[Madness]

Kellais brought up an idea in Quorum the other day, a concept that we are all likely familiar with here at SA.

So let's look to our different reality-tunnels and the evidence therein...

Is bitterness the most common, or the only, response to being intellectually different?
Is depression a causal result of intelligence?
Are these ideas something biologically innate or is it a result of seeing our sociocultural circumstances as flawed?

And go...

[Alia]

Well, I think it's just a question of finding your niche with people who are like you. I was a very bright kid and my primary school was a total nightmare. But it got better and when I went to university, I found my place among nerds and the fandom. I go to conventions, I meet my nerdy friends every Thursday evening in a pub and chat with them on our own social media during the week, and I'm not bitter. True, our politicial scene sucks, the mainstream media are dumb, but I simply don't care. I have my niche and stick to it.

[sciborg2]

True, our politicial scene sucks,

There's a political scene for nerds? Or do you mean in general politics is rife with logical fallacies and inattention to data?

[Alia]

By "our", I mean political scene in one not-very-small central European country. Which is quite unlike American or British one.

[sciborg2]

By "our", I mean political scene in one not-very-small central European country. Which is quite unlike American or British one.

Ah, gotcha - thanks for the reply!

[Royce]

Hmmm. If bitterness is the only outcome, than I am not "intelectually different". I agree that it is common though. Depends on who you decide got it "right". If you are convinced by depressed dead Germans, French etc then you will most likely be bitter and depressed. If you are convinced by a happy guru, then you will be happy. This is not really convincing is it? There is of course much more to it than that, but in a very broad sense, I do think that it boils down to this. Don`t get me wrong though, some theory that makes some people depressed, can also make others awestruck with joy, so it is of course complicated. God damn blind brain!

Is depression a causal result of intelligence?

Depressed people will certainly claim that this is true. I am not so sure. If youre depressed because of neurological issues, then it is not your fault, but if you are down just because you read a book, I would not call that particularly intelligent. Maybe I am to stupid to be depressed anymore, willfully ignorant etc, but hey, it beats being down for sure.

I guess we all want to feel intelligent, smart etc(very human), but I sincerely believe that you can be a happy intelligent person. Not met that many though

[Kellais]

Wow, i get attributed to this discussion in the shoutbox?! Thx, Madness 

To get back on topic:

What i said in that discussion was the following - I said that i can totally see how being intelligent above (maybe well above?) the avarage can lead to become bitter in the long run. Why? Well it can be very frustrating to argue with...how do i put it...less educated people about stuff that you know they are wrong* on but they just don't see it or are willfully stubborn on. I mean this not from a arrogant point of view! You can really try to help them and they still will argue and argue about it without cease just because they "have to be right" . I find that highly frustrating (disclaimer: I mean in normal discussions that i have experienced! I by no means want to imply that i am well above average intelligence or that i know all the truths!). And i am not that old yet (not young either but oh well ) ... and i can imagine how this will make me bitter in the upcoming 20 years or so.
* this implies that i am talking about topics where there is something like right and wrong. I know that there are a lot of topics where there are no clear-cut truths (for example politics ).

It's just that if you have a certain...education/intelligence/how-ever-you-want-to-call-it you see things clearer or have at least thought about them hard...and there are just so many "oh i don't know but...i decide it is like THIS....*end of discussion* " people ... it can get to you.

I know i oversold this PoV in the shoutbox discussion  It's not as if i see no hope at all...that i only see this fate for the intelligent people....but as said, i can very much see how this is a path those people might eventually walk down. Maybe i am zynic, i don't know...

@ Royce - Happy intelligent person... take cover....the universe will implode 

@ Alia - now i am curious...what country are you in?

[sciborg2]

Heh, maybe it's time for some Alan Watts

But the people who coined the fully automatic theory of the universe were playing a very funny game, for what they wanted to say was this: all you people who believe in religion--old ladies and wishful thinkers-- you've got a big daddy up there, and you want comfort, but life is rough. Life is tough, as success goes to the most hard- headed people. That was a very convenient theory when the European and American worlds were colonizing the natives everywhere else. They said 'We're the end product of evolution, and we're tough. I'm a big strong guy because I face facts, and life is just a bunch of junk, and I'm going to impose my will on it and turn it into something else. I'm real hard.' That's a way of flattering yourself.

And so, it has become academically plausible and fashionable that this is the way the world works. In academic circles, no other theory of the world than the fully automatic model is respectable. Because if you're an academic person, you've got to be an intellectually tough person, you've got to be prickly.

[Phallus Pendulus]

Hmmm. If bitterness is the only outcome, than I am not "intelectually different". I agree that it is common though. Depends on who you decide got it "right". If you are convinced by depressed dead Germans, French etc then you will most likely be bitter and depressed. If you are convinced by a happy guru, then you will be happy. This is not really convincing is it? There is of course much more to it than that, but in a very broad sense, I do think that it boils down to this.

Depression has far more to do with neurology, environment, genetic predispositions, etc. The idea that serious depression is around the corner if you pick up a Nietzsche book, and can be cured with a happy self-help guru book, isn't convincing at all.

(Nietzsche himself seems to have believed that morality was entirely your own choice. Slave morality was something you learned at Sunday school, and master morality was something you could He-Man yourself into. Nowadays, of course, we know that's not the case. I'd recommend Jon Haidt's The Righteous Mind.)

[Royce]

Depression has far more to do with neurology, environment, genetic predispositions, etc. The idea that serious depression is around the corner if you pick up a Nietzsche book, and can be cured with a happy self-help guru book, isn't convincing at all.

You are of course right Mr Phallus. I am not sure you read it right though. Do you think I would suggest reading Ram Dass to a clinically depressed person? "just throw away your medication son and read this! It will cure your ass!"

This is not what I was saying at all, and more importantly, it is not what this thread is about at all.
I do not think depression caused by neurological issues is what we are discussing here. We are talking about intellectual "depression" or bitterness. What makes your worldview more "right" than others. This bitterness that occurs when you confront "stupid" people with what you consider "facts" and they don`t get it (like Kellais described). My point was only that we are often convinced by theories that suits the narrative you want(or are convinced) to be true. Being intellectually superior gives you a feeling of one upmanship, of superiority over others, a me versus stupid people scenario, where you feel bitter because what you think has to be right! Your ego loves to feel that you and a few others "get" it and all the sheep around us just walk around in ignorance. It makes you feel special and unique. This really is something we just assume though. When you actually get to really talk to someone, it often occurs that people you considered idiots actually has interesting ideas after all. It is easy to judge and assume this and that about people just by watching television or reading the paper, and end up screaming at the tube "you fucking idiots!" and not realize that is solely the point of the media in general. To make you feel like you are superior to others, and that feeling is great! You tune in again and again to get that feeling as often as you can, suddenly you are addicted to feeling superior, and then you become bitter.

That little rant reeks of bitterness I know, but we are all confused I guess, and that is why I will finish by saying that I am most likely wrong in my assumptions, because there is no right way IMO.

[Kellais]

Let me start by saying that i am not trying to pick on you. I just have two little things that make me wonder. And here goes...

That little rant reeks of bitterness I know, but we are all confused I guess, and that is why I will finish by saying that I am most likely wrong in my assumptions, because there is no right way IMO.

The two bolded parts is what i take issue with (maybe too strong a word but let me continue) ...

the first bolded part...isn't that a bit too easy? I mean this is a general cop out that puts everything in the "oh well, we can't do anything anyway because you know, we are all dumb/confused..." territory. And i think it is not as easy as that. Or at least not in every aspect and/or topic.

The second bolded part...i'm really wondering if you believe that to be true in that general a way? In your opinion, are there no hard facts? Nowhere? So nobody can ever be really wrong (or right)?! I don't think that you are saying that...but i hope you can elaborate on that

As i tried to explain (most probably not that well), i do think there are topics where you can be wrong about something. Especially in the field of hard sciences. So i guess there are some things were one can be right and, if you want to put a negative spin on in, "superior".

I do agree though that there surely is a lot of stuff where there is no real right and wrong. There are a lot of topics with shades-of-gray. Where your upbringing and moral compass are deciding factors or it's just a matter of taste etc etc. . And i agree that a lot of heated discussion, especially on the internet, are in such fields. And all the online drama is mostly only the one upmanship you talk about. But i guess nobody likes to be wrong...so the ink-wars will continue add nauseum

[Royce]

the first bolded part...isn't that a bit too easy? I mean this is a general cop out that puts everything in the "oh well, we can't do anything anyway because you know, we are all dumb/confused..." territory. And i think it is not as easy as that. Or at least not in every aspect and/or topic.

It is of course very complicated, and I should have emphasized that this is me I am talking about. I am a confused being .
That being said I do not see that as a cop out, more like not being certain about anything. If nothing really is certain, aren`t we all at least just a little bit confused/deceived maybe?.

If you are 100% certain about something, than good for you, that must be a very liberating feeling. I am just saying that I have not come across something that convincing yet I am afraid. I do not think that accepting uncertainty leads to "giving up" as you suggest, but more that it leads to further investigation, instead of staying still. But again, this is just me, and it was wrong of me to assume that everyone is confused, because that would make me certain right?

The second bolded part...i'm really wondering if you believe that to be true in that general a way? In your opinion, are there no hard facts? Nowhere? So nobody can ever be really wrong (or right)?! I don't think that you are saying that...but i hope you can elaborate on that

Well, I do not think that it is carved in stone, or written on paper anywhere, that humans even are supposed to know any thing for certain. It does not stop us from trying our best to boil things down to "hard facts". Take the field of science for instance, does not "facts" change as science progresses through time?. New things are discovered and previous "facts" are suddenly disregarded and replaced by new "facts" which will stick around until they are proven wrong ad infinitum.

On a personal level, when we are dealing with each other on mundane levels of interaction, then "right" or "wrong" simply boils down to human decency. To treat people like you want them to treat you and so on(jesus that sounded like christ himself!). Then "right" and "wrong" actually makes a huge difference in relations to the feelings it brings to the surface. So in that aspect of existence(feelings) there definitely are rights and wrongs but in all other teoretical fields.... well I am willing to discuss this further with all of you beautiful minds out there

[Madness]

Wow, i get attributed to this discussion in the shoutbox?! Thx, Madness 

You brought it up .

Depression has far more to do with neurology, environment, genetic predispositions, etc. The idea that serious depression is around the corner if you pick up a Nietzsche book, and can be cured with a happy self-help guru book, isn't convincing at all.

Sorry Pendulus. I should have made the original chat context clearer.

To the bold, sure, all of those influence a person's predisposition to mental states. In some cases, absolutely needs some kind of invasive intervention (chemical, surgical). But depression is humanity's third, if I remember right, most common affliction after cancer and cardiovascular (heart/vein/etc) problems. And in many cases, people recover for a variety of reasons, a percentage of which are the result of that person taking "actionable" measures to change... I'm heavy into the cognitive neurobiology so I find studies that show recovery through strengthing specific brain structures through neuropractice most interesting.

But yeah, waxing; Royce is right in clarifying and I shouldn't have implied that all depression was result of "intellectual bitterness."

Could I have rephrased that as "does depression causally follow intellectual bitterness?" is that the same thing as my opening post?

[Wilshire]

Nah, I don't believe it.  It probably has more to do with how much more intelligent you believe you are than everyone else. Someone can be brilliant and be honestly humble and always see the best in everything, or extremely ignorant and know very little and be very angry that everyone is so stupid and doesn't see the world the way they do.

Less to do with how smart you are, more to do with how you interact with the world around you.

[dragharrow]

The second bolded part...i'm really wondering if you believe that to be true in that general a way? In your opinion, are there no hard facts? Nowhere? So nobody can ever be really wrong (or right)?! I don't think that you are saying that...but i hope you can elaborate on that

As i tried to explain (most probably not that well), i do think there are topics where you can be wrong about something. Especially in the field of hard sciences. So i guess there are some things were one can be right and, if you want to put a negative spin on in, "superior".

I would love to talk about this more at some point because I consider myself to be a pretty hard relativist. A few months ago I would have wholeheartedly defended the position that there are no objective facts whatsoever. Recently, however, I've begun to cautiously reexamine that position. But as of now, I still do lean towards total fact relativism. I don't think it is an incoherent position at all. Understand, I am not a nihilist nor am I agnostic. I still have a system of epistemic, factual, and moral commitments that I use to interpret the world and guide my behavior. I just suspect that these commitments are themselves subjective or even arbitrary, and that they create the truth of the world I live in more than extract a preexisting truth from a preexisting world. I accept logic and empiricism, and utilize science and philosophy, not because they are true but because they are useful. When I believe that other epistemic systems, such as faith or mysticism, could be useful in the pursuit of my will, I take them up and put them to work. The most likely case still seems to me to be that there are no universals, no objective truths. I genuinely suspect that everything is subjective. Everything is frame dependent.