How do we deal with the 'oversocialized wordcel midwits being indistinguishable from actually intelligent people' problem?
I'm talking at-a-glance here.
How do we deal with the 'oversocialized wordcel midwits being indistinguishable from actually intelligent people' problem?
Talk to them for a few minutes, it becomes apparent whether they are midwit or not.
this:
a person can pretend all they want, but they can't actually fake it. At some point they'll say something, and it'll just click. Oh, they've been an idiot this whole time.
>oversocialized wordcel midwits
If they say things like this you can spot 'em pretty easy.
Not going to pretend like I didn't see this coming.
Regardless, you understood exactly what I meant.
I like to pretend I'm a lot smarter than I actually am and you can't do a damn thing about it.
I like to pretend I'm a lot dumber than I actually am and you can't do a damn thing about it
JFC same.
Its better to pretend to be moronic than attempt communication.
Shut the frick up. Please, shut the frick up.
Is that what we tell them? Or?
Wittgenstein would probably agree.
why does hitler look like dewey wilkerson?
>wilkerson?
ew
Why would they be in the same school when Hitler was a middle class bumpkin and Wittgenstein came from a friggin dynasty?
fpbp
What does this mean? "fpbp"
first post, best post
keep up with the newbie lingo, oldgay
You need to define what a "midwit" and an "intellinget person" is. Everybody seems to have a different interpretation. So many of you trowing around these word as if they were universally agreed upon. It's funny because most of us are midwits, reffering to others midwits as 'midwits', meanwhile we are midwits outselfs.
midwit is 105-115iq
Then I guess you have to find out how smart you are (by taking an IQ test by your logic) and then have a deep conversation with the supposed midwit. This is the only way to tell a midwit apart from an intelligent person.
Only intelligent post in the thread.
> midwits being indistinguishable from actually intelligent people' problem?
You can't, because there's a cap to how smart you can speak before you have to dumb yourself down to be understood, and beyond that point it's all about tailoring your language to your audience to seem just a little higher OR lower than them.
>most of us are midwits, reffering to others midwits as 'midwits', meanwhile we are midwits outselfs.
This is a paradox of humility. Those who are humble are more likely to be highly intelligent, but if you tell people that then then they get over-confident and become dumbasses... As well, once idiots hear that humble people are more likely to be intelligent, they get it into their idiotic heads that it's ACTING. So dumbfricks start humble-bragging to pretend to be smart.
Then there's an additional layer of socio-paths who *ARE* smart but who are far more power-hungry than rational and who will fricking use the skills they DO have to fake the skills they'd DON'T have, and it just ends up tripping EVERYBODY up because the fricking scumbag moron sociopaths are harming society by inadvertently mis-applying their own skills.
If the sociopaths actually had social-awareness, they'd be able to realize that they could be doing the exact same things by applying their skills differently, but because they don't all they do is frick up society.
The archetypal midwit is someone who has cargo cult thinking/memorizes logic trees of arguments without actually understanding them and uses it to gain social status via pseudo intellectual maxxing. I find what makes these types so repulsive is their lack of introspection/desire to actually learn things and instead just commodify learning for social gain. I have this sort of believe that a midwit is not necessarily a range on a bell curve, but rather a spiritual condition. I have met people with poor articulation skills and not much education who I have had great and thought provoking conversations with and people who went to good universities who are ignorant as frick, yet what made them so insufferable was them being lost in their hubris.
It's only possible if you share an interest with them that you understand so deeply you are able to distinguish someone faking it.
The other option is to wait for big narrative shifts like the memeflu and watch them behave nonsensically.
Memes are an intrinsic part of modern culture. What's wrong with having fun with a meme? You're one of those 'no fun allowed' hardheaded conservative types?
What exactly does "oversocialized" mean? I've been seeing it crop up a lot on the chans lately, and I've a hunch it's just losers coping for not having any friends.
Read the Unabomber.
He has a name, you know
Just a new way to refer to leftists and other conformists who take argumentative cues from popular beliefs
You can sus out midwits easily with math. Just ask them for a proof that the algerbraic real numbers are countable or something else easy. If they can't do it they're a big fat phony faker.
I can't fathom a situation where someone came at me with this question out of nowhere and I didn't laugh at their autism.
that's right, the "baffle them with bullshit" technique. a classic.
Yeah you think you're so smart? Let's see you pull an engine and rebuild it.
play chess with them. anyone below 2000 in chess doesnt deserve to read lit and pretend like theyre getting something out of it. if you suck at chess stop reading now.
Go is a better measurement for G than chess. It actually entails creativity and abstract logic. Chess past 1800 is just rote memorization.
finna learn GO so my math phd friend will stop making fun of my intelligence
But this is about image, anon. How is it supposed to help if most don’t even know how to play it?
Play Chess, but each chess piece is a Go board with starting handicap inversely proportional to the piece's value. You win by having the most territory in Go, counted by the surviving chess pieces at the end of the chess match; Kings instead count as one full Go board's worth of territory for the player who controls them, such that losing your king in the chess match isn't everything-or-nothing, but it's a massive blow.
Probably needs a few more rules than that in practice, but that'd be a good start
If they can't understand the concept a word represents. They can only understand the approximations of concepts but not the concepts themselves.
Can you give an example?
>'oversocialized wordcel midwits
Can you please rephrase this in English, rather than moronic Zoomer babble. Thanks.
fr fr bussin
Paradoxes. Leading questions that bring them to it. And refusing to elaborate. Dialogue between frens, rhetoric to opponents only interested in eristic self-justification for their rationale.
Ask them good questions.
People that agree with me = intelligent
People that disagree with me = unintelligent
Simple as.
Get a translator first
>oversocialized wordcel midwit
Don’t throw bricks from glass houses buddy.