Albert Einstein

[ken]

You are making a fool of yourself.

Why does your goal here in this forum appear to be to degrade others to make you look superior to them?

Summary: "Intelligence = ability to learn".

Finally you went and actually checked up BEFORE making another wrong assumption again. Congratulations. I wondered how long it would take you.

We do not all have the same ability to learn.
It is different for all of us both qualitatively and quantitatively.
You know that, I know that and anyone reading this knows that.

Therefore, according to you, I am WRONG. You have finally proven you are right. However, what is the purpose of you "proving" this? What does this lead to? What is the actual point that you are trying to make and show others?

Your "valid, sound" argument that,
We do not all have the same ability to learn, BECAUSE
The ability for all of us is different both qualitatively and quantitatively, AND BECAUSE
I know that, you know that and anyone reading this knows that.
Surely does prove that I am wrong and you are absolutely right.

Your argument here alone proves all this all by itself. Your attempt at an argument by the way just happens to coincidentally agree wholeheartedly with you have already gained and maintain as your beliefs, which were already stored within that brain, before you even looked at this, i.e., the already obtained and stored knowledge, which you continue to choose to believe as absolute truth, could not and would not have effected your ability to learn and understand what I have been saying, would it?

By the way I wonder if you had noticed at all, which others have and will notice, that you are doing EXACTLY what I have been pointing out all along here in this thread from the very first page and which einstein actually was also referring to in the OP of this thread, i.e., you are NOT using imagination, from the open Mind. You are ONLY using the limited knowledge, from the brain. That knowledge from which you obviously could NOT become any wiser with or from.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."

Do you ever wonder what einstein was meaning by this, or do you already believe you know exactly what he meant here?

"Imagination comes from the open Mind.

Knowledge comes from the brain.

Using imagination FIRST is needed to see newer or further things, and then he and we can use our already learned knowledge to verify its correctness.

Looking from the open Mind, where imagination exists, is more important than looking from the brain, where limited and limiting knowledge exists.

Obviously we can not discover newer and further knowledge from the knowledge that we have already gained, so it is far more important to learning to use the limitless imagination.

Einstein did not have more intelligence than any other human being. Einstein just used imagination first to look at the "world", prior to looking from his already gained limited knowledge.

What knowledge we already have and know is far too limiting to see the Universe the way It truly is."

This is why some people given all the opportunities achieve little and why some given few opportunities achieve much.
It is how some people contribute intelligent inventions and innovations, and how others, given every chance, having massive confidence and massive opportunities amount to nothing.

Okay thanks for "enlightening" Me further here. I had "NEVER" considered any of these things, before I wrote what I did. And, from your truly "wise" perspective here I can and will be able to now lead a much more knowledgeable life.

Could there be any thing further in this issue? Or, is what you wrote absolutely true, right, and correct, and enough evidence and proof has been provided, therefore there is nothing else nor no need to look at or for any thing else?

Are you saying here that every human being is born the way they are, each with varying degrees of ability to learn? If so, then because you believe I am making a fool of myself there is nothing I could achieve, no matter what, and all I will always amount to is nothing? Could a fool really achieve anything at all?

By the way, you have stated that you are clearly more intelligent than Men, so what IS the definition of 'intelligence' to you?

Please refer to the post I made earlier today.

A typical response from you. No help whatsoever.

I wonder if you will again, after I ask you to provide Me with some information on which you post you are referring to, just tell Me to look for it Myself. I had the courtesy to provide you with information even when you were accusing me of something, which I actually did not do.

I had a look and can not find your definition of 'intelligence', so which post exactly are you referring to?

[Hobbes' Choice]

, i.e., either looking from the brain or from the Mind.

Okay - we can conclude that you have the intelligence of a person, or human being (makes no difference), with half a brain.
Good.
Have a nice day!

Who is 'we'?

There is a huge difference between a person and a human being. You say it makes no difference so what is the definition of 'person' and 'human being'? But I guess you only need to provide one definition because it "makes no difference", to you.

Again, an attempt at an insult. To put others down your hoping that will build you up?

By the way have you provided the definition of 'intelligence' yet?

You are just digging yourself deeper in your hole.

All meanings to intelligence refer to a human characteristics which are all empirically and demonstrably NOT the same for each ALL humans.

Please refer to the post I made earlier today.

[ken]

Okay - we can conclude that you have the intelligence of a person, or human being (makes no difference), with half a brain.
Good.
Have a nice day!

Who is 'we'?

There is a huge difference between a person and a human being. You say it makes no difference so what is the definition of 'person' and 'human being'? But I guess you only need to provide one definition because it "makes no difference", to you.

Again, an attempt at an insult. To put others down your hoping that will build you up?

By the way have you provided the definition of 'intelligence' yet?

You are just digging yourself deeper in your hole.

The only way to find the Truth is to keep "digging" so that one can look deep within themselves to find the Truth. If anyone wants to ask clarifying questions to Me, then what can and will be discovered will be far more enlightening than any thing you have provided so far.

The actual truth is your very words here are providing Me with all the evidence and proof needed to support My position, which may not be fully understood in these days but soon will be.

All meanings to intelligence refer to a human characteristics which are all empirically and demonstrably NOT the same for each ALL humans.

Are you absolutely sure of this? Stating 'All' is a very decisive statement to make. And you used that word three times here. Your stating this as an absolute fact that could not be disputed

If so, then if and when I prove otherwise you will obviously be closed off from seeing that truth.

You are not going any way forward. You are just stuck in your own beliefs and assumptions. Absolutely blinded to and from what I want to express, and the Truth.

Also your refusal to answer My questions shows signs that could be interpreted in certain ways.

Please refer to the post I made earlier today.

Which post?

Obviously there is some reason you do not provide which post it is.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Obviously there is some reason you do not provide which post it is.

Yes.
You are obsessing about a small mistake. It was a ridiculous comment made to support some other argument about imagination.
I've no idea what kind of a person you are, but from this exchange it seems clear that you are not willing to take back that silly mistake and although you have not offered a single argument in support of that assertion that humans share the same degree of intelligence, you do not seem to think you have any obligation to back up your words. It is for this reason that I feel that you are flogging a dead horse, and are demonstrating from a lack of your own intelligence that yours is lower that many on this Forum, thus shooting yourself in the foot.

Digging deeper in a hole means you are going now where except your own grave. And this conversation is dead.

[ken]

Obviously there is some reason you do not provide which post it is.

Yes.

Is that all you can come up with, a "Yes".

What is the reason you refuse to answer EVERY question asked of you?

It surely appears to some you do not answer because either you can not or you are afraid of the outcome.

You are obsessing about a small mistake. It was a ridiculous comment made to support some other argument about imagination.

What are you talking about? What "mistake"? I purposely said what I said and the way I said it to provoke some inquisitiveness from others. Only one person asked for clarification and showed any sign of being inquisitive. I replied to that person. You, on the other hand, ONLY insisted that I am wrong, from the outset. And, you still refuse to look into what I am meaning. So, you are helping Me in another way.

A dictionary definition is NOT a ridiculous comment to make AFTER a definition was requested from Me.

I've no idea what kind of a person you are, but from this exchange it seems clear that you are not willing to take back that silly mistake

It should be very clear. I thought I had made that very clear. So, do not know why you continue with the "mistake" comment.

and although you have not offered a single argument in support of that assertion that humans share the same degree of intelligence,

No one has asked for any argument. The only thing left here is you and the only thing you want to do is ridicule and degrade and only believe in your already gained beliefs.

you do not seem to think you have any obligation to back up your words.

Of course I do. I am just waiting to be challenged by some one. I have yet to see any challenges. All I see from you is a person coming from a completely closed perspective and a stubbornness of that you are right and I am wrong attitude. Your useless examples of backing up what you say is not anything at all. You have yet to give any definitions for 'intelligence', 'person', and 'human being', which if we ever get around to looking at would not surprise Me at all if they just absolutely contradicted each other. If any one was truly interested My definitions further each topic to further prove each other being true, right and correct.

It is for this reason that I feel that you are flogging a dead horse, and are demonstrating from a lack of your own intelligence that yours is lower that many on this Forum, thus shooting yourself in the foot.

All this figurative language you use just takes away from the literal language that is what is best used to discover and find truth, especially in philosophical discussions.

Digging deeper in a hole means you are going now where except your own grave. And this conversation is dead.

This discussion is only dead because you completely refuse to look at any thing other than what you believe is true and because you completely refuse to answer any question asked of you whatsoever. Talk about NOT being able to back up one says. This discussion died when you started talking, from that completely closed-minded attitude of yours.

Typical of a person who does not answer questions and will not even provide the post they say they wrote something in, to call a conversation dead, so that they can then leave trying to appear as though there is nothing left to discuss. Why do so many people run away when I question them? What is it they fear so much.

The beauty of you saying My intelligence is lower than many on this forum is you have NOT given a definition of what you mean by 'intelligence', so no open-Minded person actually knows what it is that you are talking about here. You are the only one that knows what you are talking about here, but you either can not or do not want to explain yourself.

Also, when I show how the actual words you wrote in this thread actually provides the evidence of how imagination is more important than knowledge and where imagination comes from compared to where knowledge is stored, then how much you actually did NOT use any of that equal intelligence, which is available to you and which is within each and every body, will be seen by every person here.

The way you are acting and reacting here is showing every one else how the open Mind, which is intelligence, can be and is completely shut off stupidly by the already gained beliefs, stored from within the brain.

I have NOT yet "offered a single argument in support of that assertion that humans share the same degree of intelligence," because as has been proven countless times here already, even with a truly sound valid argument people who maintain strongly held beliefs are not able to recognize the truth in the argument. So, there is and was no use offering a single argument to you. What I have done, however, is to provoke and use you to react the way that you have to show WITH evidence and proof instead of HOW ALL human beings HAVE the same degree of intelligence, but how they prefer to use their own distorted thinking instead, i.e., their beliefs, believing, and assumptions, which unfortunately prevents any intelligence coming into place.

When it is the right time to offer and provide arguments in support of some of My views, then I can refer others back to this thread for the proof and evidence, if they need it, which will however also be of use for the scientific community. We all know how thorough scientists like to be and i think you have provided enough proof so far.

So, thank you. If you want to leave now, then go ahead. But if you want to remain, then feel free to ask some 'intelligent' questions. Just saying that you are right and I am wrong does not cut it, for Me anyway.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I have NOT yet "offered a single argument in support of that assertion that humans share the same degree of intelligence,"

And yet you claim that all humans have the same degree of intelligence to Einstein. And therein lies your problem.

. Just saying that you are right and I am wrong ......

Please refer to all the posts I made previously, if you can see out of that deep hole you have dug beneath your feet.

[ken]

I have NOT yet "offered a single argument in support of that assertion that humans share the same degree of intelligence,"

And yet you claim that all humans have the same degree of intelligence to Einstein. And therein lies your problem.

I already explained WHY I have not YET offered a single argument to you. This was explained thoroughly in the last part of the same sentence and in the next sentence. Do you only read and reply to only parts of what I write? Your lack of engagement and of answering questions could suggest that actually.

And, YES I still claim that all human beings have the same degree of intelligence to EACH other. No one human being has more or less intelligence than another. The only degrees of variation is in how much of that intelligence a human being actually chooses to use. Obviously a newly born, non-believing human being uses far more intelligence than that of a fully fledged, believing adult human being. Obviously the ability of young children to learn and grasp relatively new ideas happens much quicker than in older adults. But, the capacity to use the intelligence is always there. It is just very unfortunate that that intelligence rarely gets used in elder human adults, as proven throughout this thread, and from the world around us.

Also, where in lies what problem? You allude to things, but without clarification I have no idea what you are talking about. But, we can only guess what the chances of getting an answer to this question will be. You have yet to provide one answer to any other question. But i will try again anyway. How do you actually define 'problem'? You can add that to your list of confusion causing problems, which you have, to answer and solve.

Please refer to all the posts I made previously, if you can see out of that deep hole you have dug beneath your feet.

[/quote][/quote]

But there is nothing of any substance to refer to in all the posts that you made previously. You have NOT made one attempt to answer any questions. You have NOT provided any sound valid argument. You have NOT made any attempt to define any words asked of you. And, you have NOT shown any evidence that you are open to anything other than your own beliefs.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

''Obviously a newly born, non-believing human being uses far more intelligence than that of a fully fledged, believing adult human being.''
If you are referring to belief in 'god' then truer words have not been spoken.

[Hobbes' Choice]

''Obviously a newly born, non-believing human being uses far more intelligence than that of a fully fledged, believing adult human being.''
If you are referring to belief in 'god' then truer words have not been spoken.

Indeed.

But Ken is trying to claim that Einstein is no more, or less intelligent than anyone else. But he fails to see that the logical conclusion of that is we all have to have the same intelligence for that to be the case.
Babies would have to have the same as an octogenarian with Alzheimers, or a person with half his brain missing.

[Hobbes' Choice]

And, you have NOT shown any evidence that you are open to anything other than your own beliefs.

I don't have any beliefs sweetie.

[FlashDangerpants]

One major cause of all the disagreements, disputes, arguments, and fighting in the world among human beings is their inability to cope with the tendency of other people to treat any and all words differently than they do.

That sentence simply cannot be true or else it would be literally meaningless.

Suppose we didn't agree on any particular word within it. For instance, if I were to say "I have a tendency, it has five fingers" you would say that I either don't know what tendencies are, or I don't know what fingers are. If that was the only word I was unable to use correctly, it would be fine, you could tell me what 'tendency' means and we could continue the discussion.

But what if I didn't know what any of these words meant either: "disagreements, disputes, arguments, and fighting in the world among human beings is their inability". I might tell you with absolute sincerity that "disputes are trouser under ferret diaphanous banana" and you would say, shit, that guy doesn't make any sense at all.

Language works because we are able to trust as a rule that other people understand more or less what we do by the words we use. This isn't nitpicking grammar nazi stuff, I'm not suggesting that if we allow split infinitives all id lost for human communication. shared meaning of at least the common, useful and necessary words in every day use makes language possible. How people use the word - any word whether it is 'house' 'dog' or 'intelligence' - is how we expect that word to be understood by others, and that ultimately is how any word gets its meaning.

In common with all the people I typically converse with, if I call somebody stupid, I mean they have low intelligence, and if I call somebody smart, I mean that they have high intelligence. If I see man trying to eat soup with a fork, I am liable to say he is not intelligent, and if I see a man successfully eating soup with a fork I will say he is dead f****** smart.

Now if you are planning to say the world at large is wrong about what intelligence means, you may do so, but there will necessarily be qualifications. I have never asked a psychologist what they mean in any special psychological context by intelligence - I am dimly aware that they don't really go with the vernacular smart / stupid thing. But if that is correct, they would be using a different and special definition of the word that always comes with the implicit caveat 'intelligence (in our specific usage of the term)'

Philosophy has many examples of these special words. If I describe somebody as an idealist in an ordinary conversation, I likely mean that they are some sort of political idealist who believes very strongly in sort of principle. But if I refer to George Berkeley as an idealist, I obviously mean something completely different by that word. Likewise, whenever I proposition a lady, I damn well don't mean the same word as I would when referring to propositions in any other context round these parts. I'm not that perverted.

So you can use 'intelligence' to mean anything you want by it. But you must recognise as you do so that you are opting out of the standard definition, you aren't showing the world that our word is inferior to yours. And you certainly won't get far simply inserting it into conversation with your special Ken meaning.

[ken]

''Obviously a newly born, non-believing human being uses far more intelligence than that of a fully fledged, believing adult human being.''
If you are referring to belief in 'god' then truer words have not been spoken.

I was not referring to that actual example in particular but that is a great example of what I am getting at. Holding onto and maintaining a belief or believing in absolutely any thing stops a person from having the ability to learn something else. Any prevention of having the ability to learn is lacking intelligence. When looking at the definition of the word 'intelligence' to mean the ability to learn, then no matter what the belief and the believing in is, the exact same thing happens. That person will be lacking in intelligence. If a belief is held so strongly as to not allow a person to learn anything else, then that is a person being an unintelligent person. Depending on the degree of the belief and the believing in influences how intelligent or not they are.

Look at any newly born baby, it is open to absolutely any thing. They look at the environment around them ONLY through the perspective of the open Mind. Thus, they are able to learn absolutely any thing. Just look at how quickly, for the sake of this discussion, 'any' child is able to learn any language in just a relative very few short years, and then they go on to learn any sort of religion or teachings that they are surrounded by. In fact while they are open they can not be influenced by what is happening around them. Also, the more a child trusts, respects, etc, its parent(s)/caregiver(s) or even the other adults around it, from its community, then the more that child will start believing in what it is being taught. Obviously what is taught, and thus learned, all depends on what culture and what period of time a child is brought up in.

Now, fast forward a few years to when a child is an adult. Once those things that are being believed in become strongly held beliefs, then that now adult looks at the environment around them MOSTLY through the perspective of those beliefs. They are looking at things from the perspective of the knowledge that they already have. Thus, they are NOT able to learn any thing else. As I have been consistently saying throughout this forum it is better to look at anything first from the perspective of the open Mind BEFORE using that already gained knowledge to see the actual truth in what is being said. It is obvious when a person is looking from the open Mind because they are eager to learn, which is shown by their inquisitiveness and their clarifying questioning, which is usually WHY? However, and unfortunately, on nearly every occasion nearly all adult people look at things firstly from the perspective of their already attained knowledge. This is what I call 'intellect'. Adults can be extremely intellectual people and show this by expressing their extremely vast amount of already gained knowledge that they already have, but at the same time they can be extremely lacking in intelligence, to the point of stupidity. 'Stupidity' just shown by lacking intelligence.

The ability to learn remains with us, all all the time, but only if we choose to look at the environment around us (any thing) intelligently or intellectually. 'Intelligence' comes from the open Mind and provides the ability to learn (imagine and create) any thing new. 'Intellect', on the other hand, comes from within the brain (the storage unit for information) and only provides what knowledge that has already been gained. Nothing new nor further knowledge can be learned nor gained from there.

All of this and more I can show how it exactly works, and in conjunction with how the Mind and the brain actually works also. However, I can only show and prove this to people who are willing to look at this from the perspective of the open Mind. I am unable to show and prove any thing to people who believe they already know what is true, right, or correct, and also insist "you are wrong" BEFORE I even begin a, or at any time, during the discussion.

[ken]

''Obviously a newly born, non-believing human being uses far more intelligence than that of a fully fledged, believing adult human being.''
If you are referring to belief in 'god' then truer words have not been spoken.

Indeed.

But Ken is trying to claim that Einstein is no more, or less intelligent than anyone else.

Yes that is right but if we want to continue this discussion we can loose the 'einstein' word. My view is ALL human beings are no more nor less intelligent than another.

I can provide all the evidence and proof for how this view was obtained, BUT, only people who are truly interested in wondering how I obtained My view are able to see and learn this. By the way I still say My view could be wrong and as such is always open to being changed.

But he fails to see that the logical conclusion of that is we all have to have the same intelligence for that to be the case.

But that is what I can actually show, logically. That conclusion is what I came to, from what I have seen and experienced in Life. So, I do NOT fail to see that at all. That is the conclusion so far, which is still open to being changed.

Babies would have to have the same as an octogenarian with Alzheimers, or a person with half his brain missing.

You have nothing else to do but just read the words what I write and imagine what "Having the ability to learn" could actually mean?

Human beings, on a whole, have the ability to learn absolutely any thing. No other animal has that. Here this might help, imagine it from the perspective of ALL human beings as one, instead of just trying to see it from the perspective of individual people. I do NOT like to go into complex details of picking one particular person over another, I like to keep everything as simple as possible, but there was a case reported about how a human being lost half the brain and was still living. I am pretty sure that person also still had the ability to learn. The same with a person with alzhiemers I am pretty sure they still have the ability to learn, if they forget what they learned five seconds later does not matter. They were still able to learn some thing.

There is nothing hard nor complex about anything that I am trying to say here. I am not trying to make out einstein did not know a lot more, and know much newer at the time, knowledge than most of us do. I am just trying to show how 'intelligence',the ability to learn , is a human only thing, and which ALL human beings have an equal share in. We are ALL born with equal intelligence and, for the sake of this discussion, no intellect at all. But, because of this great ability to learn absolutely any thing we also sadly learn to believe in some things also. Then, unfortunately, our actual already gained intellect can effect our actual natural ability to continue learning, i.e., our intelligence.

Maybe I had not make this clear before but I see that einstein used intelligence much more than other human beings do, but, to Me, he did not have more intelligence than another. Einstein, to Me, is a great example of what can be achieved if and when people remain open, and thus are naturally using intelligence, instead of closing the open Mind off by using the brain and that already gained knowledge only. It was because off intelligence that einstein was able to learn more, newer, and further knowledge.

[ken]

And, you have NOT shown any evidence that you are open to anything other than your own beliefs.

I don't have any beliefs sweetie.

None at all? Are you sure?

Your writings certainly do not show this.

A "you are wrong" statement could only come from a person who believes they are (or knows what is) right. Believing (in) some thing is a belief in of itself.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

''Obviously a newly born, non-believing human being uses far more intelligence than that of a fully fledged, believing adult human being.''
If you are referring to belief in 'god' then truer words have not been spoken.

I was not referring to that actual example in particular but that is a great example of what I am getting at. Holding onto and maintaining a belief or believing in absolutely any thing stops a person from having the ability to learn something else. Any prevention of having the ability to learn is lacking intelligence. When looking at the definition of the word 'intelligence' to mean the ability to learn, then no matter what the belief and the believing in is, the exact same thing happens. That person will be lacking in intelligence. If a belief is held so strongly as to not allow a person to learn anything else, then that is a person being an unintelligent person. Depending on the degree of the belief and the believing in influences how intelligent or not they are.

Look at any newly born baby, it is open to absolutely any thing. They look at the environment around them ONLY through the perspective of the open Mind. Thus, they are able to learn absolutely any thing. Just look at how quickly, for the sake of this discussion, 'any' child is able to learn any language in just a relative very few short years, and then they go on to learn any sort of religion or teachings that they are surrounded by. In fact while they are open they can not be influenced by what is happening around them. Also, the more a child trusts, respects, etc, its parent(s)/caregiver(s) or even the other adults around it, from its community, then the more that child will start believing in what it is being taught. Obviously what is taught, and thus learned, all depends on what culture and what period of time a child is brought up in.

Now, fast forward a few years to when a child is an adult. Once those things that are being believed in become strongly held beliefs, then that now adult looks at the environment around them MOSTLY through the perspective of those beliefs. They are looking at things from the perspective of the knowledge that they already have. Thus, they are NOT able to learn any thing else. As I have been consistently saying throughout this forum it is better to look at anything first from the perspective of the open Mind BEFORE using that already gained knowledge to see the actual truth in what is being said. It is obvious when a person is looking from the open Mind because they are eager to learn, which is shown by their inquisitiveness and their clarifying questioning, which is usually WHY? However, and unfortunately, on nearly every occasion nearly all adult people look at things firstly from the perspective of their already attained knowledge. This is what I call 'intellect'. Adults can be extremely intellectual people and show this by expressing their extremely vast amount of already gained knowledge that they already have, but at the same time they can be extremely lacking in intelligence, to the point of stupidity. 'Stupidity' just shown by lacking intelligence.

The ability to learn remains with us, all all the time, but only if we choose to look at the environment around us (any thing) intelligently or intellectually. 'Intelligence' comes from the open Mind and provides the ability to learn (imagine and create) any thing new. 'Intellect', on the other hand, comes from within the brain (the storage unit for information) and only provides what knowledge that has already been gained. Nothing new nor further knowledge can be learned nor gained from there.

All of this and more I can show how it exactly works, and in conjunction with how the Mind and the brain actually works also. However, I can only show and prove this to people who are willing to look at this from the perspective of the open Mind. I am unable to show and prove any thing to people who believe they already know what is true, right, or correct, and also insist "you are wrong" BEFORE I even begin a, or at any time, during the discussion.

I know an agenda when I smell one. That's not what an 'open mind' is. It's the religious who have a closed mind. They believe without evidence, and get enraged when anyone else doesn't share their irrational beliefs. An open mind is what you have BEFORE you view the evidence. After that it becomes an informed opinion based on evidence and observation. If there's no evidence then only an idiot keeps an 'open mind'. There's also the fact that some beliefs are just so absurd that they don't require a concerted hunt for evidence. e.g. I don't bother to look for evidence of fairies. I suppose they might exist, but I would be astounded if they do, and if they do then it would be have to be some kind of natural phenomenon--meaning they aren't fairies at all, since a fairy is a supernatual being. I feel the same way about gods.