PDA

View Full Version : Lecture on idiots - findind out who the *REAL* idiots are.



Neal13
19th January 2008, 11:13 PM
Idiot when used in nature seems to be a pretty subjective/objective term, since it seems to be used strongly opinion-based.

But we like facts!

Defining idiots.

We suppose there are more than 1 definition of idiots. Here's an example of an arbitrary method of which someone may define an idiot.

1.Definition of idiot.
2.Definition of idiot.
3.Definition of idiot.
4.Definition of idiot.
5.Definition of idiot.

Then, someone may say, "my defintion of an idiot is someone who passes any of the 3 above definitions or more.

Then, someone could have..

1.Strong definition of idiot.
2.Strong definition of idiot.
3.Strong definition of idiot.
4.Strong definition of idiot.
5.Strong definition of idiot.

And someone could use, "anyone who passes 2 of the 5 strong definition of idiot, is an idiot in my book."

And then, another common classic way, would be.

1.Weak definition of idiot.
2.Weak definition of idiot.
3.Weak definition of idiot.
4.Weak definition of idiot.
5.Weak definition of idiot.

"Anyone who passes all the definitions of idiot is an idiot."

And which method is the best?

The best method I have found, is to combine them all.

So there are multiple ways of defining an idiot.

1 particular method I like to use is when the term idiot is defined in law books. Their classic method has to do with intelligence, or their I.Q. Their classic definition is 1 who's IQ is below 70.

So here's what's currently in my book.

Strong definition (any will pass):

1.Has an I.Q. below 70.

Then, I may have others, such as.

Definitions of idiot:

1.Definition.
2.Definition.
3.Definition.

For example, someone may have an I.Q. above 70, but having an I.Q. above 70 shouldn't mean it isn't impossible to be an idiot. Therefore, developing/having multiple methods of idiot can lead someone who's I.Q. above 70 is also an idiot. Just that if the I.Q. is below 70, he or she is an automatic idiot by the 1st definition.

And of course, 5 is just an arbitary (or random) number. Some could have 3 possible definitions of idiots while others, 5. Some could have 37.

I never went around trying to define ways of identifying properties of idiots, besides the I.Q. thing.

You can tell I did not come up with a comprehensive list of definitions for identifying idiots, mainly for the fact that I simply don't sit around to think about it. With my sleepless nights, I don't go "Hmm, who on the Internet do I know to consider to be an idiot?" Hey - too many other stuff to think about. I suppose over the years, I may collect more definitions and add them to my book.

And so.. when someone says so and so is an idiot, the thing to do if you're curious is to ask them "what's your definition of an idiot."

And that's exactly my point - when people jump to the conclusion that so and so is an idiot, you ask them for their premise.

And I have found people tend to call people idiots if they don't like them. Or if they are mean. Measure of intelligence is not a measure of how nice a person is. Measure of intelligence is not a measure of how much you don't like them. But that's okay, if I don't like someone, I may call them an idiot right? Despite that it would be against my definitions.

Or in other words, better safe than sorry.

Neal Conroy.

Ryan's Team
19th January 2008, 11:19 PM
huh? can you explain this to me in english please.

kaijusasuke
19th January 2008, 11:34 PM
Idiot when used in nature seems to be a pretty subjective/objective term, since it seems to be used strongly opinion-based.

But we like facts!

Defining idiots.

We suppose there are more than 1 definition of idiots. Here's an example of an arbitrary method of which someone may define an idiot.

1.Definition of idiot.
2.Definition of idiot.
3.Definition of idiot.
4.Definition of idiot.
5.Definition of idiot.

Then, someone may say, "my defintion of an idiot is someone who passes any of the 3 above definitions or more.

Then, someone could have..

1.Strong definition of idiot.
2.Strong definition of idiot.
3.Strong definition of idiot.
4.Strong definition of idiot.
5.Strong definition of idiot.

And someone could use, "anyone who passes 2 of the 5 strong definition of idiot, is an idiot in my book."

And then, another common classic way, would be.

1.Weak definition of idiot.
2.Weak definition of idiot.
3.Weak definition of idiot.
4.Weak definition of idiot.
5.Weak definition of idiot.

"Anyone who passes all the definitions of idiot is an idiot."

And which method is the best?

The best method I have found, is to combine them all.

So there are multiple ways of defining an idiot.

1 particular method I like to use is when the term idiot is defined in law books. Their classic method has to do with intelligence, or their I.Q. Their classic definition is 1 who's IQ is below 70.

So here's what's currently in my book.

Strong definition (any will pass):

1.Has an I.Q. below 70.

Then, I may have others, such as.

Definitions of idiot:

1.Definition.
2.Definition.
3.Definition.

For example, someone may have an I.Q. above 70, but having an I.Q. above 70 shouldn't mean it isn't impossible to be an idiot. Therefore, developing/having multiple methods of idiot can lead someone who's I.Q. above 70 is also an idiot. Just that if the I.Q. is below 70, he or she is an automatic idiot by the 1st definition.

And of course, 5 is just an arbitary (or random) number. Some could have 3 possible definitions of idiots while others, 5. Some could have 37.

I never went around trying to define ways of identifying properties of idiots, besides the I.Q. thing.

You can tell I did not come up with a comprehensive list of definitions for identifying idiots, mainly for the fact that I simply don't sit around to think about it. With my sleepless nights, I don't go "Hmm, who on the Internet do I know to consider to be an idiot?" Hey - too many other stuff to think about. I suppose over the years, I may collect more definitions and add them to my book.

And so.. when someone says so and so is an idiot, the thing to do if you're curious is to ask them "what's your definition of an idiot."

And that's exactly my point - when people jump to the conclusion that so and so is an idiot, you ask them for their premise.

And I have found people tend to call people idiots if they don't like them. Or if they are mean. Measure of intelligence is not a measure of how nice a person is. Measure of intelligence is not a measure of how much you don't like them. But that's okay, if I don't like someone, I may call them an idiot right? Despite that it would be against my definitions.

Or in other words, better safe than sorry.

Neal Conroy.

Someone called you an idiot, didn't they?

Virtual Headache
19th January 2008, 11:45 PM
Get a life.

Kirby
20th January 2008, 1:35 AM
Get a life.

Agreed.

Guys stop responding to this idiot.