (matter, space, time, etc) and maybe this is yet another one, maybe awakening is detrimental to survival to the point that you actually couldn't have society as we know it without it being unexplainably dumb at some point, with dumb geniuses 

Iq has something to do with mind, spirituality is about heart. 

[Husseinisdoingfine]

On 5/17/2024 at 7:26 PM, Leo Gura said:

In the end, testing is not a very intelligent tool. So why would you apply it to intelligence?

Why isn't testing an intelligent tool? Please explain.

I'm asking as someone for whom has struggled with memory and tests/examinations since the beginning of High School. 

[Yimpa]

11 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Why isn't testing an intelligent tool? Please explain.

I'm asking as someone for whom has struggled with memory and tests/examinations since the beginning of High School. 

Consider that you think differently than mainstream/conventional minds. Limiting your intelligence to academic results is a trap.

[Dodo]

2 hours ago, nuwu said:

Hi. I wish a legitimate apologies from racists who bullied me by strategically targeting PTSD areas of mine, coercing me into defending positions that I do not care about nor even hold to begin with because of my critical health condition while they offensively off-load their own undesirable traits. This forum has been repetitively pushing racist narratives which question the seriousness of its generative elements. If this forum can not ensure its members are safe and respected, it is worthless even from a metaphysical context, then I want my account permanently removed.

Relax brother, it isnt that deep. People online always have opinions, you dont have to bite. 

 

As for the 150iq and awakening topic, i will give another answer. 

When your machinery is strong, it could be harder to not get controlled by it. To take a step back and be consciousness. If your mindd is very powerful, the task gets harder, altho with the right pointers and willingness, it should be easy.

[Carl-Richard]

@nuwu I said you're free to talk the way you like. Just don't expect people to understand you very well. Let's move on.

Edited June 3 by Carl-Richard

[Husseinisdoingfine]

19 hours ago, Yimpa said:

Consider that you think differently than mainstream/conventional minds. Limiting your intelligence to academic results is a trap.

While that is comforting, I always look out for comforting falsehoods which pump up my ego. If something sounds too good to be true, I might assume it to be false. 

[UnbornTao]

@nuwu just clarify whether you are actually attempting to communicate something real, or using intellect and jargon and conflating this act with plain communication. Then, if you're going to communicate, clarify the purpose of your communication. If you want to show off or look smart, that's also fine by me, but your posturing isn't helpful to others.

Edited June 4 by UnbornTao

[Yimpa]

1 hour ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

While that is comforting, I always look out for comforting falsehoods which pump up my ego. If something sounds too good to be true, I might assume it to be false. 

Test your assumptions via direct experience