Academy of Sciences of Heroesland — Everything about everything.

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Lord de Satan

“Mind,” translated from German, means “spirit.” That is, it is the SPIRITUAL ability of a person to think. You have, of course, acquired some information, but that doesn't mean you have developed this ability itself. Education develops the mind, but it is different from people who strive to develop their thinking rather than accumulate knowledge.

Unfortunately, this question is like the Gordian knot. On the other hand, what do you stand for? You stand for the physiological health of a person. And I stand for moral health. But, in my opinion, the level of moral health is higher than physiological health, as I have already said. So, everyone decides for themselves. But if you one day come out with a protest against mandatory vaccinations, I will most likely be among your opponents.

Define for me “spirit” and “spiritual ability to think.” Clearly and unambiguously. And yes, regarding “spirit” in German:
http://www.classes.ru/all-german/dictionary-russian-german-essential-term-20799.htm
You are wrong.

I am not advocating for physiological health at the expense of moral health. My moral principle is known to you – “I cannot, by action or inaction, allow a person to be harmed,” including if he causes this harm to himself, regardless of the reasons. And harm is not only physiological but also psychological, for example.

And yes, accumulating knowledge is bad because you also need to be able to use it. Education, in my opinion, is about increasing the ability to use and process information. When I said that I started learning in the same way as those I considered smarter than me, I meant that I was able to process the same amount of information with the same efficiency.
Experience that does not contain information or does not help to process it has nothing to do with learning

Саня Изи

14 years ago

Auto-translated

When I say that I started learning in the same way as those I considered smarter than me, I mean that I was able to process the same amount of information with the same efficiency.

Heh, how did you verify that?

In reply to Саня Изи

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Lord de Satan

Heh, how did you check that?

Um. Regarding "with the same efficiency," it's probably simpler – after all, the efficiency of information processing in a specific field can be measured by observing the speed and effectiveness of solving certain tasks from that field. Considering that this trio is quite diverse, the fact that I was able to effectively compete with each of them in their "peak" area may indicate an increased efficiency in processing incoming information for me, or a decreased efficiency for them.
Regarding the same amount – well, I definitely know that in the fields in which I compared efficiency, I received no more information than they did. Possibly less.
That is, yes, it is difficult to talk about increased intelligence in general – I didn't focus on the "peak" areas of these three; I continued general development and mastering things not related to these areas, as a result, reaching a new level of understanding and processing data from other areas of knowledge.

Added 1 minute ago
And in any case, returning to "respecting means humiliating," acknowledging that someone is better than me in no way humiliated me.

Added 6 minutes ago
And yes. I'm still waiting for a definition of "spirit," "spiritual ability to think," "spirituality" (optional), and "mind," since "mind" != "spirit" in German (as stated)

Саня Изи

14 years ago

Auto-translated

In any case, returning to the idea of "respecting means humbling oneself," acknowledging that someone is better than me in no way humiliated me.

Well, that's in your case, not mine.

And yes. I'm still waiting for a definition of "spirit," "spiritual ability to think," "spirituality" (optional), and "mind," since, as it turns out, "mind" is not the same as "spirit" in German (as stated).

Well, what else? Should I teach you arithmetic?

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Hey, we're arguing about the properties of intelligence here, but we don't even have a definition, not even in the form of a link to a source. This painfully reminds me of _sophistry_. And sophistry is bad because it doesn't lead to establishing objective truth.

Added 2 minutes later

Lord de Satan

Well, that's in your case, not mine.

In general, if I remember correctly, you initially claimed that "respect = humiliation" in all cases, and you don't humiliate yourself before anyone, therefore you won't respect anyone either. That is, either it's not in all cases, or your case is unique - and then a poll is needed. Or you are in a society that cannot be called healthy. Or being in such a society has had too much of an impact on the overall pattern of perception, but that's already completely unfounded theorizing.

Саня Изи

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Hey, buddy, we're arguing about the properties of intelligence, but we don't even have a definition, not even in the form of a link to a source.

Tengro, relax. Do you want me to dig around on church websites?

P.S. Every person is unique in their own way. So you can challenge my point of view, but I'll still stick to my own.

In reply to Саня Изи

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Lord de Satan

Tengro, chill out already. Do you want me to keep digging through church websites?

Sha. Halt. You mentioned "spirituality." So, I've been trying for two years to get anyone who mentions "spirit" and "spiritual thinking" to provide clear and consistent definitions. So far, the most rational definition of spirituality has been "the ability to grok," but the word "grok" requires reading a considerable book to understand it, and not just reading it, but also understanding it.
Because from your words, it follows that receiving and processing information does not lead to an improvement in the ability to process.

Саня Изи

14 years ago

Auto-translated

So, I've been trying for two years to get a clear and consistent definition of "spirit" and "spiritual thinking" from anyone who mentions them.

First, I said "spiritual ability to think." Second, if you need a definition of "spirit," look it up on Wikipedia; it's all clearly explained there. Third, what kind of processing are you talking about? What did you process? Did you come up with something new? If so, then yes, you may have become smarter; I don't deny it. But if you just sat at your desk and mindlessly accumulated data, then no. That's what I meant.

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Hmm.
Okay.
The next question is: is it possible to come up with something sufficiently complex without a knowledge base?
And if not, does acquiring such a knowledge base (approaching the moment of "I've figured it out") make a person smarter?

Added 2 minutes later
And yes, a related question: does the awareness and understanding of the essence of one's own actions ("Hooray! I understand why this law works this way and where it can be applied in real life"), even if you don't conduct research from scratch, lead to increased intelligence?

Саня Изи

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Theory is one thing, but without practice, you won't come up with anything new. If a person, without a "knowledge base," as you put it, engages in practice, they will eventually understand everything. And then, perhaps, they will become wiser. Of course, if they have the ability to think.

And yes, a related question — the awareness and understanding of the essence of one's own actions ("Hooray! I understand why this law works this way and where it can be applied in real life"), even if you don't conduct research from scratch — does it lead to becoming wiser?

Perhaps. But it's debatable. P.S. Tengro, either write faster or wrap it up, because it's almost morning.

In reply to Саня Изи

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Lord de Satan

Theory is theory, but without practice, you won't come up with anything new. If a person, without a "knowledge base," as you put it, engages in practice, they will eventually understand everything. And then, perhaps, they will become smarter. Of course, if they have the ability to think.

Possibly. But debatable.

P.S. Tengro, either write faster or wrap it up, because it's almost morning.

You see, there are fields – like high-energy physics – where you need a solid theoretical foundation to conduct an experiment and understand what you're even doing.

Heh, here's an explanation, by the way, of why students in technical universities are considered smarter than students in economics – without understanding the essence of the process and how it works, it's impossible to pass a single lab assignment.

And yes, what do you mean by "almost morning"? The night has just begun... oh, sorry, it's only one in the morning for me.

Саня Изи

14 years ago

Auto-translated

You see, there are fields – like high-energy physics – where you need a solid theoretical foundation to conduct an experiment and understand what you're actually doing.

But what does this have to do with the ability to think?

Heh, and here's an explanation, by the way, of why students in technical universities are considered smarter than students in economics – without understanding the essence of the process and how it works, it's impossible to pass a single lab assignment.

Wow, I didn't expect such a tirade, of course.

Okay, I'll continue tomorrow.

Tengro

14 years ago

Auto-translated

I was actually writing this to point out that you can’t directly apply the same principles to practical training. However, if we say that fundamental science doesn’t develop thinking, and that only applied science develops thinking and intellect, we would immediately call Einstein, Landau, Hawking, and others on the list fools.
And yes, there have been experiments focusing solely on the practical, applied side of science. They ended badly.

In reply to Tengro

WishmasteR

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Again, who are the current lecturers in the departments? Old Soviet conservatives.

I can argue with that. There are, of course, some old conservatives, and there were plenty of laughs during their lectures in the 2nd and 3rd years, but there are very few of them. And now, most of our lecturers, as well as my superiors in the lab, are promising specialists aged 28-35. There are also older lecturers, but they are by no means conservatives.

I don't feel like reading any further about the argument you're having here; I'll write my opinion tomorrow.

Ment

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Lord, regarding the absorption of knowledge: without this element, the maximum you can come up with right now is a bicycle. Let's put it this way. What is intelligence? The ability to generate useful information for a given situation. How can you develop this ability? Information is generated from information; don't expect the periodic table to appear in your dreams. The more information you have, the easier it is to generate new information, until physical limitations on the brain begin to manifest. Regarding spirituality: this concept is closely related to the concept of the soul, so you, Lord, mentioned it in vain, considering you are not a believer. It won't help you in your analysis.