|
|
Post by Plainsman on Oct 10, 2021 14:00:06 GMT -5
Interesting article about thought, as an "activity," and the tendency to avoid it. I think our digital-distraction age has a lot to answer for.
|
|
|
|
Post by just ol ed on Oct 10, 2021 14:15:01 GMT -5
From what I could make out it (I have brain damage at birth, lack of oxygen, said about 12secs) me & thinking have to keep it simple. Think too much...I probably would be dangerous! Thanx for the article 'tho
Ed Duncan, Batavia, NY
|
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Oct 10, 2021 14:43:49 GMT -5
I think one of the greatest injustices done to people is the IQ infatuation. People have different skills, perceptions, abilities, and insights— none of which necessarily correspond to IQ. My "IQ" is way higher than my dogs', but when we're in the woods or afield I'm a dummy compared to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Oct 10, 2021 15:09:01 GMT -5
“I think one of the greatest injustices done to people is the IQ infatuation.”
Agreed, I have an uncle that is in the genius category, but he is the biggest creep you can imagine, look up narcissist and his face is in the dictionary.
Conversely, I have known plenty of “simple” people of virtue and wisdom whose company I enjoy immensely.
Critical thinking skills are not encouraged in academia, quite the opposite, indoctrination rules the day. Those that agree to it are rewarded, those that challenge it are often persecuted.
That does not bode well for our future.
|
|
|
|
Post by urbino on Oct 10, 2021 15:12:54 GMT -5
I think one of the greatest injustices done to people is the IQ infatuation. People have different skills, perceptions, abilities, and insights— none of which necessarily correspond to IQ. My "IQ" is way higher than my dogs', but when we're in the woods or afield I'm a dummy compared to them. Very true, and more recognized today than it used to be. You hear quite a bit about emotional intelligence, social intelligence, etc., now. From my interactions with Ed, both here and in the chat, I'd say his "life intelligence" is extremely high. |
|
|
|
Post by simnettpratt on Oct 10, 2021 15:41:58 GMT -5
An infatuation with IQ is annoying. It is neither earned, nor even asked for, you're born with it. Better than IQ is wisdom, which you get when you don't get what you want, or when you screw up. Better than both is kindness.
Wisdom you earn, and you can seek it. Kindness is a choice.
It is also annoying when people say there's different kinds of IQ - there's not. Street smarts is wisdom and knowledge, not IQ. A genius that wouldn't last ten minutes in prison lacks street smarts, not IQ. An expansive knowledge of trivia is not IQ, it is knowledge. Talents are not IQ. Playing guitar really well comes from talent and practice, and you can have practiced a lot with no talent. IQ is not behavior, you can be brilliant and wreck your SUV going down a straight road.
IQ is a specific thing, and you're born with it, like your brown hair. You can exercise it, or Ozzy it away.
It is sad though, that the more intelligent you are, the more stupid you sound to dumb people, but a superior IQ does not make you a superior person. Everyone has the same value, though some make better choices, and your choices are more important than your IQ, wisdom and knowledge combined.
|
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Oct 10, 2021 15:48:41 GMT -5
Well said, David.
|
|
|
|
Post by simnettpratt on Oct 10, 2021 15:54:16 GMT -5
Thanks man. Hey urb, I wasn't saying the term 'life intelligence' is wrong, but I am saying they're using the word intelligence to mean something other than IQ.
|
|
|
|
Post by urbino on Oct 10, 2021 16:59:27 GMT -5
Thanks man. Hey urb, I wasn't saying the term 'life intelligence' is wrong, but I am saying they're using the word intelligence to mean something other than IQ. Largely because they don't think IQ tests measure anything terribly meaningful -- about intelligence or otherwise. As I understand it, the newer terms are part of a rejection of IQ as a useful psychometric tool. |
|
|
|
Post by simnettpratt on Oct 10, 2021 17:45:33 GMT -5
I think they're wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by urbino on Oct 10, 2021 19:46:02 GMT -5
Fair enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonanzadriver on Oct 12, 2021 13:51:45 GMT -5
One of my favorite quotes by Thomas Sowell...
“The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling.”
Maxwell wrote a great book 10 or so years ago on this topic, titled. "Thinking for a Change". Great read and really delves into how lazy most of the world has become, as it relates to intentional, focused, substantive thinking.
Think I'm wrong, try bringing up "Root Cause Analysis" next time you're in meeting, unless you're working with engineers, you'll most likely get a bunch of blank stares.
cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by oldcajun123 on Oct 12, 2021 15:41:28 GMT -5
 I’ve worked at Exxon with he top 1% most from MIT. Most did not impress me, a few were impressive, most lacked common sense, case in point we had a small drum that held critical quenching oil, you lost that and it was a catastrophic thing, so one MIT Engineer decided to legnthen the gauge taps on the vessel , plan English he doubled the gauge glass. He told me now you have more oil, I looked at him and told him You Dumb💩 if you didn’t change the drum you don’t have more oil. The look on his face was something, No Common Sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Oct 12, 2021 16:22:25 GMT -5
One of my favorite quotes by Thomas Sowell... “The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling.” Maxwell wrote a great book 10 or so years ago on this topic, titled. "Thinking for a Change". Great read and really delves into how lazy most of the world has become, as it relates to intentional, focused, substantive thinking. Think I'm wrong, try bringing up "Root Cause Analysis" next time you're in meeting, unless you're working with engineers, you'll most likely get a bunch of blank stares. cheers Everything Thomas Sowell says is a favorite quote of mine! We need more men like him. |
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Oct 12, 2021 18:36:24 GMT -5
I've been thinking, will I get in trouble if I change my signature to "Let's Go Brandon"?
|
|
|
|
Post by don on Oct 12, 2021 23:26:47 GMT -5
I have been thinking more than I care to the past 6-7 months or so. Lack of thinking is found in sleep. I wish I slept better, because I really do enjoy being thought free these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Oct 13, 2021 8:33:37 GMT -5
I have to listen to an audio book with my headphones to get too sleep every night. Otherwise my brain just keeps going until I'm mentally exhausted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Legend Lover on Oct 13, 2021 9:59:19 GMT -5
I have to listen to an audio book with my headphones to get too sleep every night. Otherwise my brain just keeps going until I'm mentally exhausted. I would wake up and my brain would sometimes switch on and take forever to stop again. Very annoying. As for sitting and thinking...the article was interesting. I need to think more about it. |
|
|
|
Post by don on Oct 13, 2021 10:02:04 GMT -5
I am thinking about you thinking about thinking….
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Oct 13, 2021 10:02:52 GMT -5
I have to listen to an audio book with my headphones to get too sleep every night. Otherwise my brain just keeps going until I'm mentally exhausted. I would wake up and my brain would sometimes switch on and take forever to stop again. Very annoying. As for sitting and thinking...the article was interesting. I need to think more about it. 😁😉 |
|
|
|
Post by Stearmandriver on Oct 13, 2021 17:19:58 GMT -5
Critical thinking skills are not encouraged in academia, quite the opposite, indoctrination rules the day. Those that agree to it are rewarded, those that challenge it are often persecuted. To be fair, this is an oft-cited misunderstanding of the academic process. The reality is, the fastest way to become respected and "in demand" in academia is to overturn a widely-held position on something. The catch, of course, is that you must have solid evidence with which to defend your position. Peer review can be pretty ruthless in its exposure of process and methodology errors, broken logic etc. This is sort of the point. |
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Oct 13, 2021 17:42:41 GMT -5
I think Charlie might have been referring to students and not to academicians.
|
|
|
|
Post by don on Oct 13, 2021 17:45:28 GMT -5
I think we have overthought it.🤡
|
|
|
|
Post by Stearmandriver on Oct 13, 2021 18:12:22 GMT -5
I think Charlie might have been referring to students and not to academicians. Maybe, but doesn't the same philosophy apply? Consensus has value, and challenging it based on feelings probably shouldn't get one very far. If you have fair questions rooted in evidence though, I've never met many educators who wouldn't take those questions seriously. I was always the kid in regular school and Sunday school who asked the inconvenient questions. In real school, it more than once caused deeper dives into material that ended up being really interesting. In Sunday school, it resulted in my parents being asked not to bring me anymore. It was really win/win. 😉 But yeah, the only attempt to force indoctrination I ever saw was in religion, not real world. |
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Oct 13, 2021 18:38:23 GMT -5
I think Charlie might have been referring to students and not to academicians. Maybe, but doesn't the same philosophy apply? Consensus has value, and challenging it based on feelings probably shouldn't get one very far. If you have fair questions rooted in evidence though, I've never met many educators who wouldn't take those questions seriously. I was always the kid in regular school and Sunday school who asked the inconvenient questions. In real school, it more than once caused deeper dives into material that ended up being really interesting. In Sunday school, it resulted in my parents being asked not to bring me anymore. It was really win/win. 😉 But yeah, the only attempt to force indoctrination I ever saw was in religion, not real world. Maybe you should visit some contemporary universities. CA might be a good start, with many not far behind. (I contend this is not "political" but "educational.") |
|
|
|
Post by kxg on Oct 13, 2021 19:17:13 GMT -5
As to thinking as described in the article linked above: I've always found it interesting and troubling that one thing snatched from children in school is daydreaming. If I read the article correctly, thinking for enjoyment and meaning is fairly akin to daydreaming, at least that's how I remember it. But, that sort of thinking was deemed improper and we were encouraged to think about the task at hand. Eventually, it is hard to daydream without feeling guilty over one's lack of "activity". It is our loss.
I think I'll load a pipe and go do some daydreaming. For science, you know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stearmandriver on Oct 13, 2021 20:02:30 GMT -5
I agree there. While being able to focus on a task is a valuable life skill and has a place in school, imagination / creativity / "pondering" has probably been pushed aside too much. Sadly, it seems like many people don't make time for it these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by don on Oct 13, 2021 20:58:26 GMT -5
Did a lot of thinking today. No happy thoughts. Thought about how nice it would be to retire, but can’t afford to yet. I was happier when I started a fire in the chiminea tonight and just enjoyed staring into the coals. Little thought occurred beyond enjoying the colors, smells and the changing coals. Relaxing. Had more London Dock. Burning through that tin, but it was really packed in there.
|
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Oct 13, 2021 21:48:40 GMT -5
Critical thinking skills are not encouraged in academia, quite the opposite, indoctrination rules the day. Those that agree to it are rewarded, those that challenge it are often persecuted. To be fair, this is an oft-cited misunderstanding of the academic process. The reality is, the fastest way to become respected and "in demand" in academia is to overturn a widely-held position on something. The catch, of course, is that you must have solid evidence with which to defend your position. Peer review can be pretty ruthless in its exposure of process and methodology errors, broken logic etc. This is sort of the point. Certainly, the students that came to mind that I personally know are brilliant, and had facts on their side. The professors were ideologues wedded to their own philosophical worldview that had no desire to even consider other points of view. They are tenured, and have no reason to entertain any sort of challenge to what they demand others ascribe to if they want a passing grade. I agree with your approach, if that indeed is what is practiced, sadly oftimes it is not. |
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Oct 13, 2021 21:50:47 GMT -5
Did a lot of thinking today. No happy thoughts. Thought about how nice it would be to retire, but can’t afford to yet. I was happier when I started a fire in the chiminea tonight and just enjoyed staring into the coals. Little thought occurred beyond enjoying the colors, smells and the changing coals. Relaxing. Had more London Dock. Burning through that tin, but it was really packed in there. I think we could all use a lot more sitting around a fire and "letting the mind roll on." |
|
I’ve worked at Exxon with he top 1% most from MIT. Most did not impress me, a few were impressive, most lacked common sense, case in point we had a small drum that held critical quenching oil, you lost that and it was a catastrophic thing, so one MIT Engineer decided to legnthen the gauge taps on the vessel , plan English he doubled the gauge glass. He told me now you have more oil, I looked at him and told him You Dumb💩 if you didn’t change the drum you don’t have more oil. The look on his face was something, No Common Sense.
