Something I find annoying:

"I don't like or do [y]. Only a stupid person could possibly like or want to do [y]. Therefore I must be smart."

I see this type of reasoning from self-proclaimed "highly intelligent" people all the time. They use their abstinence from popular activities and disdain for popular opinions as "evidence" of their brilliance.

Even if they have little to show for themselves apart from that abstinence and disdain; nothing of positive worth, just a negative attitude toward "the masses."

[Examples of [y]: watching sports, having kids, watching TV, working a certain kind of job, listening to a certain kind of music, watching a certain kind of movie, etc.]

it makes sense to me, I guess i am smrt and you are dumb.

While I would not necessarily claim my abstinence from some of the examples you listed make me 'smart' (whatever the fuck that actually means), I think you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that watching television and having kids isn't stupid as shit.

I do think I get your point though... I do plenty of things that people consider a 'waste of time'. As though things that are considered 'productive' by the masses are in fact all that important? Human sense of duty often confuses me.

Despite this though, the problems that might very well arise with an entire generation of isolated individuals does seem somewhat apparent.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Boomer187 it makes sense to me, I guess i am smrt and you are dumb.

your avatar is intelligent

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by bas we're just rolling in that sweet sweet Beatport chedda SON. I PUT DIAMONDS IN MY SALT SHAKER SO I CAN HAVE CRUSHED DIAMONDS ON MY FOOD...it makes my dookie twinkle!!!

Yeah it's very true. People then to define them selfs as what they are not rather than what they are.

Basically to have someone to look down on.

___________________
If you can read this, I'm seriously fucking bored.

It has to do with our culture of opposition.

if you're not with us, then you're against us blah blah blah

And I do say 'our' tentatively. I mean, there are big differences in "culture" all around the world, so I wouldn't seek to necessarily generalize in that respect, but I think this sort of group exclusion dynamic is prevalent any place you go.

Yeah, it's a way to look down on people. That is life though. Some might say that those who are looked down upon are the ones who allow themselves to be subjugated. I'm not sure if I completely buy that, given it's a typical espousal of people in far more pristine economic brackets, but is the triumph of willpower really something that can be grasped by anyone who, for lack of a less redundant term, has the will to willpower?

Strength is something that needs to be defined. I don't know if any one person can effectively represent it in any essential sense. It would seem that we are all of us weak.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

If you willingly abstain from doing an activity you like, but which (according to you) is not necessarily productive, then there is the element of self control.

Most of the times however, a person will abstain from doing an activity simply because he doesn't want to do that.

And then he will try to justify his abstinence by belittling people who indulge in that activity.

___________________

Download and review ! Omega_M - In the Mix (Beta Version)

Originally posted by twilightki : It feels like something you'd listen to at 4 in the morning, or listen to in your car while you're going in a tunnel.

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M If you willingly abstain from doing an activity you like, but which (according to you) is not necessarily productive, then there is the element of self control.

Is it really self-control though? I would argue that many forms of supposed self-control are really just projections of fear and guilt that are representations of socially-inspired inhibitions. That is to say, you are not controlling yourself, rather, you are merely forfeiting your willpower and allowing your activities to be swayed by social expectations of conduct. Of course, this entirely depends on how you would define "an activity you like" but when left to their own devices, do individuals truly have an intrinsic sense of productivity or is productivity as we know it merely another social projection? There are few things humans really need and feel truly compelled to do - eat, sleep, fuck, etc - so perhaps society and its expectations are merely a macrocosm of these innate desires... or - perhaps people live to serve society? Like Government, it has become a machine far larger than any one person could ever control, and we are all subjects to it?

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Is it really self-control though? I would argue that many forms of supposed self-control are really just projections of fear and guilt that are representations of socially-inspired inhibitions. That is to say, you are not controlling yourself, rather, you are merely forfeiting your willpower and allowing your activities to be swayed by social expectations of conduct.

That would not be self control at all, but rather social inhibition as you just said. Social inhibitions are compulsions and in these cases, the abstinence is not willing. Willing abstinence is something that would require "self control". It is where your long term goals and your character will prevent you from indulging in impulse (or any other) activities that give short term joy, but cost you in the long run. This requires a lot more efforts and is different from social inhibition. In that case, you face social consequences for indulging in the activity. In this case, you have to face no one but yourself.

quote:

Of course, this entirely depends on how you would define "an activity you like" but when left to their own devices, do individuals truly have an intrinsic sense of productivity or is productivity as we know it merely another social projection? There are few things humans really need and feel truly compelled to do - eat, sleep, fuck, etc - so perhaps society and its expectations are merely a macrocosm of these innate desires... or - perhaps people live to serve society? Like Government, it has become a machine far larger than any one person could ever control, and we are all subjects to it?

Whether productivity is a social projection or not would depend on the individual's goals and desires. Monks who meditate in the high Himalayas, disconnected from the society will also have a sense of productivity if they move towards their spiritual goals. Their innate desires transcend your so called innate desires. These concepts are pretty much subjective. I don't see any generalization in this.

___________________

Download and review ! Omega_M - In the Mix (Beta Version)

Originally posted by twilightki : It feels like something you'd listen to at 4 in the morning, or listen to in your car while you're going in a tunnel.

abstention /= intelligence
intelligence --> abstention

quote:

Originally posted by leph555 your avatar is intelligent

yeah, exactly, its so not boomer

___________________

insignificant cor member alliance

quote:

Originally posted by leph555 your avatar is intelligent

welcome to my group of friends. You have just replaced stren