Any geniuses around?

[Kamille]

 

One more thing. The reasons that your comment on "lower mammals" etc caused a problem was because it's something which taken out of it's context can be taken the wrong way. They think you were talking about them. I know you weren't. They took it personally.

 

People tend to take anything related to inteligence very personally.

 

My opposition to the view that some humans are equivalent to "lower mammals" or that some humans are "lesser humans" has nothing to do with personal insecurities. I do just fine in my life, thank you.

 

The concepts are disturbing because they go against the contemporary ethos of human rights, an ethos which political thinkers have spent a lot of time developping since the end of World War 2 and the subsequent anti-colonial movements.

 

The shared some social beliefs that some humans are "lesser than others" has usually lead to some pretty atrocious treatments of those 'lesser" people, from slavery to expropriation to genocide.

 

So untile PCF manages to resolve the tensions between his world ideals and the political implications of humanity, many of us are likely to object to his perception of humanity. It has little to do with taking it personally, everything to do with how we choose to live together.

[Kamille]

"Self Proclaimed" eh.

 

Pretty much everything on the internet is self proclaimed. What kind of proof would make someone not self proclaimed as being anything or anyone? Just for the sake of argument?

 

Yes, the internet functions just like the Census. And yet, we take the census seriously.

[Happy Finally]

My opposition to the view that some humans are equivalent to "lower mammals" or that some humans are "lesser humans" has nothing to do with personal insecurities. I do just fine in my life, thank you.

 

The concepts are disturbing because they go against the contemporary ethos of human rights, an ethos which political thinkers have spent a lot of time developping since the end of World War 2 and the subsequent anti-colonial movements.

 

The shared some social beliefs that some humans are "lesser than others" has usually lead to some pretty atrocious treatments of those 'lesser" people, from slavery to expropriation to genocide.

 

So untile PCF manages to resolve the tensions between his world ideals and the political implications of humanity, many of us are likely to object to his perception of humanity. It has little to do with taking it personally, everything to do with how we choose to live together.

 

Yes Kamille I agree with you. But you fail to realize that you are not a genius like those who consider us lesser mammals. So your very well thought out response is just an ignorant rambling of "a lesser mammal"!!! <said with tongue in cheek>

[threebyfate]

Yes Kamille I agree with you. But you fail to realize that you are not a genius like those who consider us lesser mammals. So your very well thought out response is just an ignorant rambling of "a lesser mammal"!!! <said with tongue in cheek>

Lest she be so modest not to mention, she's got her PhD, has a tenured job and is the type of woman that CPF can only dream about.

[Mrlonelyone]

Kamille

 

While it is true that there are no people who are born "lower" humans. The people the OP was talking about made themselves lower humans by building and then using the atomic bomb.... That includes all of the high IQ people who worked on the evil device.

 

They worked on it because they thought that an even lower human...Hitler... would get it first... Once he killed himself in his bunker that should have been the end of it.

 

Those people prove themselves to be lower humans when they used that Atom bomb on Japan.

 

That's what the OP was talking about.

 

Don't take those words out of their context.

 

(Not to mention all the murderer's and rapist and child molesters... I think we can safely call them lower humans).

 

As for the lower mamals thing. He was talking about how some people ... the Clevon's of the world (reference to the video's I linked)... tend to not think, and just react based on instincts... is that not the behavior of a lower mammal? By definition people while we have instincts can control them.

 

Look around the world and tell me that everyone has mastered their baser and most destructive instincts? if they had we would not have greed, corruption, avarice, adultery, abortion, rape, or murder.

 

That is what the OP is talking about. Many people like him tend to see the world as it could be and demand that it should be that way.... that is their downfall.

[jane100]

I agree lets get together. Smart hot sexy people doing a documentary. Hot sexy bodies interlocked, discussing relativity while their minds are blown.

 

And since it's a documentary, it's not really porn!!!!:lmao:

 

V. funny.

 

"I'm laughing.

 

My mate was laughing."

 

If you're English you;ll get the joke! C4 are you listening?

[Mrlonelyone]

Yes Kamille I agree with you. But you fail to realize that you are not a genius like those who consider us lesser mammals. So your very well thought out response is just an ignorant rambling of "a lesser mammal"!!! <said with tongue in cheek>

 

Don't you put those words in my mouth. I never said that you or any one posting here was a "lower human". Your own insecurity made you think that.

 

If anything YOU meet the definition of a troll much better than the OP.

[Sabali]

I thought this was a sexy dating site. Why is it turning into a nerd fest? Can us lower mammals get a break here?

[Happy Finally]

Don't you put those words in my mouth. I never said that you or any one posting here was a "lower human". Your own insecurity made you think that.

 

If anything YOU meet the definition of a troll much better than the OP.

 

Right. That's what it is you must of used your far superior level of intelligence to figure that one out.

 

For one, I never said you. You never mentioned lesser humans, the OP has mentioned that several times. Second you mention my insecurities but yet you believe I am talking about you. Not once did you mentioned in this particular thread anything about lesser humans (maybe in disagreement to that comment on the OP). So is it I that is displaying the characteristic of insecurity? No, I think not. But rather you transfer your own insecurity upon me by making that statement...especially since you are not mentioned.

[Titania22]

My opposition to the view that some humans are equivalent to "lower mammals" or that some humans are "lesser humans" has nothing to do with personal insecurities. I do just fine in my life, thank you.

 

The concepts are disturbing because they go against the contemporary ethos of human rights, an ethos which political thinkers have spent a lot of time developping since the end of World War 2 and the subsequent anti-colonial movements.

 

The shared some social beliefs that some humans are "lesser than others" has usually lead to some pretty atrocious treatments of those 'lesser" people, from slavery to expropriation to genocide.

 

So untile PCF manages to resolve the tensions between his world ideals and the political implications of humanity, many of us are likely to object to his perception of humanity. It has little to do with taking it personally, everything to do with how we choose to live together.

 

 

Hi Kamille,

 

I agree with the, in that the idea that some humans are lesser than others has been an excuse to perform untold cruelty.

 

Although I am sure your comments weren't directed at my post, I wanted to clarify that when I mentioned lesser beings, I did so because I was speaking to the OP in the way he spoke.

 

The OP, didn't just speak of having intelliegence, he spoke of having a high standard of ethics. From that perspective, isn't it even a possibility that a person who would commit acts of cruelty for their own amusement, be defined as a lesser human. From this definition it would be impossible to round up all cruel people and kill them, because in the process you would become a cruel person, and therefore need to be rounded up and killed.

 

But it is very possible to say I will not consort with cruel people, because they are below me. It is up to the OP's personal ethic to decide whether someone he meets is living by his standard or not.

 

I would caution the OP however, to consider that we all see the world differently, and even if he found someone with a strong personal ethic they lived by, it doesn't necessarily mean that persons ethic will completely match his own. So please think about how much of your dilemma is caused by your (vast) intelligence, and how much is caused by you need to find someone who lives by an ethical code, and also how much these things have to be the same as yours in order for you to accept them as worthy.

[Happy Finally]

I thought this was a sexy dating site. Why is it turning into a nerd fest? Can us lower mammals get a break here?

 

NO!!!

 

Here is tin foil hat. Put it on. You will be just fine <raises hand and uses Jedi mind trick>

[Kamille]

Kamille

 

While it is true that there are no people who are born "lower" humans. The people the OP was talking about made themselves lower humans by building and then using the atomic bomb.... That includes all of the high IQ people who worked on the evil device.

 

They worked on it because they thought that an even lower human...Hitler... would get it first... Once he killed himself in his bunker that should have been the end of it.

 

Those people prove themselves to be lower humans when they used that Atom bomb on Japan.

 

That's what the OP was talking about.

 

Don't take those words out of their context.

 

(Not to mention all the murderer's and rapist and child molesters... I think we can safely call them lower humans).

 

As for the lower mamals thing. He was talking about how some people ... the Clevon's of the world (reference to the video's I linked)... tend to not think, and just react based on instincts... is that not the behavior of a lower mammal? By definition people while we have instincts can control them.

 

Look around the world and tell me that everyone has mastered their baser and most destructive instincts? if they had we would not have greed, corruption, avarice, adultery, abortion, rape, or murder.

 

That is what the OP is talking about. Many people like him tend to see the world as it could be and demand that it should be that way.... that is their downfall.

 

Could you point in the direction of a post where he explains this, or otherwise towards a common reference (preferably a book) you two would share, where the link between his concept of "lesser humans" and "lower mammals" is better explained?

 

I read through most of the thread, but obviously haven't scrutinized every posts.

 

Also, why is he then making a link between 'lesser humans' and women, if, in reality, what he means by lesser humans is a class of people who stupidly and without holding prejudicial social beliefs just randomly do evil in the world?

 

My question remains: do you rape if you respect women? Do you molest if cherish children? Do you murder if your respect human life? Do you steal if you respect property?

 

The tension between the belief that some humans are worthier than others and its political implications has yet to be disprooved.

 

As to my creds, thanks TBF . I would say, however, that they indicate little about my IQ, and have more to do with my ability to interact and converse with a lot of people, from the socially marginalized, to students, to the leading experts in my field.

[Happy Finally]

Right. That's what it is you must of used your far superior level of intelligence to figure that one out.

 

For one, I never said you. You never mentioned lesser humans, the OP has mentioned that several times. Second you mention my insecurities but yet you believe I am talking about you. Not once did you mentioned in this particular thread anything about lesser humans (maybe in disagreement to that comment on the OP). So is it I that is displaying the characteristic of insecurity? No, I think not. But rather you transfer your own insecurity upon me by making that statement...especially since you are not mentioned.

 

Ok, that's enough Miller Lites...or rather I should proof read before I hit Submit.

[Mrlonelyone]

No offence to Kamile. But people are placing far too much store about a PhD. There are plenty of PhD's in humanities or soft sciences who work at Barnes and Nobel.

 

While for all we know the OP could work for NASA with his BS in engineering degree. Or god knows what else.

 

Take a hint on which is more important from president Adams.

 

I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.

John Adams

US diplomat & politician (1735 - 1826)

[Sabali]

NO!!!

 

Here is tin foil hat. Put it on. You will be just fine <raises hand and uses Jedi mind trick>

 

 

Uh, oh...now Star Wars is being worked into this? Sorry I disturbed you all.

[Mrlonelyone]

Kamile

 

To the right people what the OP meant with his comments was crystal clear. We were able to see what he really meant.

 

While you, and you are by no means dumb, simply were not and choose to interpret what he said with your emotions instead of your intellect.

 

He never made a connection between "lesser huamans" and women... Other than saying his heterosexual and is looking to date a woman he hasn't even really mentioned women at all.

[Happy Finally]

No offence to Kamile. But people are placing far too much store about a PhD. There are plenty of PhD's in humanities or soft sciences who work at Barnes and Nobel.

 

While for all we know the OP could work for NASA with his BS in engineering degree. Or god knows what else.

 

Take a hint on which is more important from president Adams.

 

What is found to be important is relative. It depends on the person and their interests. Adams was a great thinker but to say his words are more important than Joe Schmoe goes against Adam's own principles and beliefs. He felt every person's thoughts were important irregardless of what they thought about.

[Mrlonelyone]

What is found to be important is relative. It depends on the person and their interests. Adams was a great thinker but to say his words are more important than Joe Schmoe goes against Adam's own principles and beliefs. He felt every person's thoughts were important irregardless of what they thought about.

 

Adams was good friends with Thomas Jefferson who wrote the declaration of independence.

 

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” --Thomas Jefferson

 

Adams presided over a country that not only had slaves but in most states suffrage, for those of you in Rio Linda that means voting rights, were only for those white males who owned property and could read.

 

He wasn't for Joe Schmoe by any means.

 

But then you should know that since you are so damm smart right?

[Kamille]

Kamile

 

To the right people what the OP meant with his comments was crystal clear. We were able to see what he really meant.

 

While you, and you are by no means dumb, simply were not and choose to interpret what he said with your emotions instead of your intellect.

 

He never made a connection between "lesser huamans" and women... Other than saying his heterosexual and is looking to date a woman he hasn't even really mentioned women at all.

 

I could through the thread and find the links. He wonders if "ethical" women even exists.

 

Could you define who those "right people" would be? Here, let me help you, would it be people who read Nietzsche?

 

As to the implication that I am reacting emotionally, I would like to ask you on what grounds you base that assumption?

[Happy Finally]

Kamile

 

To the right people what the OP meant with his comments was crystal clear. We were able to see what he really meant.

 

While you, and you are by no means dumb, simply were not and choose to interpret what he said with your emotions instead of your intellect.

 

He never made a connection between "lesser huamans" and women... Other than saying his heterosexual and is looking to date a woman he hasn't even really mentioned women at all.

 

Really. So basically you are saying only the other geniuses on her understand what he meant? Right. Well I am no slouch when it comes to intellect but it does not define me. I have other qualities that go with my brains to make me a whole person and I don't claim to be a genius either.

 

The OP clearly said that those who do not have the same intellectual capacity as himself are clearly "lower mammals". Those are not my words those are his:

 

"If you lived in a world with only lower mammals, I doubt you would want to lower yourself down to that animal level in order to find "happiness" with one" - ChessPieceFace, March 21, 2011 at 11:39 pm

 

Yep, he clearly wasn't saying that everyone else wasn't a lower mammal. Not at all.

[Titania22]

I could through the thread and find the links. He wonders if "ethical" women even exists.

 

Could you define who those "right people" would be? Here, let me help you, would it be people who read Nietzsche?

 

As to the implication that I am reacting emotionally, I would like to ask you on what grounds you base that assumption?

 

 

So Kamille, was my response to you so unworthy that you can't even acknowledge it?

[Happy Finally]

Adams was good friends with Thomas Jefferson who wrote the declaration of independence.

 

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” --Thomas Jefferson

 

Adams presided over a country that not only had slaves but in most states suffrage, for those of you in Rio Linda that means voting rights, were only for those white males who owned property and could read.

 

He wasn't for Joe Schmoe by any means.

 

But then you should know that since you are so damm smart right?

 

You brought Adams into this not me. I only mentioned that Adams thought that the Joe Schmoe's thoughts were important. And in his day you are right, the Joe Schmoe was a white male. And Adams was a big supporter of State rights (which is why our Constitution limits federal powers). But they (white males) didn't have to own property to vote. That was dependent on the state for which they lived. C'mon..if you are going to pull something out, at least give all of the facts.

[Mrlonelyone]

"If you lived in a world with only lower mammals, I doubt you would want to lower yourself down to that animal level in order to find "happiness" with one" - ChessPieceFace, March 21, 2011 at 11:39 pm

 

Yep, he clearly wasn't saying that everyone else wasn't a lower mammal. Not at all.

 

No he wasnt' the key word is IF.

 

He didn't say that he did.

 

Suppose you were Charelton Heston and found yourself living on the planet of the Apes... Would you do Zara? Would the women on here do Dr Zais?

 

Your insecurity at the idea that someone might be more than just not a slouch in the brain department made you interpret what he said as an insult to you.

 

Let me ask you all this. If you accept that there exist people who are mentally deficient then why deny that it's possible for people to exist who are just as much mentally advanced?

 

 

I said in most states so you even quoted it. You did not even read what I wrote.

[Titania22]

 

The OP clearly said that those who do not have the same intellectual capacity as himself are clearly "lower mammals". Those are not my words those are his:

 

"If you lived in a world with only lower mammals, I doubt you would want to lower yourself down to that animal level in order to find "happiness" with one" - ChessPieceFace, March 21, 2011 at 11:39 pm

 

Yep, he clearly wasn't saying that everyone else wasn't a lower mammal. Not at all.

 

If you are inferring from said quote above, that he meant they are lower due solely to their intellectual capacity, i could read said quote to mean they are lower, because they don't behave in an ethical evolved way.

[utterer of lies]

If you are inferring from said quote above, that he meant they are lower due solely to their intellectual capacity, i could read said quote to mean they are lower, because they don't behave in an ethical evolved way.

 

 

His ethics are evolved, are of a higher standard than the ethics of others?

 

What arrogance.

 

His belief doesn't make it so.