Can retards become smart if they try really hard

>>18713710

'smart' has no strict definition. a lot of people say im smart cuz i can parrot off information I'm interested in but then in a regular conversation im confused by every little thing they say.

if you're stupid, learn. you might never reach smart, but you'll certainly be smarter than you are now. Go buy a history textbook of the world and start there. work your way through it, and when you get to the end, think about which culture you enjoyed learning about the most.

then go pick up a text book specifically from that culture. and when you get to the end think about what part of that culture you enjoyed the most. Was it a war? a certain period? their art? go buy a book on that specifically.

fill your phone up with educational podcasts.

The word retard means slow.

If your brain is slow, then it'll never get fast, if that's what you're asking.

You have to qualify what your mental deficiency is, in order to get a more precise answer.

But here's an example. Say your IQ is 90. You never really 'got' math or puzzles. Your quantitative thinking is shot. You can put 1000 hours into learning math through khan academy and exercises, and you might be able to get comfortable with some areas in math, but you're never really going to 'get it,' the way a math whiz does.

Another example, I listen to the Joe Rogan podcast a lot, have heard his stand-up too, and I like the guy, it's obvious to me that he's either just average or actually below average in IQ. He's a meathead for a reason, in other words. On his podcasts, sometimes he'll interrupt people with Ph.Ds to 'correct' them on something trivial, as if he has an inferority complex. He comes off really bad because he can't engage them in their complex conversations. So it'll be just be the PhD talking for like 10 mins, then he chimes in with something irrelevant, then the PhD goes back to talking. It's obvious, that because of his lack of intelligence (parity) he can't engage those smart people in a real conversation. Joe Rogan, to his credit, has built a vast knowledge of various topics. He's basically like a "Jeopardy!" guy. He knows more about the world than I do, and yet, I'm fairly certain I have 10-20 IQ points over him.

So what am I getting at. A high(er) IQ person can be lazy with their mind and not build up knowledge. A lower IQ person can be active with their minds and build up knowledge. But a lower IQ person will never compete with the higher IQ person with the same knowledge/education.

A "retarded" (slow) mind will never win against a fast one. That's the tl;dr.

Learning is so much harder as an adult. It's not impossible, but it is much more difficult.

>>18713732
>>18713742
Bit off topic but does anyone in this thread know of any podcasts or audiobooks where i can actively learn something, all i seem to find is that "self help" shit that just blabbers on about how you have the power inside you and shit.

>>18713754

its hard to teach things like say, math, to anyone through audio alone, as its more of a hands on sort of thing, and most science podcasts are likely for the advanced minds that already enjoy science.

i recommend podcast history of the world:
http://podcasthistoryofourworld.libsyn.com/

history is not as useful as say, math, but its certainly something easier to converse about than science. with science you either get whats goign on or you dont. someone cannot explain something really complex in science to you without explaining years of the less complex stuff first.

but with history you can literally just say 'back in this year, this specific culture did this specific thing' and everyone knows enough about history to at least be able to understand. they dont need much more context. they dont need the whole history of everything up to that point, whereas with science you kinda do.

>>18713726
I don't have a problem reading about history I quite enjoy it. The area I feel like my brain is 'capped' in is mathematics. It's always been a roadblock to subjects I've tried to take up like electronics, aeronautical engineering, programming etc like a bouncer constantly blocking me from entering an exclusive club.

>>18713732
Basically I can put in an insane amount of hours into something that requires mathematical thinking and my progress will be pathetic compared to the average person. I got up to Calculus on Khan Academy but it took me an inordinate amount of time and I realized I hadn't retained the information I'd learned as if my brain was just discarding much of it as fluff. And this was me learning out of my own interest, not an academic requirement and I still couldn't get my head around it.

I was wondering if there's some kind of 'lifehack' to cut a path into mathematics and super technical thinking. Like a way to actually retrain a simpleton brain, akin to physical rehabilitation, to make it easier.

For most people I think the obstacle to learning complex things is lack of interest but in my case I think there is a real physical limitation in my brain.

>>18713754
It really depends on your interests. I listen to Sam Harris a lot, he has really high brow conversations on various topics, like genetic engineering, AI, spirituality, free will, politics etc. I also listen to hardcore history, and this one podcast of two psychologists having very in-depth conversations about various pressing issues in the field of psychology today. If philosophy is more your thing, then are probably hundreds of podcasts that can basically cram into your head, Plato, Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, Kant, Marx, etc., in a few hours. Podcasts way more efficient at getting in information, since that information is already translated into 'simple English,' with proper context for you. It's very hard to read the original works of some of these guys, Kant in particular, they're 800 pages long, poorly translated, use very proper/technical language no longer in use. It's much easier for a philosophy guy to just give you a Kant for Dummies podcast.

>>18713763
Thanks i listened to a physics type podcast yesterday called inquiring minds so im fine with science, if theres anything else anybody would like to recommenced.

>>18713778
>but in my case I think there is a real physical limitation in my brain

As someone who is also mathematically challenged, perhaps, moreso than you. I've come this conclusion and have come to peace with it.

I never had problems with math in early grade school. I could read analog clocks for other retarded kids, who couldn't read them. Enjoyed my multiplication tables, and long division, fractions etc. Never really any problems with it.

I reach 7-8 grades. I finally get to Algebra, and I bomb them hard. Part of the reason, at least in the specific instance in 8th grade, my teacher was awful, and she basically took off after Christmas break for personal reasons. My school didn't have any math tutors, and the substitute teachers obviously don't know math, and so I bombed my algebra class hard. So I blamed it more on the teacher.

High school rolls around, I need to pass algebra II and geometry to graduate. I have a truly excruciating time learning all the formulas, and after much pleading and whining, I was allowed a cheat sheet on a couple of my exams, after bombing for months -- the teacher just passed me on sympathy.

I didn't know what to do after high school. I finally enrolled in community college after a few years, and took a math placement test. They put me in elementary (algebra I) math. Whatever. I powered through it. I hit intermediate algebra (algebra 2) from high school. I couldn't pass it twice - I just withdrew once, and took a D a second time. I was ready to quit. But I shopped around for an easier teacher, put in hours at the tutoring center, and got passed, with a curve and with work shown on my third attempt. Had a MUCH easier time with statistics, especially in my particular school that allowed us to use calculators and computers to just punch information - I didn't have to memorize the formulas.

I spent 4 years in community college, thinking I was retarded for not being able to pass math in order to transfer to the uni.

Will cont

>>18713866
I looked into the matter extensively. Read books on IQ, The Bell Curve, and looked up the theory of multiple intelligences. And finally, it all started to make sense. The theory of multiple intelligences states, as the name implies, that people have multiple intelligences, and they may score really high on some, but low on others. I, never been able to 'get math,' was finally able to put my concerns to rest, and move on with my life. I'm simply 'quantitatively retarded'. Charles Murray, author of the Bell Curve, said that his own son scored really low on the quantitative portion of the IQ test, still scored 110 (or whatever the figure was), because his verbal and writing was very strong.

This basically affirmed my suspicion. In my own situation, I've done very well writing papers in my life, was in AP English and Social Science in high school, and so I can't be all that retarded -- except for math.

So it's probably not what you want to hear. But it help you to just accept it. You're probably never going to be good with math, dude. If you can't learn calculus, then your brain does have a physical limitation. Sorry, if it hurts your ego, but you have to just move on, and find something that you are actually good at. There is no 'physical rehabilitation' for being retarded math. There's no boot camp where they'll cram all those theorems and proofs into your head, and you'll have a magical moment where everything will be revealed.

>>18713894
Excuse the typos/missing words. I never bother to edit 4chin posts.

File: tumblr_osssq8agrN1tuaz2oo1_500.gif (710KB, 500x488px) Image search: [Google]

710KB, 500x488px

>>18713710
My brain has a slow processor, but very fast RAM.

To answer your question, maybe, if they take enough LSD.

>>18713710
Here you go:
http://jimkwik.com

Try listening to a couple episodes of his podcast. It's good shit.

>inb4 >taking advice from a gook
Obviously he needs these tricks as much as anyone.

>>18713894
The reason I suspect its not a foregone conclusion isn't just denial or an ego thing, it's because I've managed to make lateral moves through tangential learning into subjects I couldn't grasp initially.

For example, I'll completely fail to understand a concept within a subject, can't visualize it in my head and give up after many failed attempts. Then much later I'll take an interest in something else that incorporates the concept in a less abstract way then go back to the previous subject and breeze through it.

Certain things you learn have advanced components that are the basic components of another subject, being basic simply because that component is more frequently used right from the getgo in the 2nd subject.

I think if there was some magic list of subjects that overlap the same skillset, mental compartment etc you could custom tailor your own shortcut by learning tangentially related things.

>>18713894
>IQ test
>verbal and writing
What?

>>18714004
A professional IQ test evidently has different portions, like an SAT test, one of them being verbal/writing/lingustics. I can't tell you first hand, because although my curiosity wants to go take one, it costs upwards of $300 to have one professionally done through a psychologist.

>>18714001
I don't know what to tell you. Every person learns differently--that's also true. It's possible that your approach to self-learn Calculus is not working. Have you tried learning it through the education system/and or going to a tutor? I have a feeling that they can tell you why exactly it is that you're not learning it.

Google different methods of learning a subject, with perhaps an emphasis on math. Med students have a very particular way of memorizing all the information in their field. If after exhausting this avenue, you still find that you're not 'getting it', then just move on. Good luck.