Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kamikaze on July 11, 2003, 07:13:56 pm
-
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/scitech/SciTechRepublish_898675.htm
I'm not getting married! :D
-
Horniness=genius.
I'd write more on this, but I don't feel like it.
-
yeah.. wank 24 hours a day and write magnificient musical scores or entire game programs in assembly!
-
Well, if the teachers were right you go blind, and then you're halfway to being a modern artist!
-
It doesn't just apply to marriage.
I was an absolute friggin genius till I started bothering having proper 'friends' and ****.
I basically did nothing for the first 13 years of my life and was described by every teacher as a genius, by every adult as a polite, happy, friendly child and by every kid as an annoyingly brilliant bastard.
Then BAM! Thirteen years old, I gets me some proper 'friends'. Start going out, getting drunk, going to parties and all of a sudden I'm a trouble-maker, a rogue, an abusive, violent, foul-mouthed, under-achieving little ****-head.
And sports! Sports will **** your head up no-end. Have you ever seen anyone truly brilliant who plays football? Hell no. Sure you get a few of those annoying all-rounder people who're good looking, intelligent and sporty, but they never really excel in any area and drift into a life of mediocrity.
The key to genius is unremitting hatred for all life. Love and excercise will **** you up.
-
well that's all good; so I have a better chance of being able to do math my entire life. :D :yes:
That article would also seem to imply that geniuses and criminals have something in common... :D (well after all I guess the most powerful man is the criminal genius)
-
Yeah, just look at Mr Freeze.
-
I resent that An0n, I was taking senior classes in the 9th grade and I aced them all. I'm not a pure genius, but I'm very smart, and hella good at football... One of the captains on my team btw.
-
So the big question would be were those people personally happy. If they were (which I bet some of them were) then what does it matter.
-
Originally posted by adwight
I resent that An0n, I was taking senior classes in the 9th grade and I aced them all. I'm not a pure genius, but I'm very smart, and hella good at football... One of the captains on my team btw.
So what you're saying is, you're ugly?
-
If only the government would follow that logic when it came to heroin legalization.
-
What? If you're ugly, you get smack?
Sounds like a plan to me.
-
*used to be called a genius untill about 8th grade*
*has always been a smartass and generally pissed off athority*
*hasn't done any drugs or alchohol*
*loves sports, but doesn't play on any teams, yet*
*is smarter than he was before 8th grade, but adults tend not to use words like 'extremely bright and gifted' any more. *
*got 'real friends' in a 7th/8th grade*
go figure.
-
An0n: I think "a smack" might be better. Negative reinforcement, might reduce the ugly populace until, a few generations from now, we all end up looking like Thandie Newton. Including the guys.
Actually, I was responding to IceFire and you got in the way, but it's a good idea nevertheless.
-
Originally posted by Kamikaze
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/scitech/SciTechRepublish_898675.htm
I'm not getting married! :D
I uttered these words a good long time ago also, but i met the right one (your soul mate) you tend to get sweep away by being in there very presents, but this must be felt by both of you, for it to endure. I`ve been with my soul mate (Patty) now for 22 years, and intend to be for the remainder of my life. My wife is irish and i have found, you don`t want to piss this irish woman off. Reminds me of a time we went out for a few drinks and there were 3 girls at a table, they just happened to be old girlfriends of mine that i had dated before i met patty. Well they all decided to drag me on to the dance floor, trying to cause trouble between me and patty, but there plan backfired when patty aproached there table and told all three of them to step outside cause she was going to kick all there butts, needless to say, they all stayed seated and haven`t bothered me since. :lol:
-
Well, I really don't intend on getting married for two simple reasons:
1) Marriage, one way or another, will cause you to become a parent. And one glance at the world at large is enough for me to decide that no one should be brought up in such an environment.
2) For me at least, the lonely life is the happy one...to a degree...
-
Your right, marrage isn`t for everyone.
And no, your not a bad guy because you don`t want to get married, its not for everyone. :)
-
well, my line was half a joke (inspired by the article) so it shouldn't be taken that seriously....
however I don't really plan to marry unless someone gives me a really good reason, but I won't get into that.
Anyway, back to the main topic. I'd think that by genius they mean creative genius, i.e. more like abstracting math ideas, painting, making music, programming etc. opposed to academic genius which involves working hard and doing what you're told. So it's probably more like "Would Bach have been better off with no marriages?" rather than "I started to have fun in 7th grade and my grades dropped"
-
I used to be called a genius in school up until about Year 9, when I realised that there was no point in any of the work we were doing, and spent the next two years arguing with teachers and disrupting the school network.
-
*was hella smart in 5th grade*
*was better-than-any-other-male-bar-one-in-our-class in 9th grade*
*has real friends*
*likes soft non-sweet alchoholic drinks + whiskey*
*had a girlfriend (emphasis on word HAD)*
*likes his parents*
*loves classical music*
*loves certain sports, sucks at teamplay*
*loves computers*
*loves getting out and having fun*
Even I'm having trouble figuring myself out.
-
Marriage is alot of work. Sometimes without reward, sometimes with, and sometimes doing the work is reward enough. so why get married? that's easy....I love her.
-
Well I'll have to get married some time, due to my strong sense of family honour.
I have no brothers, and neither does my dad, so the family line ends with me.
-
I take it those scientists are married then :doubt:
-
:blah:
ok, so 1/4 of the married great scientists didn't do any major discovery after being married for 5 years. Whoa. What a proof.
I wonder what is the percentage of the non-married scientists ( which btw are probably a minority... ) taht did any significant discovery :doubt: An affirmation like that w/o comparison has no value, it's crap. great scientific act you have there.
That aside, I guess I should feel honoured, since here at HLP everybody is a genius ( or has been, too bad for you, you didn't go up to the 30 age limit :doubt: ).
"laughs at random people"
-
Random comment:
Originally posted by Kamikaze
...creative genius, i.e. more like abstracting math ideas, painting, making music, programming etc. opposed to academic genius which involves working hard and doing what you're told.
Just so you know, this supposed opposition is patently false. Not everyone has the gifts to be a good portraitist, no matter how hard they work. Not everyone has the gifts to earn a Ph.D., no matter how hard they work. There is a huge amount of creative energy that goes into academic work, and it should not be underestimated.
-
That I just cannot agree with. You might be right about the phd because of the thesis paper, but at least in the "hard science" fields, the rest of it is all about doing mindless busywork and mastering the existing knowledge. Whatever amount of creativity is required for academic work, it is pretty miniscule compared to that needed for actual discoveries. (which is why many of the great scientists failed in school; they were not able to use their creativity effectively there)
Anyway, I have heard the age thing a lot more frequently, that almost all of big names in science and math made their contributions by the time they were 30 or so. I think Hardy said something like "mathematics, like any sport, is a young man's game; young men should prove theorems while old men should write books." :D
So the big question would be were those people personally happy. If they were (which I bet some of them were) then what does it matter.
because then the rest of us aren't happy since we are no longer getting a steady flow of discoveries. :p :D
-
Originally posted by CP5670
but at least in the "hard science" fields, the rest of it is all about doing mindless busywork and mastering the existing knowledge. Whatever amount of creativity is required for academic work, it is pretty miniscule compared to that needed for actual discoveries.
:wtf: You make that statement based on what experience/fact? I just got my Ph.D on History and let me tell you its not just "mindless busywork and mastering the existing knowledge" as you so elegantly stated. You need to understand it, get inside the heads of important people in history. And this history still defines in a way what we do and are.
These other sciences are more then just a pool of data to be absorbed. Sure, we can't device mathematical formulea but that doesn't mean we need no creativity. I think in order to really understand things like history you need more creativity to truly understand history then to make discoveries in hard science as they are hard facts which you can check and recheck.
-
You make that statement based on what experience/fact? I just got my Ph.D on History and let me tell you its not just "mindless busywork and mastering the existing knowledge" as you so elegantly stated. You need to understand it, get inside the heads of important people in history. And this history still defines in a way what we do and are.
Well, history is the perfect example of what I was saying, as you only need to have all the events memorized down cold. Of course, you can "understand" it, get inside the heads and whatever else, which certainly enhances the learning experience, but that isn't needed to do well on the exams, and so most people don't get into any of that. What I am bashing here is the curricula currently in place, not the general learning process. And as I said, the phd might be an exception but only because of that thesis project.
These other sciences are more then just a pool of data to be absorbed. Sure, we can't device mathematical formulea but that doesn't mean we need no creativity. I think in order to really understand things like history you need more creativity to truly understand history then to make discoveries in hard science as they are hard facts which you can check and recheck.
But I could easily say that math requires the most creativity of any field (maybe along with music composition) because it is so abstract and precise, making it somewhat removed from daily affairs and not leaving any room for lesser (incorrect) theorems. Obviously the math classes do not reflect this at all, but the subject itself is still good.
-
Originally posted by CP5670
Well, history is the perfect example of what I was saying, as you only need to have all the events memorized down cold. Of course, you can "understand" it, get inside the heads and whatever else, which certainly enhances the learning experience, but that isn't needed to do well on the exams, and so most people don't get into any of that. What I am bashing here is the curricula currently in place, not the general learning process. And as I said, the phd might be an exception but only because of that thesis project.
[/b]
Exams mean nothing. That goes for math as well as they are merely a test. Not research to find a new theory or anything. And it is certainly needed on exams to get inside heads of the more important people of history.
The curricula too is not as you say it is. The courses of study of history need more creativity then you think. Theories have to be made up just as in math. The only difference is that with math you cn check them and with History you can't. You need more creativity to create such a theory. And yes you can use data from your history books to prove those theories but that is exactly the same as math.
With math you learn and learn. Same as history. You learn cold hard facts. However, with history you cannot use one fact to create another, no. You need to create whole NEW facts if you wish to make discoveries.
But I could easily say that math requires the most creativity of any field (maybe along with music composition) because it is so abstract and precise, making it somewhat removed from daily affairs and not leaving any room for lesser (incorrect) theorems. Obviously the math classes do not reflect this at all, but the subject itself is still good.
If its so precise you don't need the creativitry to create whole new facts. You can use the facts you have for new theories based on previous facts.
Basically, we can argue over this endlessly as we are dealing with 2 different kinds of creativity here. And each kind is as valueble as the other and needed in equal quantaties but in different ways that cannot be compared. ;)
-
Exams mean nothing. That goes for math as well as they are merely a test. Not research to find a new theory or anything. And it is certainly needed on exams to get inside heads of the more important people of history.
But those exams are what count for your grades. At least the history-related high school and undergraduate exams I took were all about regurgitating facts out of the textbook by writing essays, and after which you could proceed to forget everything. :p :D Of course, a history course of that type would be quite cool (e.g. thinking about what might have happened in history if certain events had been different), but I have never really heard of such a thing as widespread.
The curricula too is not as you say it is. The courses of study of history need more creativity then you think. Theories have to be made up just as in math. The only difference is that with math you cn check them and with History you can't. You need more creativity to create such a theory. And yes you can use data from your history books to prove those theories but that is exactly the same as math.
That is what I am saying; since no theory can be easily proved or even tested, any theory becomes correct to some extent and the number of acceptable theories on exams grows much larger. In math you can't do such things because there are precise rules on what is correct and what is not.
With math you learn and learn. Same as history. You learn cold hard facts. However, with history you cannot use one fact to create another, no. You need to create whole NEW facts if you wish to make discoveries.
Exactly; that first part is what I am saying. Many subjects are like this in the current academic structure even if the research is all good (some fields are genuine BS, but not the ones we are talking about). But how exactly do you "create" a fact in history? :wtf: Or do you mean propose a new theory?
If its so precise you don't need the creativitry to create whole new facts. You can use the facts you have for new theories based on previous facts.
It is the usage of those facts in the appropriate way that requires the creativity since there are infinities of them, but at the same time you cannot put out anything other a strict truth. There is no general method for discovering/proving a formula but there are ways to check the validity of the formula or its proof, which is what causes the difficulty.
Basically, we can argue over this endlessly as we are dealing with 2 different kinds of creativity here. And each kind is as valueble as the other and needed in equal quantaties but in different ways that cannot be compared. ;)
I think the two are the really same thing, but anyway I can never pass up a chance to hit out against the education systems, which I think are the single worst aspect of the world today. :D And at any rate, arguing rules. :D
-
I think the two are the really same thing, but anyway I can never pass up a chance to hit out against the education systems, which I think are the single worst aspect of the world today. :D And at any rate, arguing rules. :D
Well, personally I think here in Holland things are quite good :D
-
can't you people just kiss and make up? ;7
-
Are you suggesting CP would actually get that close to a female? ;)
-
Maybe if she was holding some math books, or worked at the nearest book store that sells math books, or maybe if she was dressed up as a calculator for Halloween. :D
Or do you specifially mean Tiara? In that case, I don't think even CP could calculate the odds of that happening in one lifetime... ;)
*re-engages lurking field*
-
Originally posted by Kamikaze
Are you suggesting CP would actually get that close to a female? ;)
no. let them locked in their room, if their math stuff is hereditary to the slightest degree, they work on their own extinction that way :D
-
I live in sin and get the best of both worlds :)
To be honest, I've always seen marriage as a piece of paper telling the world what we already know, my friends have tried to talk us into it, but we have so many other things to spend our money on! As for kids? Too expensive, too much stress, too much distraction from my computer. No thanks, not if I can help it :)
As for education, well, all I can say is the more you get now, the more money you will earn and the faster computer you will get ;) I know school sucks, it did for me too, but trust me, I work in a training provider for people who have dropped out of school, and you really really don't want to end up going to one of those, I can promise you!
Flipside :)
-
Originally posted by Flipside
1)I live in sin and get the best of both worlds :)
2)To be honest, I've always seen marriage as a piece of paper telling the world what we already know, my friends have tried to talk us into it, but we have so many other things to spend our money on! As for kids?
3)Too expensive, too much stress, too much distraction from my computer. No thanks, not if I can help it :)
1) you're bisexual? :D
2) there's financial advantages to being married :p. Well, in France, at least. ( what? romantism? )
3)ok, that must be something weird in the air of Albion :p ( Killmenow says the exact same things ). Thanks god our parents didn't think the same, heh? :D
-
Anyone Married
i am:p