Bringing intelligence to America

Great Debates
101

“”"“What exactly are the benefits of this system and who will enjoy them?”"""

That the system HAS benefits.

Everybody will enjoy them.

Rational people cannot focus on the enjoyment of people who deny existence; it’s a vaccuum tube for capital; it just sucks it up!

The person who doesn’t recieve these ‘benefits’ are only people who say: “I don’t believe in anything at all.” “Everything is exactly the same.”

It’s beyond comprehension, how this persons ‘happiness’ means anything!

If, when we keep giving them resource, they keep smiling; we have to realize, as rational beings that this person is perpetrating fraud, and is existing counter-intelligently.

Nature grants these people the free-will to exersize their beliefs; it does so, by ‘kicking’ them out of society. As long as people are rewarded for behaving counter-intelligently; the excavation of rationality stops. It can be proven that these individuals, and those who support them are existing for absolutely NO reason.

-Justhink

102

So what? we excavate rationality to previously unknown heights and depths… so what? Who benefits and exactly how?

103

OK, you already answered that.

104

But nobody (at least nobody that I know) says “everything is exactly the same” or “I don’t believe in anything” - you are only able to put these words into the mouths of people by applying your completely opaque reasoning.

105

Justhink –

It seems to me that those of us trying to understand you are asking for a clearer picture of your meaning, something with concrete details. (See Mangetout’s question re: apples.)

It would help me if you could answer this question:

If the United States is the most counter-intelligent country, which nation - or society or culture or tribe - would be an example of the most intelligent group of human beings?

106

“”"“But nobody (at least nobody that I know) says “everything is exactly the same” or “I don’t believe in anything” - you are only able to put these words into the mouths of people by applying your completely opaque reasoning.”"""

Let’s take a look at what Glee wrote:

“”""“I don’t care if the words counter and intelligence are existential or not. I just want to know what you mean by them.”""""

If the words are not positively existential (as in they exist!!); then why on earth do you care what I mean by them?

This is how humans generate resource counter-intelligently Mangetout. Glee ‘unwittingly’ nullified her purpose for saying and doing what Glee did, by the act of doing it. Intelligence does not act this way. The types of thoughts that create nuclear bombs are not the same thoughts that use them. That is the line I’m showing here in my definitions and explanations. I haven’t finished articulating why this line exists, how to measure and detect it… etc…

Although, if you comb through what I’ve already written; particularly in my definition of intelligence, you’ll understand how I’m drawing this line, and you’ll notice the beginnings of how I describe its isolation for measurement (of the substance composing the line).

You’re right. Its not totally trransparent. I haven’t submitted the entire process here.

-Justhink

107

I wouldn’t normally presume to speak the mind of another member, but I suspect that Glee was actually implying a question of your meaning and usage of the term ‘existential’, in addition to all the other stuff.

108

In fact I’m starting to wonder myself why you used the word just to signify that something verifiably exists.

109

“”"“If the United States is the most counter-intelligent country, which nation - or society or culture or tribe - would be an example of the most intelligent group of human beings?”""""

It’s an issue of Western Society primarily. It’s an issue of “follow the money”. The U.S. has concentrated more reserves of capital into smaller and smaller spaces than any other country. That, in and of itself is not significant to how that capital moved around the world and ‘stuck’ here. This is only achieved through counter-intelligence. This resource is being denied people who are living logically consistent existences; and being used to bathe our circus freaks, so to speak.

It’s like the magician who becomes super-wealthy by playing with peoples heads. It plays with peoples heads that a person succeeds in society, and yet cannot utter one logically consistant phrase or act a logically consistant behavior. “It’s a MIRACLE!”
People become entranced by this; and the counter-intelligent virus spreads into the general population.

Have you ever sat down and catalogued the number of logical and behavioral inconsistancies of any random 5 minutes of media?

Some of them are embedded so deep, that one sentence (discarding gestures and intonation above and beyond speaking) can literally nullify itself 12 times. This is typical of people who gain attention in Western society, or of who’s attention we are encouraged to focus upon. The parallel is then presented that this logical form is the essence of societal value; as an appeal to authority; you will be casually reminded that these people telling you what is popular are selected by a government in charge of all the technology you can’t fathom. You’re told (and made to accept), that you cannot fathom the selective purpose of the process for logical structures; and are compelled instead to COPY them, and accept them.

Ok. Well, I’ll create something that collapses any form of deception; if we’re going to use authoritarianism. That way, any rational human being can discern whether you are lying off your ass about you value to society; your right to commodity, etc…

It’s mass producing intelligence to combat counter-intelligence.

-Justhink

110

While it can be stated that some who has an autonomous indentured system that is capable of consistently producing existential negation 6 or more layers back, IS intelligent.
Society has to realize that behind the encryption, their existential negation is still there, permeating their existence. It is as absurd to reward this person, as it is to reward the MIRACLE of someone who eats food consistently everyday, when they don’t believe anything at all!! Wow, what a miracle!! Let’s give them a castle, or see if they can run a country! It’s just a miracle!

NO! Rationality draws the line and states: This person is absurd and/or this person is lying. There is an inherent social contract imbedded into nature, as I spoke about earlier.

-Justhink

111

Justhink: there’s no easy way to say this but I honestly think you’re suffering delusions.

112

“”"“In fact I’m starting to wonder myself why you used the word just to signify that something verifiably exists.”"""

I’m using it as a reference point; which I am prepared to back up.

‘Existential’ in and of itself; I use to articulate the question (statement):

Something exists, something doesn’t exist.
Everything exists, everything doesn’t exist.

The positive existential is that which affirms existence.
The negative existential value is that which denies existence.

I’m saying, that it is absurd to reward people with vast amounts of resource who continually deny the existence of that or any resource. There really isn’t a miracle taking place there; that is the foundation of reason and rationality.

When someone survives in ways counter to what they claim; rationality discerns why one would GIVE them the resource. Obviously they don’t need the resource to survive, or to be consistent with their belief of themselves, or what they are attempting to convey to us as what to believe about them.
If someone says they don’t believe in anything at all, and then eat food; it is not a miracle. This person is not a God.
A rational person witholds food from them, understanding that it is irrelevant to this human being “who doesn’t believe anything at all” whether or not they even HAVE food. If they beg for food, and yet still claim to not believe anything at all, again, people are like: “It’s a miracle!!!”

“They don’t believe anything, but they ask for food!! Bravo!! Give them some food!! Watch their trick, where they actually eat it!! Wow, that is the most amazing person EVER!”
“I agree, that is AMAZING!! cheers from the crowd”

Someone comes along to point out that everybody is being decieved, and the crowd kills them or the person doing the decieving kills them; further imprinting the ‘miracle’ of this absurdity.

What rational society does, is draw a line upon the absurd; by not devoting resource to it. The type of logic used here DOES NOT uncover anything rational, it is useless to the excavation and work required to validate our very essence of existential value.

I’ll add, that Biblically; the test of Christ on the mound where he didn’t jump, is a perfect example of subversive counter-inteligence and authoritarianism that demands secrecy to subsit.
It demands that life requires ignorance; except that they are less ignorant. To prove this however, is to deny the authoritative principle that life denies ignorance!! It’s philosophy that nullifies itself. People look at their status and marvel at the miracle of their achievement with this ‘magic’.

-Justhink

113

Messiah complex; that’s another term that I was looking for.

Sorry Justhink, but I really think you’re seeing all kinds of stuff that just aint there.

114

I think Justthink is a troll. He’s deliberately spouting nonsense to see how long people will to understand him.

115

Of course all of this might make a tiny bit more sense if we (ANYONE!) could actually understand how you get this idea that people are claiming that they don’t believe anything at all or that everything is exactly the same.

116

I disagree Sam (although I’d actually be quite comforted to be proven wrong): I believe we are looking at psychiatric issues here.
(at least I didn’t say it behind your back Justhink).

117

“”"“Justhink: there’s no easy way to say this but I honestly think you’re suffering delusions.”""""

I provided argument, hypothesis and insight. I have provided barely enough to establish a theoretical framework.

In light of that, your response is perfectly reasonable.
One thing I haven’t provided is evidence. I suppose that’s the line drawn; at which point, the hypothesis will converge into theory or law. I may never provide the evidence you seek, however, someone in the next generation may. I could be validated after my death in an obscurity that only you and I are talking about. Nobody would even associate that a living being described this in such detail before the emergence of evidence.
SDMB may lose all my posts, or nobody will be concerned with 100 year old “Justhink” posts.

It’s also possible that I am totally out of my freakin’ mind, and make no sense and am deluded beyond reason. It is the essence of problems associated with authoritativeness; that you don’t submit to my “pp” as was discussed in the thread on private phenomenon. The point, is to dismantle the system that allows people to thrive from doing absolutely nothing; in any sense that society would aknowledge as work.

Yeah, they’re moving around in patterns - but everything they say and do negates the reason that they exist. If we are to apply their axiom to society; society will crash!

Rationality uncovers truths, that’s all it can do.
If rationality uncovers the absolute truth; that irrationality brings all material reward; do you have any concept of how that translates into society??

Let’s just get it over with and prove that, if that’s what you believe. In my opinion, there are many rational (they would be irrational now); human beings who would exist life immediately.

-Justhink

118

“”""“Of course all of this might make a tiny bit more sense if we (ANYONE!) could actually understand how you get this idea that people are claiming that they don’t believe anything at all or that everything is exactly the same.”""""

This is the crux of what I’m working to articulate. I’ve been suggesting it every since I started posting here. I’ll attempt to make my next post on that topic. If I can’t come accross; we can agree to agree (I may be totally insane!). =) Can an insane person find evidence of their insanity? chuckle Do they have rights? chuckle It’s an inversion of what I’ve been describing in this thread. Unfortunately, your sane people believe that I have no rights. I would rather be insane in my world than yours =) At least insane people have the right to make their own decisions, in accordance with their logic in my world. What I’m describing is a situation where people stop killing other people to cannibalize their self-explanitory meaning. Killing people or locking them up against their logic, does not prove you right! Ever.

This society deems that people who want to die, cannot exist and must be insane. People who want to die have revoked their right to decide how to die or how to live. That is fiercely counter-intelligent IMO.

The ‘rational’ society I’m describing, states that people who deny consistancy can and do exist, and are insane.

To this rational society; a person who believes in nothing, and proceeds to exist is being abused against their will. They are also abusing this society. A person who does not believe anything, doesn’t do those things; they are excommunicated for everyone’s own good; including their own.

Who was the Greek philosopher who stated:

“Forcing a person to live against their will is the same as killing them.” ?

chuckle Good thing I know it came from a Greek philosopher, someone might actually take it seriously =)

Well… I suppose the debate is now completely in my lap as to whether it proceeds. We have articulated the next level of what must be stated clearly:

“how (do) you get this idea that people are claiming that they don’t believe anything at all or that everything is exactly the same?”

You’ll notice (maybe) that I’ve stated that: these observations are representative of statements and behaviors that nullify their own purpose. I’ll ‘have’ to explain why these statements link rationally to the base concept of: “I don’t believe in anything at all”. I believe I’ve already made a substantial case for why these types of statements are absurd in society. I’ll show how I conceptually link various encryptions that MASK an underlying existential negation. (Exiastential negation being the halting force to the process of uncovering rationality. The definition of existence without meaning).

Seems like lots of statements here to back up; but I’ve actually covered quite a bit so far. I haven’t covered how one discerns an encryption of existential negations.

I’ll explain that next; sink or swim in terms of the debate.
I’m interested in discerning an ounce of truth, whatever that may be; I’m not against being proven wrong and I’m certainly not trying to create a perpetual motion machine of attention (I’m not THAT smart for one!). I wouldn’t even humor the idea that I could have people pay attention to me for ever; it’s a joke to consider that I’m doing this for attention on that basis.

I’d rather it be a truth or a lie. That’s what I’m talking about creating here. A way to discern it absolutely, by collapsing the commodity of opinion.

-Justhink

119

“”"""Messiah complex; that’s another term that I was looking for.

Sorry Justhink, but I really think you’re seeing all kinds of stuff that just aint there."""""

I just noticed this little snippet. I have used Messiah Complex forms to run through counter-intelligence encryption. What I personally use to move through this layer of encryption is:

A Messiah Complex can only be attributed to such a being that cannot immediately grant their own capacity to act in a particular way, to someone else who seeks to use precisely what attracted their attention in the first place. In fact, it should be offered immediately, so as to block the counter-intelligence of selective classification levels.

What you’re doing is assuring that the ‘messiah’ becomes an equal to everyone else; so that their superiority would be counter-intelligent; and they would be deselected existentially to starve to death in their own messiah-dom.

Something like that…

It breaks Messiah Complex encryption IMO.

-Justhink

120

“”"“Messiah complex; that’s another term that I was looking for.”"""

Counter-intelligence: (loosely: that which negates the reason for being or doing) – there you go Glee!

These questions are very relevant and very important.
If the decryption sequence for counter-intelligence is off by even a fraction, these types of corruptions will avoid detection.

I want to impress upon you, how much detail I’ve been documenting. The problem with something like the Messiah Complex and many other forms of ‘glory theft’, is that they have to be transparent to the veiwer (me) and the veiwed (you); so that neither of us can hide a complex like this from each-other.

For absurd actions and/or claims; the decryption techniques are NEUROTIC demands of evidence.

A messiah must be able to give everyone not only their ability but their comprehension immediately upon demand. What happens, is that we realize this is the actual form of a messiah, also we know as intelligent beings that this levels the playing field and collapses the absurdity from which the Messiah Complex is siphoned. The only place it can exist is outside of society; at which point it starves to death. By removing the encryption, NOBODY in society will purchase the resource. This means that the resource can only be held: (rationally: degeneratively so.)

It is another instance where rationality has collapsed the marketability of absurdity. What is truly required however; is flawless and instant decryption of counter-intelligence layers, and its accessability to all beings. Do you really think, that if everybody has access to the same data I have; that they’re going to somehow worship me or hold me above society for doing this? That is absurd, and contrary to the entire integrity required of the process in order for it to even work! The attribution of ‘glory’ must be inherent; or else it’s not using the right decryption algorithm. If it’s not inherent, I have proven my own existence as absurd; and I would fall victim to the very system I established!! Understand? It makes a unillateral law. Not even its creator can abuse it; because it was derived from the very structural limits of what allows human to exist rationally. It detects people sucking energy from the indentured system covertly, by immediately shining a flashlight on them. poof

You just broke the contract of all reason embedded in nature.
How does someone argue against that?

I still have my post of comparison left!! Adding these comments first…

-Justhink