To get into the Halloween spirit, I’ve embedded one of my favorite horror shorts of all time below. It is Tales from the Darkside Season 2 Episode 20 A Choice of Dreams. I strongly advise you all to watch this short film some time before Halloween (you have almost a whole week. And watch it BEFORE YOU READ THE COMMENTS).
I often reference my high school chemistry teacher who taught me what intelligence really is: The cognitive ability to adapt–to take whatever situation you’re in and turn it around to your advantage. Some people don’t like that definition, because it reminds them more of an evil opportunist getting rich than a brilliant scientist doing truly genius work.
But as the Bible says, For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Thus, the opportunist who sells his soul to get rich has not really adapted the situation to his advantage to any huge degree. He either had no morals to burden him, and thus had an easy situation to adapt to, or his material pleasures are negated by the psychic pain of having ruined the lives of others.
The film below is about a rich mobster who got rich using some intelligence (his IQ is probably an above average score of 110) and a lot of evil (probably a psychopath). He is smart enough to adapt to a life of crime, but it takes a scientist with an IQ of probably above 170 to figure out away for him to adapt the situation to his advantage for all of eternity, which is infinitely more advantageous than a mere lifetime of wealth. And yet, the best and truest line of the video, is “never underestimate the power of money, kid”.
So defining intelligence as the ability to adapt is perfect, because not only did intelligence evolve to enable us to adapt, but both a common sense understanding of intelligence (if you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?), and an academic image of intelligence (breakthroughs in science) are all about goal-directed adaptive advantageous behavior. As my chemistry teacher so eloquently explained, it’s the single umbrella that covers all of intelligence.
Pumpkin Person 
The idea of intelligence according to HBDer’s is circular: iq is tied into wealth, idealism, depression, stability, status, competence and yet these all contradict.
For example, iq is tied to bipolar mania and wealth and yet that same instability and wealth have a negative correlation with each other.
Introverts make less than extroverts even though introverts are smarter. Yet wealth and intelligence should have a positive correlation.
Psychopathy means a lack of morals and has a negative correlation with iq. But if morality among Muslims is higher (for example, adultery and abortion are strictly forbidden), why do Muslims from the Middle East have lower iq compared to Europeans?
How then can PP find a person’s iq using only correlations when it doesn’t work at a large scale?
If one ranks high on two positive correlates of IQ that are negatively correlated with each other, then the predictive power is enhanced by the reduced redundancy of the predictors
Vigoda did a nice job. I didn’t like that his character asked the right question (“How do I know you’ll follow through on what you guarantee?”) but didn’t follow up when evaded.
Yes, it was strange that he would let that evasion go.
”Scherrrrman, is you???”
it’s odd that neo-nazis deny the holocaust…and really mean it. it’s not as if such things hadn’t happened before or since…just not with german efficiency.
although it seems it was not the plan from the beginning, but rather went into full crazy mode only when germany knew it would lose the war…specifically when the US declared war on germany.
and this is what hitler said…in so many words…in a speech to the reichstag.
the original plan was deportation, and “resettlement to the east” was not originally a euphemism for extermination, but for gathering all the jews of europe into one place for deportation.
peepee’s post should have been on the three divisions regarding norms of reaction.
1. the extremists (i am one) believe that norms of reaction differ enormously both within and between ethnic groups.
2. the hbders who either:
a. can’t even grasp the concept of norms of reaction or
b. dismiss it as a red herring
3. the (non-existent) but still stereotyped/fantastical opponent of hbders who believes that environment is all that matters.
all the races of man have disgusting people.
but “but for the grace of God there go I” is mis-interpreted by hbders.
the questions is not “if i had walked a mile in his moccasins would i be like him?”
the question is “if he had had the environment which was best for him how much better would he be?”
peepee jives about “adaptability” totally oblivious its being a new world/heterogeneous society value.
in the land of one’s ancestors among one’s extended family he will grow to his full height more often than in an alien land among alien people…so to say…
just like a tree or a bear.
even human existence is always just rolling down hill. “hard work” and “perseverance” are perverted prole values.
but the path of least resistance is most likely to lead to the summit…for a norwegian…in norway.
and the same goes for “adaptability”.
all of these are just the values which the bourgeoisie likes to have in its proletariat and the proles devoid of class consciousness agree like running dogs.
these values are recent to the human experience…and perverted.
at the beginning of industrialization in england the factory workers, ex-peasants, often got drunk and fell asleep half way through the day. of course such is “not done” today…especially in the anglo-sphere. in fact, it goes even further. such a person would be described as “un-reliable” (as if a person were a tool), or “ir-responsible” (as if he should alter his instinctive behavior after millennia of practice) or that he should “adapt”. he might even be diagnosed with some new-fangled “mental illness” like adhd…amphetamine does make better workers.
from the biological perspective the poor and stupid are much more “adaptable” and have been ever since industrialization.
during the 19th c the population of the UK quintupled and average living standards declined.
from the biological perspective the poor and stupid are much more “adaptable” and have been ever since industrialization.
When my chemistry teacher defined intelligence as the ability to adapt, I think he meant only adapt our behavior to meet whatever goals we have (problem solve). But in order for behavior to be adaptive in the evolutionary sense, it’s not enough that one have ability to adapt, but they must be adapting to goals that advance genetic fitness. The only goals we have are to maximize pleasure and minimize pain, so evolution predisposed us to feel pleasure when our genetic fitness is enhanced (i.e, acquiring resources and mates) and feel pain when our genetic fitness is reduced (death of a child) essentially programming us, like trained seals, to advance the interests of our genes.
In a sense the smart have become so smart they’ve outsmarted evolution in that they are adapting to their OWN goals, not the goals evolution selected us to have’. They’ve created birth control, adapting the situation to their advantage by figuring out how to have sex without the burden of children.
Of course all our goals are the product of evolution, but some folks are so adaptable, they adapt faster than evolution can catch up.
all of these are just the values which the bourgeoisie likes to have in its proletariat and the proles devoid of class consciousness agree like running dogs.
If you’re going to cite Marxism, then the people who are adapting the situation to their advantage (assuming they feel no guilt about it) are those who are taking advantage of the workers, not the workers themselves. It’s no different from how humans use their superior intelligence to exploit the labor of dumb animals like the horse that drags them around all day on the cart.
The smart and evil exploit the dumb and good, both within species and races, and between them. That’s life.
peepee makes me feel like a chimo…but i can’t post anywhere else…
peepee has unknowingly put a lot of value on “eurytopy”.
she ignores that giants in whatever endeavor may be stenotopic.
she believes that human beings are intelligent to the extent that they are eurytopic.
or she believes, along with all other HBDers, that eurytopy and stenotopy are inappropriate categories (red herrings) for human beings even though they are appropriate for all other living things. could be…
looking up my own name on google i was led to my great great gran who lived in old greenwich, CT. why don’t i?
peepee’s explanation: i didn’t inherit the rich genes.
my (self-serving) explanation: i’m the better of my great great gran in everything cognitive and physical but the environment has changed A LOT.
the world’s fastest growing tree was a failure for the jari project, because…
the project was in the amazon, but the tree was from malaya.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jari_project
oprah has a small head.
Only if you consider 6.3 standard deviations above the mean to be small
that figure is a lie made up by oprah herself fucktard.
pictures don’t lie…about head size.
Nobody lies about having a big head. It’s considered negative.
I think there’s one thing we can agree on…she ain’t that attractive.
She was attractive enough to become Miss Fire Prevention and then Miss Black Nashville and then Miss Black Tennessee. It was actually beauty contests that launched her career, but she won them not being beautiful, but by using her huge brain size to adapt her behavior.
She was the first non-redhead to win Miss Fire Prevention and the reason she won was the judges asked all the contestants, “If you won a million dollars, what would you do?”
All the other girls went on about the incredible acts of charity they would perform, but when it was 16 year old Oprah’s turn, she said:
“If I won a million dollars, I’d be a spending FOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!!”
The audience exploded in laughter and the title was hers. She had the brain size to realize the most noble answers were already taken, so she creatively adapted the situation to her advantage through refreshing honesty and humor. In the animal kingdom, the larger the brain, the larger the behavioral repertoire and the more flexible the response.
someone should post this clip every time peepee opens her hole…
Here I have condensed my current understanding of Jungian typology. Feeling may be least accurate though. Judgment: Feeling is limbic, Thinking is in the front of the brain. Perception is in the back of the brain. I think I am ISTP.
I going inward
E going outward
P observations
J decisions
———————————
Ni – Combining ideas arising out of the stillness of the mind.
Ne – Connected series of ideas popping in, in response to the environmental triggers.
Si – Cascades of triggered sensations remembered.
Se – Immediate experience of sensations.
Fi – Contemplating how one would feel or others would feel if certain actions are taken.
Fe – Acting upon a situation based on immediate feelings.
Ti – Contemplating the structure or the rules of a composed system.
Te – Constructing a plan of action to achieve a goal step by step.
———————————
Intelligence tests correlate with the connections between parietal lobes and frontal lobes. Adaptability I think is more of a way to describe typology than Intelligence. Advantage is relative. Area of “Focus” is somatosensory. Jungian typology is cognitive not behaviorist.
Michael Pierce Youtube channel is a good source on typology.