[Note from Pumpkin Person: the following is a guest article and does not necessarily reflect my views]
Introduction
The physical interactions behind cognitive variation are arguably the most studied and elusive aspects of human diversity. Despite the HBD community’s enormous interest in the mind, I find that many of the modern theories they propagate are lacking conceptual rigor. Within this thesis I will attempt the following: 1) To persuade the audience that my conception of particular mental phenomena is more precise than or at least endorses the most epistemically accurate contemporary hypotheses. And 2) To lay out a simple yet reliable framework for future HBDers to base new ideas on by giving biological explanations of particular psychological phenomena. For this purpose alone you can treat this article as a short summarization of the extensive research into our concept of consciousness, as such I will not be covering any of this in extreme detail, neither will I be covering every single aspect of the mind, but it will of course be accompanied by studies and papers that will elucidate these concepts further for anyone who is interested.
Philosophy of mind
First, I think it’s appropriate to cover the philosophical grounds of my views. It should be no surprise that Physicalism/Naturalism is the most dominant position among philosophers within that domain (Bourget and Chalmers, 2013). The number is even greater if you consider scientists as philosophers (which they are). These figures are expected because Physicalism is the most parsimonious explanatory model for how our world works. So what is Physicalism? At the basic level, Physicalism is the belief that our world is a result of physical laws. I cannot highlight the entirety of this debate, the intricacy of the subjects within this article could span the length of multiple textbooks. I will delve more into this in future posts. Instead, I’m going to simply rebut what I believe are common fallacies that underlie dualistic thinking.
The arguments I have read tend to follow similar patterns in their reasoning. The one we will discuss first is the intensional fallacy. Dualist arguments that suffer from this flaw are presented in the following format:
P1: X (usually the mind) has property A
P2: Y (usually the brain/body or just physical entities in general) has property B
P3: Leibniz law which states: Necessarily, for anything, x, and anything, y, x is identical to y if and only if for any property x has, y has, and for any property y has, x has.
C1: X is not Y
From the onset this doesn’t seem that fallacious, and of course some would even argue the intensional fallacy cannot apply here, as leibniz law is not dependent on what someone knows but the properties a target may exhibit. This is incorrect, knowing the different properties the entity may possess by definition requires knowledge and subsequently a thinker. To see why this argument is ultimately fallacious, observe the following syllogism:
P1: Water is knowable with the unaided eye
P2: H2O is unknowable with the unaided eye
P3: leibniz law
C1: Water is not H2O
Descartes, Ross, and arguments on the unity of consciousness tend to all commit this fallacy. We could replace the subjects and their properties with that of neon and boron and the conclusion would be true, the problem is that discrepancies between the descriptions of physical and mental states (or any concept) does not necessarily entail that the two cannot be identical in reference. To make definitive statements on the mind’s characteristics requires an identification of the mechanisms that catalyze such functions. Physicalists have this luxury, Dualists do not. This idea is echoed (actually I’m the echo) by Kant (1781) in his 2nd paralogism of his Critique of Pure Reason (Kitcher, 1990) This brings me to the second fallacy: ad ignorantiam. We know a lot about the mind, Philosophy, Art, History, Literature, Psychology, Neuroscience, etc. What seems to be the crux of the issue is how subjectivity arises from objectivity. I am not charging any particular Dualist argument with this fallacy. Instead, I believe this fallacy pervades Dualism as a whole. It usually goes:
P1: Despite Physicalism’s explanatory power, it hasn’t explained the phenomenological character of experience.
P2: Since Physicalism cannot explain this particular aspect it cannot be a tenable model for our world
C1: Dualism is the only tenable position
What makes this a fallacious argument is that the proponent is essentially asking you to “prove him wrong”. Phenomenology is a difficult concept to ground in physical structures simply because of the sheer complexity behind it. Donald davidson even advocated Dual Aspect Monism as a solution to this perceived indeterminism (more on stochasticity later). Despite the debate on the aforementioned subject, if Dualists accept interactionism (which they have to), positing an “ectoplasmic” nature to mental states is pure ad hoc. This brings me to the final fallacy I will discuss: begging the question. If Physicalists can account for these qualities then any Dualist argument against Physicalism already presupposes the need for Dualism. If Physicalism cannot account for said phenomena then these criticisms could cut both ways. More on Dualism and its presumed fallacies.
Nature of the system
These following sections won’t be new or helpful to anyone versed in current literature on neuroscience or similar fields. This is simply a reference point for those less knowledgeable on the subject. Usually, when you read on the Nervous system, authors will refer to its descriptions with computer and engineering metaphors (Furber and Temple, 2007). This article will do the same, but for conceptual clarity I will stress that the brain is not a computer. Yes, it’s true that computers are the closest thing to a brain that we’ve engineered, but it is a biological organ that has been crafted by millions of years of sloppy evolution. As obvious as that is, let it serve as a reminder to not to take the metaphors too seriously. Despite my previous views, the brain is not a parallel system. There aren’t actual physical boundaries that could represent independence. Subsequently, the brain and the mind cannot be modular as modularity also requires independence. The NS and its parts is in fact parallel if you consider each neuron as its own processor with each synaptic cleft as a physical boundary (though you could arguably still contest the independence). Unfortunately, this is not what Scientists of the mind refer to when they use these terms. Cognitive scientists and Psychologists refer to more complex interactions, and as a result many of their computational models could be labelled parallel. Their divisions are more abstract, the subject of this article is a more empirically grounded level of function.
If anything the brain is an integrated memory system. Which is to say that it is dependent upon neighboring receivers to produce certain behaviors and actions. An integrated system has the same potential as a parallel one, as it can run multiple operations simultaneously (Born 2001). I find integration a better description of our nervous system because it allows for the dependency we clearly witness. Compartmentalization of the cerebral hemispheres is arbitrary. As you can see from the previous video, simple observation indicates that there are no real anatomical boundaries except possibly sulci. However, this would still be against the interests of the consensus. Despite this, localization can still be realized through averaging the enormous variation in functionality (Sporns, Tononi, and Kotter, 2005). Localization is still tricky to realize, as the brain is a biological construct with a general purpose function. This implies that neuronal activity of the same tasks can vary in individuals day by day. There exists a tug and pull between minimization of cost and maximization of growth and adaptation. This is how the brain retains plasticity via a “winner takes all” scenario while simultaneously allowing arborization of localized functionality to solidify (Barbey, 2018). These functions are carried out by populations of neurons. This is because there is no specificity (except maybe some kind of spatial tendency) in regard to the connections between individual neurons. It should be noted that this is not in reference to variation over time. The plasticity of individual neuronal connections and the categorical selection of pathways that groups of neurons take is determined by a multitude of factors that can be coherently expressed, so a lack of specificity is not equivalent to indeterminism in this context. RaceRealist has an interesting article that could explain the stochasticity of low level connectivity. This link will also be helpful to those interested in how this connectivity is realized. As far as the connectivity on the population level goes, there is considerable determinism that shapes the probabilistic nature of cognition (Dold et al., 2018).
Memory
This is possibly the most important aspect of consciousness, as it is an accumulation of our memories that help formulate how we perceive and establish ourselves. Alzheimers is a type of dementia that affects memory which can slowly make its carrier lose themselves over time. Our memories are completely dependent on external stimuli. Sub-mechanisms of neural plasticity are responsible for this function and can be carried out in multiple ways. Synaptic plasticity is the most commonly discussed aspect of neuroplasticity. Nonsynaptic Plasticity is newer to the field of neuroscience but works synergistically with the former to carry out key mechanisms involving memory and learning (Tully, Hennig, and Lansner, 2014). Simply put, learning a new skill requires locally specific neurons and their glial modulators to strengthen or weaken their connections with each other. The more you carry out these tasks the stronger these connections become, and subsequently the easier it becomes to perform said tasks. Your eyes, ears and skin are sensory organs that transfer information to your brain where it is integrated, which then catalyzes a motor response (most of the time). The world we model around us completely relies on the information from these organs. Because of this, the brain can be said to be experience dependent. Hence, why the brain is a memory system above all else.
There is considerable debate how memories are stored or retrieved. These traces of memories are called engrams. The most prevalent theory is that the patterns of neurons that were initiated when a memory was solidified are what reactivate when a memory is retrieved. These patterns all happen to be a part of a redundant circuitry, just in case if an engram is wiped out it can still be reformed by using alternative pathways. This is important to note, because this means our brains do not perfectly recall information, they reconstruct it. One counter (though they may coincide with each other) to this theory is the possibility that memory is stored in DNA or RNA through epigenetic changes (Bedecarrats, Chen, Pearce, Cai, Glanzman, 2018). In this study, the researchers were able to transfer memories from a trained slug to an untrained one by injecting it with RNA of the former. Usually the criticism against this study has to do with the supposed “conflation” of memory with the response showcased by the untrained Aplysia (an example being Mattei, 2018). This is an obfuscation from a distinction without a difference. In reality, this effect probably explains how instincts become ingrained within organisms over evolutionary time. The difference is simply the complexity involved and it’s quite possible both mechanisms are responsible for the propagation of memories. Refer to Abraham, Jones, and Glanzman, 2019 for further information on the topic.
Emotions
In my opinion, emotions are probably the hardest aspect for laymen to conceptualize properly. At the most basic level emotions are simply a type of interoception (Critchley, Garfinkel, 2018). Interoception is the brain’s ability to receive information on the internal state of its physiological systems which allows it to maintain homeostasis. These fluctuations in physiology can be triggered by exogenous stimuli and depending on cultural/social differences these stimuli will have varying responses from the individual (Barrett, 2017). Those specific factors are very important as some studies and experiments have showcased that different emotions can have incredibly similar physiological responses. A frequently cited example is Dutton and Aron, 1974. Not only can different emotions have nearly the same physiological effects there are also overlapping physiological effects for different emotions! However, there is enough consistency that localization is reliable (Nummenmaa, Glerean, Hari, Hietanen, 2013). To give an example that many HBDers would probably relate to. Let’s say the sight of interracial sex angers me. The external input (interracial sex) is recieved by sensory organs (my eyes) and then because of accompanying mental dispositions (like racsim) it triggers physiological responses like increased heart beat, higher blood pressure, your brain becomes flooded with catecholamines giving you a burst of energy, your muscles tense, breathing becomes more rapid, etc. This holistic process is itself what we refer to as emotion.
Now emotions are an important part of our decision making processes. You literally cannot make decisions without emotions. As emotions not only dictate the type of decisions we make, they also influence which path we choose when confronted with choice. Cold logic is far more subjective than most people would even realize. This brings forth a new question: What is the relationship between intelligence and emotional intelligence?
Before discussing this we need to first make it clear what exactly it is we’re talking about. Pumpkinperson recognizes that EQ is a very vague concept that isn’t distinguished well from others in his 2016 article. He states that: “And Goleman ruined his whole construct by not distinguishing between people who are smart at emotions (i.e. a master manipulator), and those who just have good emotions (someone who doesn’t feel the need to overeat).” The latter definition is closer to what we will be using. I believe the former is more akin to what we know of as “social intelligence”. For the sake of this post we will be defining it specifically as the ability to regulate and recognize one’s emotions, as I believe attributing any more to the concept will render it indistinguishable from Theory of Mind. Instead it would be more accurate to say that SQ and EQ are subsidiary abilities to TOM.
Since we’ve more or less established that emotions are a type of interoception it seems the best way to answer the previous question is to find exactly what the relationship between interoception and IQ is. To find this out we need to understand how one goes about quantifying this construct. Garfinkel, Seth, Barrett, Suzuki, Critchley, 2015 do just this by making the distinction between subjective and objective measurements of interoception and how both are required to make accurate assessment of one’s EQ (see table one for detailed examples). Now of course the authors cited never mention EQ once in the paper, but I believe conceptually what they are measuring is incredibly similar if not identical to EQ. For example, Garfinkel et al, 2016 found that people with higher anxiety had poorer abilities to accurately gauge their respiratory functions. This connection is further corroborated by some studies indicating that IQ and EQ overlap heavily in the neural networks that create said properties (Barbey, Colom, Grafman, 2012). Our own Racerealist provided considerable evidence that the mediating factor behind racial differences in aggression was education, not testosterone: “However, as I’ve noted last year (and as Alvarado, 2013 did as well), young black males with low education have higher levels of testosterone which is not noticed in black males of the same age group but with more education (Mazur, 2016). Since blacks of a similar age group have lower levels of testosterone but are more highly educated then this is a clue that education drives aggression/testosterone/violent behavior and not that testosterone drives it.
Mazur (2016) also replicated Assari, Caldwell, and Zimmerman’s (2014) finding that “Our model in the male sample suggests that males with higher levels of education has lower aggressive behaviors. Among males, testosterone was not associated with aggressive behaviors.”” This all seems to imply that both EQ and IQ are heavily integrated with one another. In fact, intelligence may be required to regulate one’s emotions and that this creates a feedback loop where emotional issues cause intellectual issues and vice versa. This of course has effects on the racial level that I will delve into in another blog post.
Intelligence
What exactly is intelligence? Pumpkinperson and I usually define it as the mental ability to adapt and I imagine most people would agree, but there is no actual agreed upon definition and I tend to see great variation when reading upon the subject. Truthfully, most variations are semantic rather than conceptual. Macdonald & Woodley, 2016 refer to intelligence as novel problem solving. They state: “Intelligence is usually distinguished from learning which subsumes a variety of mechanisms that allow the organism to take advantage of temporary regularities in its environment – paradigmatically classical and operant conditioning….Intelligence, on the other hand, assumes no environmental regularities – even temporary ones – nor does it refer to learning how to achieve a goal by observing others who have already solved the problem. Rather, as stated in Jerison’s definition, there is the implication that the organism has a goal and is integrating its knowledge in order to solve problems.” I see this definition the most in regards to Evolutionary Biology, and while it is not that different from Pumpkin and I’s definition, notice that we already established earlier that no aspect of cognition can be independent of one’s previous experience. So “novel problem solving” is a nonsensical term. Subsequently one cannot define mental constructs as being separate from the cultural/environmental conditions they are situated in because said mental constructs cannot develop or exist without input from these exogenous factors. Intelligence is holistically catalyzed, so terms like innate, novel, or potential cannot be accurate descriptors for this concept.
Unfortunately, intelligence is almost always coextensive with these terms. These types of issues can cause all sorts of conceptual misunderstandings in discourse on the subject. For example a common criticism thrown at intelligence testing is the idea that they are culturally biased. Now these types of critiques are appropriate when in reference to more menial aspects of cultural differences like how the Japanese read right to left instead of left to right like Americans, or how the former tends to think more collectively than the latter. However, when you divorce the idea of “culture free potential” and “intelligence” from one another it becomes clear that intelligence is not really distinguishable from the application of cultural knowledge. Obviously it doesn’t take some sort of genius to see the fallacy in trying to give a Ugandan who only speaks his native tongue and has never ventured outside of his country the Weschler in english and then call him stupid when he inevitably fails, but that is not what’s happening. The truth of the matter is that East Asians consistently score higher on Intelligence and academic achievement tests than do westerners whom the tests are supposedly biased in favor of.
Ultimately, since human environments are their culture (Fuentes, 2018) and intelligence is the cognitive expression of your imprinted culture it may controversially imply that some cultures are just superior to others. Now of course you can’t impose any idea of “superiority” without first defining a reference point. So if intelligence is simply the mental ability to adapt then what is a good hallmark of intelligence? Innovation for one, and as most HBDers are aware, 1st world countries like South Korea and Germany have the highest levels of Innovation. Historically, western societies have also had the most instances of technological innovation. Even Physical Anthropologists use technological complexity( among other things) to deduce differences in intelligence between species of hominins (of course there are some exceptions). So some cultures are superior at producing innovation and concurrently are better at fostering the development of intelligence than others.
Measuring intelligence
Originally I was planning on dedicating this section to the supposed construct validity of IQ tests which are currently the most accurate measures we have of intelligence. However, recently I came across what I believe is the single best critique(some may disagree) of IQ that I’ve read (Garrison, 2004). Garrison states in his section on validity: “In traditional psychometric theory, validity is defined as the degree to which a test measures what it claims to measure. I want to first point out the oddity of this formulation. For example, how does the reader respond to this: my ruler is valid to the degree to which it measures length? Is it normal practice to begin ruler validation by asking this seemingly circular question? Rulers by definition measure length. Note as well that by asking what a test measures the assumption that something is being measured goes unchallenged.” Notice, Garrison correctly points out the absurdity of construct validity as a sort of litmus test on whether a test supposedly measures what it purports to. Its circularity renders the use of construct validity in this way as fallacious and simultaneously charges of its supposed lack of construct validity (like Richardson, Norgate, 2015) are critically impotent.
In Garrison’s section on the “Scientific status of Psychometry” he states: “ The development of measurement has generally progressed from classification (qualities), to topology (comparisons) to metrication (measurements) (Berka, 1983). Classification concepts such as “cold” become topological when comparisons are used, such as colder than . . . . Thus they “enable us, not only to establish the sameness (or difference), but also to mutually compare at least two objects which possess a given property and, consequently, to arrange them into a sequence” (Berka, 1983, p. 6). he then goes on to claim that IQ tests only satisfy the first two criteria: “For example, norm-referenced achievement tests offer results in terms of percentile ranks, not delineations of what a student does or does not know about a given field of study, let alone diagnoses of the cause of difficulty. Put another way, scoring in the 70th percentile only indicates how well one did relative to the norm; it does not indicate 70 percent of required material was mastered. Thus the test remains at the topological level,” and because of this “The same problem exists with so-called measures of ability. Nash (1990) contends that norm-referenced ability tests only provide rank order information. “Students are ranked, in effect, by their ability to correctly answer test items, but it is inaccurate to argue that their ‘cognitive ability’ is therefore being measured” (Nash, 1990, p. 63).”. Of course this idea is false for reasons already iterated earlier in this post. Does answering test items correctly not require cognitive ability? However, Garrison believes that because “The validity discourse about test score meaning relative to testing purpose is based on value not residing in things or phenomenon themselves, but in their relation to subjects. Length, however, is a property of an object.” IQ tests are actually assessments of social value not measurements. First I need to clarify that there is a distinction between Criterion-referenced tests (CRT) and Norm-referenced tests (NRT), IQ is an example of the latter, and the former is indeed a measurement of a students knowledge in a particular field, not simply a comparison to the rankings of other students. Garrison may be correct in saying that because of this, IQ is just an assessment but scores on NRTs will highly predict those on CRTs and vice versa. So this distinction may matter little to the practical utility of IQ tests. But maybe I’m wrong, maybe its norm referencing isn’t the only reason it’s “just an assessment” and maybe the CRT’s don’t provide extra corroboration to these tests. Even If IQ is just an “assessment” instead of a “measurement” why does that matter? Moreover, even if it’s just an assessment of social value…so what? Do we not value the skills that are learned in school? Should we prioritize something else? Does he believe this subjectivity makes something less scientific? All definitions are inherently circular and thus are subjectively created. If we define this social value as intelligence is it not an ‘“assessment” of intelligence? What does this dichotomy really matter to the overall purpose of these tests?
Conclusion
In this article we’ve clarified what intelligence is, what emotions are, how both of these are catalyzed biologically. I’ve also cleared up logical misconceptions and criticisms on the subjects in the process: IQ is not something that is coextensive with innate potential and consciousness is not a biological mystery (at least in the sense of what it is). Furthermore, a lot of these ideas are not compatible with the consensus within HBD circles. If HBD wants to be taken seriously it needs to either address these issues and inconsistencies or get used to being treated like it’s astrology.
I’m going to go ahead and end this paper here. Simply because we’re already around 4,000 words and I’m sure I’ve bored half of you to death in the process. In the next part I’ll be going more into depth on the racial differences in EQ, what a culture neutral (not culture-free) IQ test may look like, our concept of personality, and the evolution of intelligence.
Pumpkin Person 
no one believes that “King Melo” isn’t you peepee.
wow love this theory that everyone’s me. melo does the research and i get the credit
Wow Pumpkin you must have a lot of time on your hand and have a stratospheric IQ level to be able to mimic this many personalities and writing styles while also arguing with them constantly.
Mugabe is a better detective than Batman.
And if that weren’t impressive enough, according to him I also find time to write RR’s blog & handpicked his photo so he would look Israeli. All part of my master plan for black lesbian world domination.
If Mugabe wasn’t such a genius sleuth you probably would have gotten away with it.
wow love this statement of fact.
…. I don’t look Israeli. But, then again, Italians and Jews do kinda have a history together.
About ten years ago I was in Manhattan at Times Square around Christmas time with my then-girlfriend (now ex) and we were walking around sight-seeing. A Jew, out of nowhere, says “Happy Hannukah.” I turned around and said “Merry Christmas, I’m Roman Catholic”. My girlfriend was dying laughing. I had the beard and long hair then, too.
maybe a guy like reed can be so against anti-racism, because he knows he’s smarter than 99% of white people.
he is a third generation marxist and catholic, proving mugabe’s contention that the smartest negroes are all catholics and/or marxists.
but by “marxist” i just mean someone who groks marx, not a leninist, stalinist, whatever.
and basically the whole ruling class is straight up marxist.
marx and engels described the way the world works…they didn’t merely claim to…they actually did.
marxism’s absurdities are merely vestiges of bourgeois prejudice…which both marx and engels had in spades because their own class background…specifically, they may have insisted that marxism was “scientific”.
so whenever someone uses “marxist” as an epithet/term of abuse, you know he thinks professional wrestling is real and thus can be ignored…
or he’s just lying…
jeff bezos is a STRAIGHT UP MARXIST.
just like all high IQ people.
I wanted this to be longer but I said fuck it and made it two parts. Since corona I’ve had a lot of extra free time so I think I’m going to start making more guest posts of pumpkin is cool with it.
I’m honestly not sure if I’m going to finish the paper on Rapper’s IQs simply cuz I’m not comfortable with the level of subjectivity that is required. Like how am I supposed to know their brain size and religious views? There’s so much lacking that it would not be objective in the slightest.
Also I’m going to make a follow up on the sexual selection post next before I’m the part 2 to this.
When I respond, I will address each section shortly one time in the comment. Then after that all comments will be philosophy of mind. The discussion I’m interested in is the physicalism/dualism discussion—sound good?
That’s fine with me buddy.
When I respond, I will address each section shortly one time in the comment. Then after that all comments will be philosophy of mind. The discussion I’m interested in is the physicalism/dualism discussion—sound good?
“Since corona I’ve had a lot of extra free time so I think I’m going to start making more guest posts of pumpkin is cool with it.”
Please no. Someone stop him.
Lmao.
melo and rr prove that dogs are better and more valuable than some people.
when i’m at the store and i see a dog alone in a car…i say…
HELLO MR DOG!
but i’d never do that if his person was there, because they’d think i was a nazi.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savitri_Devi
Damn man this is really good. I need to digest this so I will come back to this tomorrow night. Really good stuff.
You know Chalmers is a naturalistic duelist (I think that’s what it’s called?) right?
Have you seen Garrison’s book A Measure of Failure? He argues that psychometry isn’t a science. Reading Garrison, Berka (though it’s really really technical) and Nash will give you an idea of the critique
I loved this article. I will give an in depth response tomorrow.
Thank you! And yes I recall reading about Chalmer’s views. He isn’t a substance dualist though I don’t recall whether he believes the mind is emergent or not.
The article by garrison that I cited in this thesis referenced Berka and Nash quite frequently. I’ll definitely check out that book though. Do you remember that one book by the woman you cited me recently?? I can’t find it
I don’t recall Chalmers’ actual views I just know it’s called something like naturalistic dualism.
Download Garrison’s book on libgen and read chapter 4. Are you talking about Straightening the Bell Curve by Constance Hilliard? Or the by the psychologist who wants to ban words like “nerd”?
It might be the first one I’m not sure. You cited very recently. I’ll look around more
Science in Black and White by Oubre?
I’m think so!
That’s most likely it—anything specific about it? I’d liken it to reading my full blog from beginning to now. Similar citations, similar arguments. (Some, anyway.)
I was trying to remember it because I needed to check it out
Would love to discuss what you like and don’t like about it when you read it. I think it’s pretty damn balanced.
why is rr not even pretending to be a gentile?
Just because lots of white male philolspher had/has fear of dark after leife…
Without these retards, this fake dychotomy “physicalism vs metaphysicalism” would not be worth to debate.
My attention deficit (high instinctiveness) is affecting my capacity to read…
How much did he pay you to write this article for him?
When you’re at my level you don’t have to pay. Just the prestige of being published on a blog as important as this one is payment enough
I thought he was talking to you.
Loaded hasn’t been around long enough to remember the days I used to make comments like RR. I stopped quoting paragraphs and sourcing multiple studies because I realized half of these idiots don’t even read my citations and just continue to repeat their bullshit.
You and RR take most of my comments seriously because you’re already aware of the research and insight I can produce when I actually give a damn.
Dude I can’t believe I’ve been commenting here for almost 5 years now.
MeLo youre certainly right when you say most don’t have the attention span to follow what other people are talking about.
Thats why its best to keep it simple but also apply descriptiveness to ones writings to keep up the attentiveness of the readers.
Dense info can make this difficult but attempting to simplify the difficult nature of these topics is highly commendable and worthy of immense praise!
Nah I get what you’re saying but I already dumbed this post down quite a bit to keep it around 4,000 words
this is my considered opinion of this post:
TURN UP THE VOLUME!!!
Damn man the JIDF only employs the lowest IQ jews.
Puppy this is thrash. How can you let someone shit on your blog like this. First anime, now melo. What next? Are you going to bring back afro???
Philo explain how it’s trash.
I’m waiting.
White “thinkers” defining basic concepts… ugh
If intelligence is the capacity to adapt then all nonhuman living beings are smart, right??
Humans supposedly, theorically, ideally, have the capacity to REadapt. That’s the correct way to define human intelligence by this perspective or facet.
Majority of White retarded “thinkers” because bullshit like mythology tend to impose an anthropocentric view of inteligence. So humblee..
Defining nonhuman species as irrational is like defining humans are “flying deficients”. You only can be irrational if you have a potential to be rational.
All life forms must need know something (knowledge) about reality they are to survive. Knowledge or truth (what an animate subject perceive from reality or factually) is “only” a mean for nonhumans while adaptation is their ultimate goal. Humans is the only specie knowledge or truth is also their ultimate goal. Just humans can know about stuff that have no immediate pragmatic utility for them, otherwise if , at priori, it can be quite depressing or discouraging , like know about the finity of life. Humans are only ones aparently who knows they will die while they are fighting against death.
Pumpkin do you believe there is a sweet spot for intelligence/IQ? If so, what is it (and dont just say youre own lol)?
Also what other traits are equally as important to IQ for success and what impact do they have on an individual?
Seems like there’s a lot of really intelligent people on this blog but their intelligence can be a limiting factor sometimes.
Thanks in advance Pumpkin!
some have speculated that the optimum IQ for success is 125 to 150 but i’ve seen no empirical support for this claim. as far as i can tell, there’s no such thing as “too much IQ” although it’s a bit curious that chris langan (who has one of the highest IQs in the world) has had so much difficulty in life.
Translating
“I dont searched correctly ”
It’s not about “too much IQ” . It’s about how IQ really works to increase creativity.
Because there are many “very high IQ people” who are not highly creative, the sounding logical conclusion is
Very high IQ doesn’t make you a potential creative genius, It’s not causal.
Melo I’m drinking tonight so I won’t be able to respond but I must say I particularly like this passage:
“Let’s say the sight of interracial sex angers me. The external input (interracial sex) is recieved by sensory organs (my eyes) and then because of accompanying mental dispositions (like racsim) it triggers physiological responses like increased heart beat, higher blood pressure, your brain becomes flooded with catecholamines giving you a burst of energy, your muscles tense, breathing becomes more rapid, etc. This holistic proces”
You need to write more. The last time you wrote was on my blog like 3 years ago.
I’m currently penning something on the physiology of racism and its effects on blood pressure and telomeres—really interesting stuff!
True stupidity is not know that you don’t know. It’s knowledge too. It’s don’t know that you don’t know.
That’s why education system is so…
You’re drinking tonight? At a bar?
Heck no. I’m a home-drinker now. I won’t be going out until AT THE VERY LEAST January, 2021 and even then I doubt it. I haven’t really lifted weights in almost 4 months. All I do is work and go home—this virus is serious, even though many people (and states) are acting as if the threat has subsided
the only reason to drink at a bar is if you’re in an airport. bars are a bigger rip off than starbuck’s.
unless you want to taste some very expensive drink and don’t want to spend the cost of a bottle.
if you have to go out to eat with someone…don’t drink…no regrets.
People drinking alone is considered really sad here. Its definitely the first signs of becoming an alco. I’m not saying I’m against it personally, but most of the times I drink socially.
Be careful RR that’s a slippery slope to Alcoholism
“You need to write more”
I know, but I’m kind of harsh on myself. I didn’t think y’all would even like this post. I can post this on your blog too if you’d like. Also, did you hear that r/HBD finally got banned?
fuck it I did it anyway. It’s scheduled for 2maro if that’s cool.
melo is afraid to turn off his nintendo.
he’s afraid he’ll die.
I haven’t played on any nintendo consoles in a long time. My PS4 is all I need.
Though i might get the switch just to play Breath of the wild.
what happened to south africa’s statues after 1994?
this appears to have been taken to a much less conspicuous location.
ideally SOME streets and airports would be renamed and SOME statues would be replaced, but the apartheid figures would still be remembered. just like in former soviet states there should be statues of marx and lenin and STALIN and nicholas and peter the great and in germany statues of hitler and goebbels. and the american south should have MORE statues of confederate heroes.
any attempt to ERASE history is evil.
remembering is not the same as celebrating…
just like admiring is not the same as liking.
both arnold and khan were described as…
you either hate arnold or you admire him. you don’t LIKE arnold.
or so said the director of Pumping Iron, on my top 10 list.
interesting that a paki was the leader of the “eugenics wars”.
but TOTALLY NOT interesting for the cognescenti…
Knocking down statues is not equivalent to erasing history.
WTF why is this banned? So you can’t oppose knocking down the statues now???
within the next month rr will post articles defending ron jeremy and ghislaine maxwell.
I just slept 36 hours straight. Wow. And I didn’t even take medication.
My dreams are pretty weird. In one of them my parents organised a bank robbery and in the other aliens invaded the world.
The same 5-10 people I knew in middle school always appear in my dreams. I haven’t seen or talked to them in 20 years +. In between dreams sometimes I get these quasi psychotic episodes where Im half awake and can feel somebody lying near me on the bed and whispering into my ear. Many times its my sister. Sometimes she touches my ear. Once she was on top of me and looked like the girl from the Ring. My sister is in Australia before you make dumbass jokes.
As I already mentioned a few weeks ago, I recently dreamed that wealth inequality increased to the point that all billionaires became trillionaires and each bough their own planet to escape coronavirus & riots. In honor of her first movie, Oprah’s orbited a purple star and thus had gorgeous purple sunsets.
I also recently had a nightmare where I went to a store and a pseudo-retarded friend of mine was working there, and he deliberately began following me around coughing on me trying to give me the coronavirus.
Are Irish Travellers known for incestual behavior? I’d garner a guess that its a yes but I want a first-hand account.
I snorted half a gram and chased it with a four loko yesterday. I figured I’d have nightmares or not be able to sleep, but I slept soundly.
I was barely conscious but I played some really good poker and beer pong too
Heidegger disease…
Make the literate fool believe he is wiser
Poor “soul” i mean consciousnessnessness
your fixation with the mystic of messkirch is sad.
it’s not as if there’s any other contender for greatest thinker post marx.
Heidegger was one of the greatest charlatan even Marx AND Engels were not fakers as your devoted perv nazi. You even can’t understand the heideggerian pseudo profoundness… always in your life you pretend to understand real philosophy. Just like majority of white dudes who pretend to be deep thinkers. Heidegger was a word-magician and you are a kid who believes in his magics.
Pumpkin, since most bilinguals know the definitions of words in the similarities subtext, it can be assumed that the underestimation of the similarities subtest is due to other verbal factors and not vocabulary knowledge right?
One thing I’ve noticed about global warming is that overnight lows are warmer than they used to be, especially during summer. It’s not so much that days are hotter.
For example, in NYC the average july low is 69, but the coolest temp in the 15 day forecast is 72. Afternoon temps are typical though.
What do you do for a living austin?
I have one more year of uni left and I’m going into tax accounting after I graduate.
What subject are you studying in college? Are you going into the Big 4?
Business admin and accounting. Yeah, big 4.
I have a year of uni left too. Majoring in finance dunno what im going to do with it much more esteemed at science than business.
Where in the country do you go to school mane?
In-lovee
Jeesz
The right link
But i’m watching this mexican soap opera. If you think latin America is not white supremacist…
You are such a fool Santo. You have serious mental illnesses that the doctors cant properly diagnose.
Youre the most neurotic person ive come across online or otherwise. And yes everyone knows Latin and South America are white supremacist…its highly cemented in their minds from the days of Conquistadors and before even.
loldy
huauahuahuahuahuahuahua
Pumpkin, is information plus vocabulary and similarities a better measurement of verbal than just similarities and vocabulary?
Its funny the way RR and melo both tend to write the same convulted and long winded way. You could easily summarise the above into 2 paragraphs and not lose any of the points being made, which a stupid and boring anyway.
The point of the article is to explain. Not to simply just state random assertions with no evidence or actual reason like you do.
Why are RR and melo obsessed with definitions of things. Is that really such a problem out there in the scientific community? That the scientists are so dumb that don’t even know what to call what they’re investigating? How many non aspergers people have these definitional issues? 2? 3? The fact melo wrote 4000 words on this inane topic leads me to believe he must be a total loser in real life. Nobody would dedicate that much time to write crap like that if they had a life.
The reason you have to specify what you mean by terms is to have conceptual clarity on a topic. It’s an extremely important part of theory creation and discussion in science.
The only reason I even have time is because of the corona virus. That’s why I’ve only published two articles the entire 5 years I’ve been here.
”Why are RR and melo obsessed with definitions of things.”
gosh…
i think i was there at game 6 of the nba western conference championship…
even though my dad was from the south and a harvard grad he had this fixation with the blazers…it was sick…
but that was a great game.
my dad thought the lakers were the LIETRAL devil.
Its time Puppy finally bowed to popular pressure and allowed me to guest contribute.
peepee likes posting trash. it makes her feel better about herself. she won’t even let me post on why [redacted by pp, july 6, 2020].
LOL
The biggest error made by classical dualists is the claim that consciousness is a property of the mind distinct from the body. You either posit that consciousness is removed (akin to how Jewish mystics have delt with God) or you argue from the point of view of physical monism as does melo
I think that both positions are utimately reliant on a grand axiom, in the first scenario it will be the removed consciousness itself while in the second one it will be the unity of all physical laws under one axiom to the exclusion of qualia being given a high rank. The big difference between the 2 positions is that the first entails that physical ontology isn’t the ultimate one while the second denies any other than the physical (physical in this case needn’t mean only material, it could be something like reality ultimately being just spacetime alone or a hierarchy of axiom -> laws -> spacetime -> matter energy and what is directly experienced; to give just 2 examples). Now technically the first position can accept any of the hierarchies of physical ontology as long as there is a removed consciousness beyond it. I think both are interesting positions.
Pumpkin, what does it mean if the tests I performed poorly on on the WAIS-R are the ones removed from the WAIS-IV, and the new subtests the ones I did much better on?
Were Object Assembly and Picture Arrangement low-quality tests?
I suspect picture arrangement was removed because it was too unique. I actually think that was the test’s strength however the people in charge probably wanted tests that would fit neatly into the categories that emerged from factor analysis (verbal comprehension, working memory, perceptual organization, processing speed etc) and picture arrangement perhaps didn’t load strongly on any of those dimensions.
It also may have been a bit unreliable because you might fail one item because of poor attention to detail while another item was failed because a lack of social awareness. Such inconsistency within a subtest is undesirable; it should all measure the same thing.
Finally, the test was cumbersome to administer.
Object Assembly was probably removed because of unreliability (you might get lucky in fitting pieces together) and because it’s cumbersome and because it’s a little too dependent on motor coordination and speed which can be undesirable since they wanted to extend the WAIS to very old age groups (90+).
pp i am serious about my mars dream, just in case if you were wondering if that was a mockery
i had that dream back in the summer of 2017
I feel sorry for autistic people. Many of the emotions that normies feel just aren’t there – jealousy, hate, tribalism, imagination, euphoria, lust etc etc.
imagination is not an emotion you moron
Philosopher is so out of touch with reality
You are evil
Your entire existence is based on the naturalistic fallacy.
Tribalism is evil.
STFU!
If only Pumpkin would let me post interracial porn here.
Then maybe Mugabe and a Philo would have heart attacks and stop harassing people more intelligent than them.
filipino man + white woman porn videos?
do you have to go on the dark web for those?
or do they even exist?
bottom line is…
asian men are “feminized” because they are usually shorter and slighter than white men and black american men. (some black africans are pretty slight too.) but then so are asian women. so when asian men hook up with asian women there’s no problem.
the average icelnadic woman’s grip strength is greater than the average south asian man’s…
it’s just the nature of men and women that icelandic woman + south asian man is not a good marriage.
Interracial porn in general makes you angry LOL.
Kanye West sounds extremely religious. He must have been introduced to that in his mental health counselling. Funnily enough many of the psychiatrists I have met told me to pray to god for healing.
Which I did. But not to their god.
What kind of god do you believe in? Just curious.
Philosopher is Jewish.
I’m pantheist.
I was praying to God last night.
In my dream, I convinced a girl not to commit suicide.
I looked her in the eyes and told her I was sorry for everything I did wrong.
I share an identity with God so I was looking in my own eyes.
It’s like how Jesus and the Father are one, it is trinitarian.
I and god are one, she is a girl yet she does not realize she is me yet.
One day she will realize she exists but now she stares at me in my dreams.
She is becoming more awake every time I meet her.
Gym
fascinating!
it has only been twice that i have modified my free speech absolutist stance.
1. i had the epiphany that porn and stepping on small animals (https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/supreme_court_strikes_down_law_banning_animal_crush_videos_cites_first_amen/) is NOT political speech and the federal government may shut down FOX’s Who Farted? without touching the most holy and blessed first amendment peace be upon it. totally NOT ironic!
2. i can’t remember…was it pill’s point that where one group has a SUPER LOUD magaphone and drowns out everyone else this is a problem…no! that wasn’t it…but the point is that THEORETICALLY some speech may be sort of TURNED DOWN without even coming close to MUTING it. and this is DEMOCRATIC…what the framers of the glorious purple first amendment peace be upon it INTENDED…
TO HEAR EVERYONE…
INCLUDING NAZIS AND BLM AND OPRAH.
I WANT TO THINK THAT ADOLPH REED ISN’T SOME KIND OF FREEK.
I PRAY TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE US.
IT’S THE ONLY THING MY COUNTRY IS THE BEST AT.
That’s a good one
You guys are clearly overtly over intellectualizing. Ridiculously over intellectualizing.
This is a world with no consequences brought to you by porn. This is the basis of our society.
My experiences are the only ones that matter.
Grossly over-intellectualizing is a better term.
Reality instead of society.
Not to overly intellectualize myself but its ironic that evolutionary forces created a tendency to value the opinion of the opposite gender so much that we decided to base our entire concept of confidence on it.
Thats why most pathologies exist including homosexuality.
Fresh perspective. Right?
So youre saying gays are men who aren’t confident enough with women?
Loaded is one of the dumbest if not the dumbest commenter here for so long.
I’m not saying this just because his comment now but because It’s just the truth. A good moment to say this but his case of lack os self knowledge and minimally correct understanding of reality is so severe seems It’s recommended call him stupid any time.
Even down syndrome can’t be correctly defined as pathology with proper symptoms and progressively intrinsic lethality why such more trivial thing like sexual diversity would be??
It’s good to know he and pill never will procreate. The problem is always the massive crowd of functionally retarded hetero who will do.
Humanity is despicable.
I doubt he can score higher than 110 on IQ tests if IQ is more precise than i thought.
The same way pill feels with his instincts that autists are totally unemotional he is feeling that the reason people are gay is lack os confident with opposite sex. So maybe 80% of white nationalist retard are gays??
No
When i was younger i tried to hide for myself what i’m (one of my existential identities) and don’t feel confident with women but because my nerdiness. If pill and loldead live in real world , they would figure out that homossexual males tend to be more opposite sex friends. Lack of confidence to deal with women??
Santo youre a brazilian homosexual. Why is it that brazilians are so fascinated with gay sex?
And im far more intelligent than you could ever aspire to be. You can barely speak a language youve been practicing for years correctly and try to scrutinize my intelligence? Damn you must have a lot more inferiority issues than I thought.
And I certainly hope you never procreate. As a homosexual you dont deserve kids. You deserve to be in a cage.
Loldead, as ignorant as himself, believes he knows more about brazil than me. He read something on murrican renonsence site, pick up pieces of information, not necessarily true or precise, and generalize it…
If brazilian heterossexual men were more on avg “fascinated” about homo sex it would not be exactly a problem. But It’s not true, lold.
Poor kid,
In rational manner, you are basically at animal level. Instinctive thus primitive. Your reasoning is confuse, simplistic, often innacurate and childish. For sure, i never will be capable to “reach” your level.
Lold can’t understand the diversity of human inteligence. He think all smarter people must be capable to learn the same thing at the same levels. Lots of great minds who are were not capable to be polyglot even to learn a second language. Even i’m not a great mind. I don’t need speak about my parent’s success or supposed high inteligence (proved otherwise) to feel me with avg Self esteem as you. Stupidly you revealed extreme insecurity when you spoke about your parent credentials rather than yourself (you have none).
We must explain basic things to loldy and even that he will always follow his primitive nature.
”And I certainly hope you never procreate. As a homosexual you dont deserve kids.”
I hope you be sterilized soon. You are tremendously dumb. Poor creature if you were his daddy.
So “sad” that i will not procreate… so “darwinianly advantageous” if i have 2 or 3 kids completely free to choice with who they want to associate and even if they would procreate. What’s matter is not if i will put in this despicable human world a failled-to-be-complete version of me but the correct variety of phenotypes who truly can interact harmonically with first nature and with themselves. For sure, you are not among this ideal humans, lold. Most parents are selfish. They just want to have a near version them.
As a rational human being i deserves Whatever i want. But you…
”You deserve to be in a cage.”
Hihihihihi
Retarded as you are, have no rationally correct reason for why i must be jailled.
I’m being 100% sincere here. You are a stupid clown everyone laugh here in this blog and in every place you are.
Hahahah why are you so obsessed with me mentioning my parents one (no more than a few) times on this blog.
And what is your fascination with rationality and instinctiveness? I am in no way primitive except in the necessary capacities, usually involving the intention of getting what you want!
You aint clean Santo you aint clean.
Rationality is what you and at least half of humanity no have. Be always truly rational is a matter of survive and also to clarify the path of truth.
Your obsession and simplistically wrong reasoning about human sexual diversity is one of the numerous evidences about your lack of human reasonableness.
Instead try to understand about this topic objectively you just overimpose your instincts on it and use words to hide or mask them. That’s why you are not fully human. If homossexuality was remotely pathological in the causal sense no doubt i would be the first to be cured because i hate be sick. But just not. You unlikely will change your instinctive views about this topic because objective truth is not your real commitment.
Homosexuality definitely has a genetic component. If it didn’t gays and dykes wouldn’t look so distinctive.
The genes that influence it continue to exist because being gay wasn’t OK until recently. Homos still had kids.
Why there is heterochromia?? Because eye color genes varies. Why there is same sex attraction?? Exactly by the same thing. The very Idea that any phenotype must be in direct selective pressure is plainly simplistic. Any phenotype must exist firstly then to be in potential combination. Just in extremely purified selective pressure cases traits are directly derived from selection than also or from combination.
Santo just cuz something is genetically prevalent doesnt mean its normal. Look at schizophrenia…same situation.
Youre just justifying abnormalities by rationalizing them away. Also…ive scored as high as 140 on the Wonderlic. My IQ aside from matrices and spatials is certainly higher than 110 I can guarantee that.
Lold, schizophrenia is prevalent??
Even to forge a reasonable sentence you aren’t capable for.
Abnormality means something is not common, at priori. Normal and common are synonimous.
You are another failled high IQ who are barely rational (ponderated, fact -checker, empathetic).
As all IQtards You uses your IQ scores as evidence about your intelligence but any time you try to develop a reasoning here You show how intelectually limited you are. IQ tests are first of all TESTS.
Santo I agree. I think homosexuality, if it’s substantially genetic, arose randomly but hasn’t been selected against.
Austin,
Remember genetic combination and that phenotype is the expressed or individually dominant genetic archicteture while genotype is all genes or Whatever bio we have. But i also think there is more self declared hetero guys who may have some minor degree of same sex attraction but It’s so little and thus controlable It’s very difficult to perceive. I also believe sexual diversity is intersectioned by psychological. Hetero men for example who are more vain many of so called metrossexual ones may carry some genetic potential and in combination with their female procreator can result in homossexuality. I’m the result of birth order effect. It’s seems explain 7% of homossexual people. Women who had many miscarriages also is more likely to have a homossexual son.
Kind of yeah. Or they seek out female approval too much due to lack of confidence in general. This is why they act like women or build a lifestyle that emulates their feminine attributes.
example of non-crazy conspiracy theorists like mugabe:
these two old guys agree with mugabe, oswald was NOT a patsy. but one thinks he acted alone and the other thinks the prime mover was marcello. but both believe the single bullet theory which mugabe is skeptical of.
Oswald was a patsy. Its so obvious. Read the Devils Chessboard and educate yourself on what happened.
I don’t know another person here who used their parents academic credentials as something to be personally proud off…
You are waste of time in any debate. Why you still try?? Your megalomania is bizarre.
I know. This blog is addicting. But you are its kid.
Santo you have a serious mental condition I cant solve…none of your megalomaniacal beliefs in God will solve it either.
YOU are the failure here Santo. Try not to be angry.
Childish and histerical comments as always .
What’s your age?? 13?? Well, this is your mental age though.
If i was a cattle as you i would believe in success and faillure spectrum. Be exploited by scumbag psycho or exploit inocent people ? None for me. I have a evolved moral conscience, very different from you. For real losers included all winners, mundane world is the only world exist. For evolved consciousness, success to be a useless parasiite and or failure being a host doesn’t matter. What’s matter most is the life itself because everything is ephemeral. All losers and winners will die someday. It’s philosophical path accept all these which are the most important truths, the existential ones. This is a real religion without pernicious and literal artistic domination over cultural narrative (fantasy /metaphorical narrative dominating factual one).
“My meg bellief in god”
????
That’s you are such weak thinker.
Youre very irrational at this point Santo. Go to sleep you clearly need it.
You overrationalize things incessantly.
Also you have no morals.
You are an admittedly weak human being. Cope with it.
Despising half of this garbage you wrote, analysis is not rationalization.
You are clearly misplaced in this blog.
Your thoughts arent even coherent enough to share with others. Its like youre putting two entirely different concepts together and trying to make sense of it something thats impossible since it has no logical basis behind it.
Nothing you say makes sense hahahah!
So delusional…
Has anyone here read “The Bicameral Mind” by Jaymes? Fascinating discussion and theorizing of how we arrived at consciousness.
MeLo and RR take a look if you havent already.
Melo is trying his best but the jews control melo’s mind and tell him what to do. He feels scared and confused.
Hey if jews want to eradicate whites I’m down with that.
Seems like it’ll benefit the rest of mankind.
I have, it’s garbage.
My bad its Jaynes. Julian Jaynes. Excellent author and brilliant scholar in creating such a unique theory though lots of potential criticisms for lack of concrete evidence in his work.
Still worth a look.
I think Trump will smash Biden in the debates and close the gap in polling somewhat but the virus will get worse.
Biden seems more competent and conscientious than Trump and will destroy Trump despite having executive functioning ability up to par with what the people expect.
Agreed virus will get worse and also more racial tension.
Trump admin is going to have to brace for the worst scenario possible.
RR may be the most intelligent person in the history of the world.
RR doesn’t look musculous with this thin face, period.
RR and Chris Langan should have an arm wrestling match. Id pay to watch that.