christopera said:

When you consider the context of my post, that being learned versus genetic intelligence, it’s pretty obvious.

But here we go.

First off, I said "Inherent intelligence is pretty worthless in a world where things are increasingly abstract anyways."

So, if we are to argue semantics, you are incorrect as you've misquoted me, even worse you've attempted to cherry pick some wording to make an argument. Context matters.

Second off, the implications are obvious. We live in a world where many of the learned concepts that we rely on are of a theoretical nature. For the majority of the world, but specifically our society (USA) as the stage has been limited to Democrats and Republicans, that wasn't the case even a 100 years ago. These ideas and concepts are impersonal and detached from inherited intelligence and can only be developed through learning.

---

Tulipslave said:

christopera said:

When you consider the context of my post, that being learned versus genetic intelligence, it’s pretty obvious.

But here we go.

First off, I said "Inherent intelligence is pretty worthless in a world where things are increasingly abstract anyways."

So, if we are to argue semantics, you are incorrect as you've misquoted me, even worse you've attempted to cherry pick some wording to make an argument. Context matters.

Second off, the implications are obvious. We live in a world where many of the learned concepts that we rely on are of a theoretical nature. For the majority of the world, but specifically our society (USA) as the stage has been limited to Democrats and Republicans, that wasn't the case even a 100 years ago. These ideas and concepts are impersonal and detached from inherited intelligence and can only be developed through learning.

---

what learned concepts?  what are "these concepts?"  please be specific.


do you not understand you have cited nothing concrete?  you keep slinging buzz-words with no meaning.


i quoted you directly, sans the word "increasingly", by the way.

---

christopera said:

Inherent intelligence is pretty worthless in a world where things are increasingly abstract anyways. And especially so when you realize that opportunity is worth more than genetics. Only on rare occasions do genetics mean an advantage anymore. In this sense, Republicans are absolutely the more disadvantaged political group, in fact they actively cheer themselves on in this regard.

---

christopera said:

Inherent intelligence is pretty worthless in a world where things are increasingly abstract anyways. And especially so when you realize that opportunity is worth more than genetics. Only on rare occasions do genetics mean an advantage anymore. In this sense, Republicans are absolutely the more disadvantaged political group, in fact they actively cheer themselves on in this regard.

---

christopera said:

Second off, the implications are obvious. We live in a world where many of the learned concepts that we rely on are of a theoretical nature. For the majority of the world, but specifically our society (USA) as the stage has been limited to Democrats and Republicans, that wasn't the case even a 100 years ago. These ideas and concepts are impersonal and detached from inherited intelligence and can only be developed through learning.

---

Quote:

ab·stract
adjective
/abˈstrakt,ˈabˌstrakt/
1.
existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

---

christopera said:

christopera said:

Second off, the implications are obvious. We live in a world where many of the learned concepts that we rely on are of a theoretical nature. For the majority of the world, but specifically our society (USA) as the stage has been limited to Democrats and Republicans, that wasn't the case even a 100 years ago. These ideas and concepts are impersonal and detached from inherited intelligence and can only be developed through learning.

---

Quote:

ab·stract
adjective
/abˈstrakt,ˈabˌstrakt/
1.
existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

---

---

christopera said:

You can't think of anything of a single topic of a theoretical nature that requires the learning of concepts, something that might not be physical or concrete in existence, that gets used on a daily basis? Are you a monkey?

Here's one example; Calculus. You can run with it from there.

---

christopera said:

DOA? Everybody else in this conversation is on the same page, except you.

It's not hard to understand how many of concepts and practices used in society today would be abstract to a person without any/or less education about those constructs. Especially when you consider that the pace of change is faster than ever.

I don't think you're truly failing to understand, I just think you're being intentionally daft. As is shown by your lack of acknowledgement regarding the use of Calculus.

---

again, you won't address my questions.  thanks for the attitude

Morel Guy said:

You aren't really interested in asking the question, anymore than you are trying to deny, deflect and attack (usually Trump cult tactics).

The whole spectrum of political ideology has very little physical existence.  The ideologies and concepts exist 90% in the minds of those that play with such existences.

---

Tulipslave said:

christopera said:

christopera said:

Second off, the implications are obvious. We live in a world where many of the learned concepts that we rely on are of a theoretical nature. For the majority of the world, but specifically our society (USA) as the stage has been limited to Democrats and Republicans, that wasn't the case even a 100 years ago. These ideas and concepts are impersonal and detached from inherited intelligence and can only be developed through learning.

---

Quote:

ab·stract
adjective
/abˈstrakt,ˈabˌstrakt/
1.
existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

---

---

Okay, what CONCEPTS?  What IDEAS?  Again, you are actually saying nothing.

---

Cosmic_Flame said:

Tulipslave said:

christopera said:

christopera said:

Second off, the implications are obvious. We live in a world where many of the learned concepts that we rely on are of a theoretical nature. For the majority of the world, but specifically our society (USA) as the stage has been limited to Democrats and Republicans, that wasn't the case even a 100 years ago. These ideas and concepts are impersonal and detached from inherited intelligence and can only be developed through learning.

---

Quote:

ab·stract
adjective
/abˈstrakt,ˈabˌstrakt/
1.
existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

---

---

Okay, what CONCEPTS?  What IDEAS?  Again, you are actually saying nothing.

---

no u

---