Geez, this started one great big argument... looks like it's kinda over...
But here's what I think, anyway:
If the only people in the world who are truly valuable are people who contribute to society, and people who contribute a lot to society are more valuable (as people) than people who barely manage to hold their own, and the "more valuable" people have less respect for "less valuable" people... they don't even turn out as "valuable" (by Louise18's standards) as they would be in the first place.
I mean, if smarter people think themselves superior, and only "tolerate" the (for lack of a more sophisticated word) dumber people, then they shouldn't be obligated to help them, right?
In that case, they're NOT contributing to society.
And you say if the value of one's life depends solely on his/her achievements, you might as well say the sole purpose of life is to build a better world. If you say the sole purpose of life is to build a better world, you might as well say that doing anything other than working is a waste of time, which means the things that make us happy are a waste of time, love is a waste of time, and life in general is a waste of time. If life is a waste of time, why should we keep bother to improve the quality of it? The entire idea just contradicts itself.
I try to respect all people equally. I say "try" because I'm not perfect and can be judgmental just as anyone else, and because some people make it very hard. And do you know what trait I find the absolute hardest to overlook? Lack of respect for other people.I have a tutor, too, and though she is better at math than me and knows it, she has never made me feel like an inferior person. In return, I am more motivated to live up to the respect she has for me and do well. Respect is a two-way thing. Deal with it.
SheWhoCan'tThinkofaUserName,
Well said.
But... what would you say if someone claims the only "valuable" people are those who are intellectually gifted; those who have this logical "quick-learning" ability? I've not done much research on these topics, but what I have observed among many gifted folks, is this "quick-learning" ability, which goes a long way toward great academic success (in some cases, swift and relatively easy success.) And I have seen that many folks who are not intellectually gifted, seem to lack this "quick-learning" ability that is ever so useful for getting a high score on an IQ test, or getting through school without studying.
How would you respond to that?
Does anyone in this thread have even the slightest belief in God!?
Geez, this is depressing. Where's GuessWho when you need him?
You don't have to be a Creationist to beleive in God.
Personally I believe in Deity, but I wouldn't call It "God", nor do I think it is in the slightest bit sentient; it's simply... THERE. It's a difficult beleif to explain.
Maybe we go to Xibalba when we die, just like in The Fountain.
That was a really cool, celestial scene, at the end of that movie.
A shame the rest of the movie was so uneven.
And stop bringing age into it, or I shall start bringing academic achievement into it. The only thing that matters is the argument and whether it makes sense. The writer is of no consequence.
The writer is of consequence when he/she denigrates individuals who lack the same capacity for achievement that Louise18 has, apparently--and that's a lot of people you're denigrating.
I do know that I do not believe the same things about the world than I did when I was, say, 6 or 18 or 24 or even last month. Experience
has a way of forcing us to challenge our beliefs. However, we can certainly stubbornly hold on to them-even with much evidence to the contrary.
Off-topic a bit:
I won't lie.. I am guilty of the bolded print. I am incredibly inflexible and insist on doing things my way despite any amount of advice from anyone, usually that even includes shrinks (how dare they say I'm flat-out wrong?)... now my world view does not equate intelligence directly with human worth, but my inflexibility and rigid need for routine/ritual/habit (most of them not good ones) is appalling and has caused no end of problems for me. And yet I stick to it, anyway.
It's uncommon to see someone get hammered on an AS forum by so many people--naturally AS doesn't respond well to the "group assault," I should know as I have been victim to it in many other forums--but it looks like you pulled it off Louise18. And I kinda feel sorry to see it happen to another member... but at the same time it looks like you deserved it, from frequent posting of some very self-righteous beliefs about the value of folks who lack cognitive gifts.
As we have already acknowledged establishing someone's worth is a thing which is difficult to measure. All I have done is set out what I believe to be the assessment criteria. You do not know enough about me or what else I do in life to make a valid assessment of me. And I am not interested in making an assessment of you. All I have said is that some people are better than others. Some people are worse than me,others are better. And I need a lot of information about them to establish which category they fall into.
And how is this "establishment of other's worth" going to help you with your noteworthy future achievement(s) ?
My 'system' for assessing people is non-existent. I do not have a 'system'. I would not have a 'system' because that is prejudice. I allow everyone to assess themselves and I like everyone until they hurt someone. Louise, you have hurt a lot of people with your prejudice and I can not approve of such behaviour. I have not made any personal remarks as to your worthiness, just your appalling behaviour.
But if I met you I'd probably still give you a hug!
Then you do have a system. Its called whether or not they hurt people. And my appalling behaviour is simply to point out a truth to you: some people are better than others. Why is that so difficult for you to accept?
It is difficult for me to accept because the thing that you feel makes some people "better than others"---intelligence---is something no one can choose or control. It is sheer luck that you were given the brain you have. How can you say that your genetic good fortune alone makes you better than someone less fortunate?
Yeah I mean, some researchers (Temple Grandin comes to mind) even call "savantism" or "cognitive prodigiousness" an abnormality, and some prodigies are born to parents of average intelligence.
There is a definitely a "dice roll" aspect to this thing we call intelligence.
Yes, that's right. Thanks Erkolos for putting it far better than I could have.
And he did it with one sentence, as well. Ode to minimalism!
Louise18 how 'bout you re-read what I said about "longterm pain and self-loathing" because it looks like it is going to happen to you if you don't pull in the reins on your bigheaded, elitist attitude.
The more of a contribution an individual makes in the area, the better they have used their short time on earth to effect wider change and therefore the more respect they deserve. I do not believe people deserve respect merely for doing what they are paid to do. Construction workers do a menial job for money, and that money is sufficient reward.
Then apparently a very large percentage of the human population does not deserve respect, ignoring the fact that your safety and well-being depends largely on the collective efforts of such tireless laborers. You are one misguided young woman.
Louise18 somebody else said this before... and I am going to say it again... straw men. Understand?
It's plain and simple to me. You have not been able to successfully form the "logical argument" you have intended to make, instead relying on weak generalist statements that do little more than inflate your overblown ego.
Anything I missed?
Just about everything, Louise. You seem to have a blind spot to what everyone else is saying here. You twist quotes from your own posts into Gordian knots trying to imply that they said something different.
You are number-blind.
I believe that are there are 4 possible purposes to human existence.
1) Personal happiness
2) Maximising the happiness of others
3) Personal Achievement (as in knowledge)
4) The advancement of society's aggregate achievements
5)The pursuit of Justice.
My point was that these are the 6 building blocks
I don't think Louise18 is an Oxonian law student either. She certainly invented a spelling error the likes of which I had never seen, in this very thread:
"heinous acts" spelled as "hanus acts"
The sign of someone who uses superior gifts in the written word to compensate for other deficiencies... really?
I got A*s in science and an A in maths. Anyone who is familiar with the current educational system knows that anyone who has any ability in maths would easily get an A* and an A at A-level and an A in Further Maths A-level, and at leas a grade 2 on the STEP.
I do not consider perfectionism a flaw, I consider it to be a positive quality. And I don't see how having no respect for people who achieve nothing is imposing perfectionism onto other people.
Louise18, why would you call yourself positively *** in Math and Science, when I could sit through an entire class of Integrated Math in high school--and TRY to pay attention--and still barely learn a single thing?
I have learning disabilities, that weren't diagnosed because I was "well-spoken" and no therapist could see past my formal, pedantic speech--therefore thought "large vocabulary" meant I was smart elsewhere.. which is INCREDIBLY erroneous in my case.
I believe Dyscalculia is among my learning disabilities, as I can barely do ANY math and I am very serious when I say this.. not a perfectionist, like you... I don't count on my fingers, but I can barely do anything beyond Algebra 1 and fundamental Geometry. There is no single lie in that statement, that is a dry logical assessment of the ability I have in Math.
Should I be shot to death for this "severe deficiency" as you would call it? Here's more: I took not a single honors classes once in my life, and never took anything above the average grade level and even did very poorly in most of the average classes from 10th grade on.
Against your rigid academic standards, I would be completely worthless and pathetic. I also cannot go to college because I have intractable Social Phobia from AS, and have a similar attitude that you have about "regular people" (despite the fact that I lack academic ability)... I cannot stand all this trendy crap and cool clothing and social games.
People on AFF, when I tell them about all my serious academic shortcomings, tell me I'm not worthless and pathetic. I'd like to believe them, because if I keep putting myself down and thinking I'm worthless, I will NEVER get out of the depressed rut I am in right now. I am afraid confidence does not include "since I'm God-awful at academics, I must be defective and worthless."
Unlike you, I truly AM very poor at everything academic, especially Math. To apply your kind of thinking to myself would be suicide.
Any thoughts?
Anyone Louise18, even though you're light years ahead of myself in academic ability, you are writing your own epitaph with the extreme level of perfectionism you are applying not only to yourself, but to others. It is not a far cry from where you are now to something like "Louise18 has taken up the bottle, because she couldn't meet her own incredibly rigid standards." This kind of attitude is, at some point or another, going to lead to self-destruction.
I did the same thing to myself, with the same rigid standards that I couldn't meet (since I was a complete failure in school with bad grades in even the most average of classes, I decided to beat up on myself and it led to self-loathing)... because I compared myself to everyone who was better than me and felt AWFUL as a result.
As it happens about 75% of students at a public high school probably are better than me, so that's a lot of people to compare myself to and think I'm dismally pathetic... you can imagine the toll such thinking did on my self-image and self-esteem.
I guess you don't care to reply to personal notes such as this one, but you have been warned. Your attitude is not leading to a good place. I have the experience to know this and the state of shambles my life is in right now, is the proof.
Of course there is great risk in doing this. Whilst it does show you have a mind that allows itself to think about what the hell you are gibbering on about, it does expose your argument. You are unable then to redefine your argument without looking like you are scrambling IF your argument is unable to stand on it's own.
It shows she has a mind that likes to use straw men for arguments, more than anything else.
I can't believe that this debate has gone on for this long. Louise, your posts on this subject have made anything else you might have to say utterly worthless, and I urge those reading along to ignore any future statements she may make.
In short, Don't Feed the Troll.
I was merely giving my two cents. As much as Louise appears to be spouting egotistical garbage, she also exhibits every sign of an extreme perfectionist imposing brutally rigid standards on herself and, at this point, others as well. I have had a similar problem with ego and perfectionism and it has not led to anything good. That's all.