Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Under 120s: our friends

Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 02:25:31 AM
Also, lets be honest, just because you have a 120+ IQ does not mean you will be a good person or even that useful.


Merit, character, nobility and ability over anything else, I say.



That being said, I still think sub-98 IQs should be exiled or relegated to breaking rocks.

NHA

Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 02:41:52 AM
Math nerds would make awesome blacksmiths after they lose a finger or two. Why does this iron gate extend into hyperbolic space? Anyone?

Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 03:27:54 AM
No,

Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 04:43:45 PM
Honest answer...

I don't know.

Maybe it would be possible to pull this off successfully, maybe not.  Either way I don't think it's the best course of action, practically speaking.

Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 07:53:38 PM
Beware the false dichotomy.

I ask. Would you be better without that infected leg that will kill you if it's not amputed? YES or NO

YES

But, what if there's a way to fight the infection (antibiotics) while keeping the leg?

Quote
Would human civilization be better or worse if we fed all the under-120s into a woodchipper?

Let's supose that IQ is the most important innate human measure in regards to development, let's suppose that cultural bias doesn't play a significant role in the tests. Even though, it's not a good question. There are variations to this dilemma, and explanations to why the "woodchipper" method is childish.


Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 08:33:33 PM
But, what if there's a way to fight the infection (antibiotics) while keeping the leg?


What if the one with the infected leg refuses to admit the infection, and rejects antibiotics?

Under 120s: our friends
April 09, 2012, 08:42:02 PM
I hope our aryan overlords will emerge form their l secret base below antartica and wipe all of those under 500 of IQ And don't have the ability to mindtravel into the Xerces Galaxy.

Under 120s: our friends
April 10, 2012, 03:00:23 AM
Throw the under-120's into the woodchipper is a feel-good concept. But whether it would really deliver on the promise, I'm not entirely certain about.

Bruce Charlton offers up the idea that too many intellectuals would actually be counter-productive to stability because they would be too opinionated and would have the need to implement their worldviews to the detriment of the whole. It's an interesting point, and certainly diversity among the elite would bring its own problems to the table, but this is only assuming that the elite cannot come upon consensus of the core ideas.

Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 02:54:36 AM
Throw the under-120's into the woodchipper is a feel-good concept.

Feel-good?

Maybe to a psychopath. It doesn't make me feel good in any way.

But feelings have nothing to do with realism. In fact, they're its antithesis.

Re: Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 01:46:31 PM
Throw the under-120's into the woodchipper is a feel-good concept.

Feel-good?

Maybe to a psychopath. It doesn't make me feel good in any way.

But feelings have nothing to do with realism. In fact, they're its antithesis.

I meant feel-good more in the sense of being the right thing to do, in the same way that excising the cancer in any way or instilling value and culture into society would be feel-good. Perhaps it was the wrong choice of words given that liberals use it to mean anything with acceptable means.

It seems like a great idea, but I am skeptical for one reason in particular:

Are we expecting over 120's to scrub shit-encrusted toilets or engage in any of the other unskilled labor we usually have proles do? Temporarily, sure, but won't the majority want to move on to greater ends?

And methods? Is this the kind of subtle eugenics our ancients always used through simply favoring the best or is this more direct prole conscription to Woodchipper College?

Re: Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 01:54:36 PM
Good luck forcing 90% of active duty Marines into a wood chipper.

Re: Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 02:09:28 PM
I think he's, like, totally not saying "I want to" or anything like that. AFAIK he may deeply love under-120s.

He's just saying that the world is overpopulated and without a dramatic reduction, we destroy the planet. We'll destroy our inheritance and natural resources for no gain but saying "we supported 10 billion people who didn't do anything for a while, yay!"

It'll be like Easter Island, but this time the Island is Earth and there is nowhere else to go and no other humans surviving elsewhere. Everyone will die because we couldn't rise above the animal instinct to over breed or even come to a basic consensus on survival. Nature is supposed to keep us in Czech, but instead we rose above it and in doing so destroyed it.

Shit sucks no matter how you cut it.

Re: Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 02:10:45 PM
How is getting rid of dumb people in any way a bad thing?!?

Re: Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 04:27:02 PM
Are we expecting over 120's to scrub shit-encrusted toilets or engage in any of the other unskilled labor we usually have proles do? Temporarily, sure, but won't the majority want to move on to greater ends?

Gods be damned, but if you can't clear up your own fucking mess and provide for yourself and your family, you deserve to be chipped with the under 120s.

Re: Under 120s: our friends
April 11, 2012, 04:31:15 PM
Does anyone remember that Douglas Adams' book where a planet sends its entire middle-class off on a spaceship programmed to crash under the pretext of founding a new civilization?  Maybe there are some ideas here...