The threads on this forum

I have been lurking in schizoid forums for a while. I have also recently browsed thirty-four pages on this forum. The topics and the level of discussion in the threads demonstrate a profound lack of intelligence. I understand why this is. As was established in my earlier thread, there is little-to-no correlation between the schizoid and intelligence. There was also a poll on these forums which concluded that over fifty percent of the users are under twenty-three years of age.

The discussion in the threads also mimics the structure of ordinary conversation. The language is largely colloquial or modern technical terms. Contractions are used to mimic speech. There is a great effort towards achieving pathos. Many threads are conducted as surveys, or end at the level of mere superficial, informational exchanges. Many responses are terse and constrained, suggesting a sort of posturing of the American cowboy or construction worker for his peers. It will be noted the level of ludicrousness there is in social posturing on a forum for loners existing anonymously and at great distances from each other. The suggestion is that the tendency comes from something primal and genetic, as in the unintelligent.

Well, we have already established that because there is little-to-no correlation between schizoids and intelligence, and because most of the world is unintelligent, most schizoids therefore are unintelligent. The one paradox is that a preference for isolation is and will be uniformly that of the modern intelligent man. It may even be said that this is the greatest gap in and signifier of intelligence between an unintelligent and an intelligent man. Why then does the schizoid, despite having made this great leap, continue to be unintelligent?

Of course, with over fifty percent of the forum being under twenty-three years of age, there is little telling who is who on these forums. The lower percentage of adults may be a result of the high turnover rate of our young schizoids into marriage, etc.

Nevertheless I have been struck several times to see a thoughtfully-worded, deep, intelligent post, just begging for response, and thus a mutual gain of minute shades of understanding of life, attacked as if by posse with flaming brands. Of course, those of you who recall my last thread, will remember that the situation was somewhat similar, but I actually have in mind one by another user, where, while the post in question was dense and somewhat verbose, the poster was called out of appalled illiteracy a lunatic, to which a few others resounded something such 'a shame, he might have had something to say if he were more concise', as if meaningful discussion can ever be had through concision.

Well, anyway, for instance, 'What is your spirit animal?'. I chose to work in a competitive environment, and it sucks. Shall I go to school to become an engineer? [Thread filled with Psychiatric nonsense]. 'Do you avoid relationships and sex?' and 'what would you do if someone told you they liked you?' [combined view counts exceed all other threads combined]. 'I think my husband has SPD'. [Political thread]. [Quote thread]. 'Epically Schizoid Moments'. I would be hard-pressed to distinguish this forum from any other on the Internet. As a schizoid, why exactly is it that you have a dislike for other people? Is it not because of their crude, predictable behavior? And yet it is the crudest, most predictable threads, and the invitations to the basest, most self-indulgent discussion that accrue the most responses and views.

I dislike people because they talk too much.

Edit: Spelin eror korekted

Can you not see your hypocrisy? Or do you realise that you too are afflicted by the same symptoms of 'unintelligence'; which I believe I resolved you had confused with something else in your last thread.

You're correct! We're all a bunch of unintelligent dopes, and you're some sort of supreme intelligent being - a god amongst schizoids (and men). Has that indulged your ego enough? Is that what you wanted to hear? If so, could you please go away and leave us to our banal chatter and pointless poll-answering? Thanks.

Isn't striving for emotional gratification through the feeling of superiority just as much of a crude and predictable human behavior, though? The tendency to overcompensate through ones perceived strengths, only to satisfy an innate (or primal/genetic, if you will) need for reward, because one is lacking the ability to gain reward through successfully adapting to societies norms or other definitions of success? This all sounds like perfectly average human behavior to me, no more, no less.

Mrfeathers wrote:Can you not see your hypocrisy? Or do you realise that you too are afflicted by the same symptoms of 'unintelligence'; which I believe I resolved you had confused with something else in your last thread.

The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary defines intelligence as the faculty of understanding and understanding as a quality admitting of degree; spec. a superior understanding. Understanding being the chief quality that separates man from beast, it is thus by degrees of superiority denoted as higher intelligence, to the point where it appears to be removed altogether from the beast. In other words the superior man is the most intelligent, since he contains in himself the the greater of the man and the lesser of the beast. Intelligence is what defines the man; instinct, a quality which is minimal in the superior man, the beast.

shailene wrote:Isn't striving for emotional gratification through the feeling of superiority just as much of a crude and predictable human behavior, though? The tendency to overcompensate through ones perceived strengths, only to satisfy an innate (or primal/genetic, if you will) need for reward, because one is lacking the ability to gain reward through successfully adapting to societies norms or other definitions of success? This all sounds like perfectly average human behavior to me, no more, no less.

I think you are on to something there. Perhaps this is the sole reason for some schizoid's inability to experience pleasure. They are trapped with a burden of intelligence, being isolation, but not gifted of the other faculties of intelligence, which would under normal circumstances have been their reason for seeking isolation, being greater pleasure. Hence they are alone but do not know why they are alone.

Jadeite wrote:I am not even 30 yet and practically a god--a prince

Do you live in Asia?

Let me guess -- The House of Saud?

This superficial division between "man" and "beast" do show a lack of understanding on your part.
What exactly is it you want to understand? Humanity? I suppose that's difficult for a God.

A superior understanding of humanity is more likely to be found among people who have a complete set of human talents, including social graces.

archigallus wrote:This superficial division between "man" and "beast" do show a lack of understanding on your part.
What exactly is it you want to understand? Humanity? I suppose that's difficult for a God.

A superior understanding of humanity is more likely to be found among people who have a complete set of human talents, including social graces.

The capability to understand things beyond an instinctive level is hardly a superficial distinction.

Understanding can be thought of as a huge lake that spills into several rivers with many tributaries. All of these branches of understanding affect, essentially, decision-making. When your lake is great, your rivers are long, and your decisions start at the source and continue to have positive effect long into the future; for the source is great. The tributaries are the spindly nerve endings of the understanding--they are the inevitable sensitivity of the highly intelligent man, the tributaries that ceaselessly fill the rivers, the impulses that lead decisions to be made.

The unintelligent man is nearly a stagnant pond. His rivers are often dry. Decisions are made but exist only in the short term. His tributaries do not exist; he is insensitive. The impulses to make decisions are few or instinctive, and when they come the decision is again an instinct. Hence the man who gets married and is unhappy; nature has played a trick upon him for her own designs.

I understand humanity quite well.