/qtit/ - QT Infograph Thread Dolls: Girls: http://www.dolld

File: IMadeAThingButWillItWorkIHopeItDoesButItProbablyWontOhWell.jpg (2MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x2857px

24/M/USA, MD

As always, new friends are always dope as well!

File: 1448316821679.png (3MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x2857px

Always looking for new friendos!

File: Im8new.jpg (2MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4130x2950px

20/M/IA

File: Das it mang.png (3MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x2857px

Postin

File: qtitgraph.png (1MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4128x2948px

posting implying someone will reply :^)

File: ohboy.png (2MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x2857px

Time to add my sausage to the sausage-fest

>>22926480
Do you have the other version of the template?

File: qt chart 1.png (3MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x2857px

ehh why not

>>22927735
I just realized I put white for my Nationality, I'm from America.

>>22927756

Thank god, I thought you wanted an omni-theistic White Nationalist.

File: image.png (3MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4130x2950px

eh why not, met a couple cool people last time

File: 14274309126332.png (2MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4130x2950px

Trying again. The doing stuff together section is blank because I'm relatively open.

Also I forgot to do it at the time.

File: infograph.jpg (1MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4130x2950px

hello all

File: 1363028626563.gif (347KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 500x364px

>>22927865
I seem to be on the wrong side of the US. You do seem pretty cool though.

File: send_it.png (2MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x2857px

>>22927865
Want to have a pokemon battle?

File: template near done.png (1MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4128x2948px

somewhere is my senpai

File: mte_chart.png (3MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4130x2950px

Hey guys.

File: 1448316890215.jpg (3MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4130x2950px

Just looking for a smug qt to do shit with.

File: 1.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

i hope i did this right

>>22928482
This thread is for the template. Search the imt thread and post that there.

>>22928482
>>>/soc//imt/

File: cancer.jpg (180KB, 678x1000px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 678x1000px

>>22928900
>smokes cancer sticks
Into the trash she goes!

>>22928935

There are worse things you can do to your body. This is trash girl. On my phone.

File: 1387835347067.png (723KB, 798x800px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 798x800px

>>22928935
You sound like the biggest libkek ever.
"Ewwww a smoker stop putting cancer sticks in your mouth!!!!"
Are you one of those faggots who thinks Uncle "Sam" Shlomo should ban cigarettes?

>>22928966
I'd just like to clarify that I'm not by any means white knighting. Anti-smoking faggots who shove their agenda in everyone's face are just a pet peeve of mine.

>>22929056
But why would you smoke, though?

File: idmtp1.jpg (1MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4128x2948px

happy hump day

>>22929056
What country are you from? Where I live, not many people are against smoking and liberals are the annoying ones who try to promote smoking.

>>22928966
>it's okay to do something because something else is even worse
>it's okay to kill a person because you could have killed 2 instead
>>22929056
I oppose cancer sticks so I'm therefore a 'libkek'? Are you fucking retarded?
>!!!!
Back to reddit with your repeated exclamations, faggot.

>>22929082
Posting because this thread is arguing about smoking.

There's no good reason for it, some of us just like it and are used to it. It's deeply ingrained in our socialization.

Plus many are hopelessly addicted.

>>22929133
No reason to start, ever. Why would an intelligent person start smoking? They wouldn't.

>>22929133
>>22929082
There is no good reason for anything, it all depends on your priorities/viewpoint.

>>22929096
What fucking political party would promote smoking?

>>22929056
I don't even.

>>22928966
>>22928935
You faggots started something horrible.

>>22929147
I agree. If you are a femanon, be my waifu.
>>22929178
>You faggots started something horrible.
Calling out degenerate faggots on their degeneracy and faggotry is hardly horrible.

File: image.jpg (165KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 640x1136px

>>22927878
>>22927917
>anything goes
>aside from tattoos
ah, not be the best fit then

you seem cool too though!

>>22927947
do you play XY or ORAS?

cute doggo from work who got adopted today

>>22929194
You could do that with every person in this fucking thread, would quite miss the point, no?

>>22929178
>What fucking political party would promote smoking?
Liberals in Canada

>>22929202
Care to elaborate? You either using the word "promote" too liberally or I am really underestimating the insanity Canadian politics.

>>22929202
Goes pretty nice with a cold molson eh?

>>22929218
Canada always had a liberal population, even our conservatives were rather liberal compared to the right wing of other countries. With the arrival of the internet, people just kept in their hugboxes and the most liberal people, traditionally younger generations, really never grew up from the stereotypical "its cool to smoke and do drugs" phase as a result. Now these people are old enough to vote and the Liberals pandered to them, which is why you'll hear people on 4chan and probably other places refer to our Prime Minister as DUDE WEED LMAO because that and the fact he looks good are the two main reasons he got voted in.

>>22929194
Consider me your waifu, then.

>>22928900
Do you play any instruments?

>>22929147
>Why would an intelligent person start smoking? They wouldn't.
Absolutes like this are complete bullshit. I mean, without even getting into what your definition of intelligence is (IQ? Verbal+quant' GRE score? How much you like them? Whether they smoke or not?), a mathematics professor I really like smokes, and did his PhD at Rutgers. A good physicist friend of mine, currently studying abroad in Paris, smokes a shitload. These aren't stupid people.
If you want to make the argument that smoking is stupid in general, then sure. I mean, you have to quantify the amount and period of time it's done over (i.e. having 1 cigarette a year or 100 in a lifetime is probably not that bad), but I wouldn't even say anything if you just said something like "smoking cigarettes daily (weekly, even) is a stupid idea". Intelligent people can do stupid things, and you can't define a person by only one of their aspects. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but absolutes like that really just serve to narrow your world view, and they're way too easy to just accept without further thought.

>>22929318
Stupid people can grow up to become smart people.
While no smart person would START smoking, becoming smart does not necessarily carry the strength of will to QUIT.

>>22929318
A reasonable person on my 4chains? What is this? I suggest, one of us cutting his dick off (mine is a bit longer ... sooo, yeah) and start something beautiful! With spiders!

>>22929347
/facepalm

>>22929250
ily <3
>>22929318
Except she's right.
>>22929347
It is true that a dumb person might start smoking then become smart, but if they truly become smart, they will quit. Sure, they might cry about it being hard, they might have gotten addicted to it, but if they use that as justification to continue smoking then they are both weak-willed and incompetent.

>>22929347
That's closer, but I still disagree
Smart people can make stupid decisions.
Smart people can make decisions that would be generally stupid but are right for them.
People are complex and trying to judge a person's intelligence based on one factor is not generally a great idea. And, once again, what even defines intelligence in your eyes?
What about other decisions? Like developing a drinking habit? Is there any stupid decision that a smart person can make?
>>22929370
>(mine is a bit longer ... sooo, yeah)
Well shit, can't argue with that logic.
>>22929376
Good stuff.
>weak-willed and incompetent
Can a smart person not be weak-willed? Can they not be incompetent when it comes to certain aspects? Is the professor I mentioned stupid? Why should I trust your definition of stupidity when a mathematics PhD is deemed stupid based on one aspect of his self?

>>22929318
In this case, by intelligent I mean a person who is well-informed and not easily fallen into peer pressure. I don't blame an uninformed person for their ignorant choices, if they believed they were informed (in the case of tobacco products, the companies have been very thorough in misinforming people on the health hazards and supposed benefits of smoking).

However, with the information I have at my hands, I would never even taste a cigarette, and that's not even out of fear of the health hazards; they simply offer no benefit over not smoking at all. The supposed stress relief is relieving only because the pause between smokes is giving you short-term withdrawal and thus stress, and simply taking a 5-minute break from whatever you are doing will relax you just the same as taking the same 5 minutes to smoke. The social aspects are exaggerated, because you don't have to smoke to talk to new people or to have a private moment with someone (although you can use smoking as leverage to coax someone, see peer pressure -- personally, I wouldn't care for people like that).

Like said, there's no reason to start smoking. In addition, there are several reasons not to.

>>22929347
This is quite accurate. Even if the smoking mathematics professor >>22929318 mentioned was shown a bunch of research proving that smoking has no benefit whatsoever and several disadvantages, the physical and mental addiction may already be strong enough that they may have real difficulty quitting. Knowledge in itself doesn't give strength of will.

>>22929397
>by intelligent I mean a person who is well-informed and not easily fallen into peer pressure
Ignorance is not stupidity. Knowledge is not intelligence.
>not easily fallen into peer pressure
I have never heard that as a definition for intelligence, and I expect never to again.
Like I said, I'm not even arguing that smoking is not a stupid decision to make. I am just arguing that you can't use it as a black and white method for determining intelligence.
Also, if what he said is quite accurate, then why are you disagreeing with him? It sounds to me like he is equating intelligence with strength of will. He said that if they are truly smart, then they would stop. I am asking again, is my professor not truly smart?

>>22929394
PhD is about putting time and money into getting a degree, it doesn't have much to do with intelligence. I learned calculus when I was 15, I was in the same class as graduate students when I was 17, yet I don't have a degree and will probably never bother getting one. Yes, a smart person can be weak willed, but that doesn't negate what I said. Competence and will are both factors in smoking and ceasing smoking. However, only minimal competence is required to understand that smoking is very harmful, and quitting doesn't take a substantial amount of will (especially considering it is an issue of not doing something rather than of doing something; the latter generally requires substantially more will than the former). Therefore, for a competent person to continue smoking due to lack of will, they would have to have an extreme lack of will, beyond that of even most weak-willed people. Therefore yes, it's possible for an intelligent person who started smoking before becoming intelligent to keep smoking out of a weak will, but it requires an extremely rare combination of basic competence and the weakest of wills.

File: 180977.jpg (116KB, 375x545px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 375x545px

>>22929430
>Ignorance is not stupidity. Knowledge is not intelligence.
>I am asking again, is my professor not truly smart?
Then neither is a PhD in mathematics proof of intelligence. Q.E.D.

>I am just arguing that you can't use it as a black and white method for determining intelligence.
I'm not. I am arguing that a well-informed person with enough willpower to not fall prey to peer pressure would not start smoking. I am also arguing that not everyone is well-informed, despite their best attempts, as tobacco companies have always been known to mangle information. Initially their campaigns were claiming that smoking is good for the throat, later it was to claim that smoking a specific brand is better for the throat than others, even later to show that smoking is "cool" and so forth. Picture related.

>Also, if what he said is quite accurate, then why are you disagreeing with him?
I'm not. Read my message again, and then theirs.

>He said that if they are truly smart, then they would stop.
They didn't. That was >>22929376.

File: 1325230251754.jpg (73KB, 323x347px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 323x347px

>>22929082
I don't smoke (aside from weed on occasion). I just think that people who sperg out over the idea that someone would DARE smoke a cigarette are retarded.

>>22929096
I'm from America. California to be exact. It's a liberal anti-smoking state.

>>22929132
>>22929194
You use a term like "cancer sticks" that sounds like it probably came from plebbit and you have the gull to tell ME to go back to plebbit? Pot, meet kettle.

Oh and
>degeneracy
If you want to get into degeneracy on this board, Allow me to bring up
Exhibit A: Rate threads
Exhibit B: Any threads where people willingly post their own nudes
Exhibit C: Any thread with diapers, dogfucking, etc.

>>22929520
>dogfuckin
W-where?

>>22929459
I agree that a PhD isn't a black and white indicator of intelligence, but it's pretty hard for me to provide examples of intelligence when I don't know how you are defining it, and the only definition I've been given clearly doesn't hold. On the other hand, getting a PhD from Rutgers in mathematics is a good general indicator of intelligence as defined in a vague societally-accepted sense, and I wanted to know why your smoking=stupidity definition trumps that one. Your self-example isn't really necessary, since I never said that not having a PhD is a good indicator of lack of intelligence.
>a smart person can be weak willed, but that doesn't negate what I said.
It sort of does, because you said "if they truly become smart, they will quit" and then said that if they don't quit then they are weak-willed and incompetent. That is essentially defining being weak-willed and incompetent (in the specific area of quitting smoking) as being unintelligent. Your speculation on the competence and will required to quit smoking isn't particularly convincing (especially since smoking can mean anything from 2 packs a day to a cigarette a week, giving variable levels of competence and will). Some habits die harder for some people than others. The thing about giving up something rather than starting something being easier in general strikes me as just a nothing point. There are a billion different things that you can start doing and a billion that you can stop. Giving up oxygen, for instance, is a bit harder than taking a job each day. They all have variable levels of difficulty and saying "well this category is generally easier than this other one" and concluding that everything in the other must be easy doesn't make any sense. I really don't know how you are defining a "substantial amount of will".
(1/2)

>>22929607
(2/2)
What about something like binge drinking? That's pretty damaging; not a great idea to do often. I am getting tired and I really need to finish writing this thing, so after this and the following post I'm going to take off, but I'd be interested in what you think of this post: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201102/more-intelligent-people-are-more-likely-binge-drink-and
I tried to find the actual source separate from the article but it is becoming sort of frustrating, so for the moment I'm trusting psychology today to not fuck me over. The graphs seem fairly cut and dry, but if you find the actual study let me know. I'll check this later.
>>22929494
>Then neither is a PhD in mathematics proof of intelligence
See above. I am asking why I should weight smoking as a higher indicator of lack of intelligence than the man's PhD in mathematics. My whole kind of deal here is that you can't use a single indicator to judge intelligence.
>I'm not. I am arguing that a well-informed person with enough willpower to not fall prey to peer pressure would not start smoking.
See, that is something that I can get behind more easily. I still don't really accept it, but it's different from what I was arguing against based on quotes from your "Why would an intelligent person start smoking? They wouldn't.", which is what I initially responded to. I still don't really agree with it, but it's different (so long as you agree with me that being well-informed and non-susceptible to peer pressure doesn't define intelligence).
>I'm not. Read my message again, and then theirs.
My mistake, I thought you were quoting the other guy.

>>22929607
jog* not job. fuck me

File: qt infographic.jpg (2MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x2857px

I did a thing.

>>22929624
If you think of intelligence as "an absence of stupidity" like I do, you will see my point: a very intelligent person does very few things that can be considered stupid, and inversely a stupid person will do stupid things more often, although they may still do intelligent things as well. In other words, an intelligent person has the mental capacity to think things through rather than leap into action blindly, a less intelligent person being able to focus on just a couple of things at a time. This is why you can have a PhD in mathematics and still do stupid things -- or alternatively to have no PhD, yet do very few stupid things.

>My whole kind of deal here is that you can't use a single indicator to judge intelligence.
I agree with this notion, hence my definition of intelligence is a sum of all of the actions and inactions of a person. A person with a PhD can be a complete idiot just as well as a person without one can be brilliant.

>it's different from what I was arguing against
Actually, I first laid out this argument in >>22929397. Sure, my initial messages were provocative in form, perhaps excessively so, but my point still stands.

>so long as you agree with me that being well-informed and non-susceptible to peer pressure doesn't define intelligence
I agree.

File: ⊹⋛⋋(◐⊝◑)⋌⋚⊹.jpg (968KB, 4130x1945px) Image search: [Google]

968KB, 4130x1945px

Thread was going so well

What the fuck is all this gay shit, wow

>>22929694
I love you, marry me

>>22929694
some studies have implicated nicotine as a cognitive enhancer. There is no doubt that tobacco smoked in cigarette form will kill, but the jury is out on nicotine
>http://new.spectator.co.uk/2013/04/so-maybe-its-true-smoking-does-make-you-smarter/

Intelligence also correlates to seemingly contradictory traits such as a tendency to engage in drug use. The best explanation I've heard is that intelligence as a mechanism is associated with novelty, seeking out new and varied stimuli. This is not the same as impulse control, or what we commonly think of as intelligence

Anyways, you type like a qt

File: ourforestourhome.jpg (741KB, 1502x902px) Image search: [Google]

741KB, 1502x902px

You can't stop me Anons, I'm a strong, independent white man who needs every thread.

>http://vocaroo.com/i/s17lVF0tJfnM
Because there's no room in hell

>>22929347
>>22929397
>>22929430
>>22929459

wow so much autism fucking debating nicotine. shut the fuck up some people smoke.

what a waste of lives.

>>22929858
I may not be the marrying type, but it warms my soul knowing you appreciate me so greatly based on simply what I wrote and how I wrote it, not a silly collage of images or a chart of statistics. Thank you.

>>22930257
>the jury is out on nicotine
There seem to be studies claiming nicotine is good and others claiming it's bad. This one states that smoking is no good as stress relief, itself causing more stress than it relieves: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/health/10real.html

>Intelligence also correlates to seemingly contradictory traits such as a tendency to engage in drug use
I know. However, smoking tobacco appears to correlate with the inverse:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/23/us-smokers-smarter-idUSTRE61M3UQ20100223

Whatever the case may be, it is clear that smoking is extendedly more harmful than vaping.

>Anyways, you type like a qt
Thank you. As someone who aspires to author a book or a dozen, I can't think of a greater compliment.

>>22929694
Now this is some shit I can agree with. I mean, I do think it's more complicated than that, with like what >>22930257 mentioned, there are correlations between intelligence and self-destructive behavior (which I touched on with that binge drinking article) that really muddies the waters, but that's a pretty good practical definition.

I did know you laid out that argument there, it was that I was still trying to reconcile that argument with your post that I originally responded to, and so was arguing against that post in the more extreme context of your original post. I actually might be misinterpreting this part, because I am heavily frazzled right now, but whatever:
it's not important, since I think that at this point we pretty much agree. Good talk, and good luck on the book(s).
>>22930318
Chill m8, it's just a bit of discussion; I like talking about my feelings on absolutes, and besides I needed something to distracting me from working on my, now finally basically done, personal statement.

File: qt.png (3MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x2857px

I don't know the exact reasoning behind making this. Maybe it's an act of respect for those I've talked with in the thread, or perhaps I've run out of ways to pass the time.

In any case, this is a vague summation of words and ideas. They may represent me, or they may not.

File: infograph.png (3MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x2857px

OFFICIAL INFOGRAPH THEME SONG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzaUddim4X4

>>22930699
>mfw this guy went to my highschool

BASED YA BOY BANGS

File: 1445100384026.jpg (220KB, 1200x1012px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1200x1012px

>>22930666
your food tastes are so white lmao
lemme guess, you also season ur chicken with water amirite

>>>22928900

Yeah. I do.

Also omg relax. It's totally cool if people don't like me cause I smoke.

>>22929297
>>22930741

oops

File: 1449616056279.png (2MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x2857px

First time making one of these ever. Sorry for imposing text, I was too lazy to put actual images on some.

>>22929198
Yeah, tattoos in excess bug me for some reason. I'm not sure why.
But the occasional small one is okay I guess.
I also play/collect pokemon, so more points for me I guess.

I'd say that we could still talk if you felt like it, but I wouldn't want to impose.

>>22930666
Would you mind sharing any contact info?
The infographic is pretty vague like you said, but I would like to get to know you better

File: 1448316890215.png (1MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4130x2950px

Good morning everyone

>>22931433
I thought cutesy was kind of your thing.

>>22931490
I didn't know I had a thing.

Spider-chan in based as fuck.

>>22929684
Not sure if looking for a lesbian with a big cock or filled the wrong box. Cool taste in movies by the way.

>>22929694
>intelligence as an absence of stupidity
Quite a weird and extreme way to look at it. How did you come to such a conclusion?

Also if you care about other opinions about your writing: You sound pretentious indeed, basically like somebody who'd got inspired by the books (ideas) you read but didn't go deep enough beyond the surface or created her own yet. The kind of person who'd call herself intelligent without ever talking to a truly intelligent person in her life.

Just a subjective opinion, not meant as an affront. After all your style was enough to make me reply and your writer vibes are hard to overlook. Best luck either way.

>all these bishiz not wanting cynical a peeps
Aight fuk u den.

>>22926756
You're gr8. Where info?

File: das me.png (1MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4128x2948px

ayyyy

File: Upgrade.jpg (2MB, 4128x3365px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4128x3365px

23/m/mn
Finally got my new job so fking worth it since my last one.

>>22932507
"lethrowaway" on Skype, made it recently, so didn't include it there. Can get kik/snapshit if you want.

>>22932594
Got the template?

File: qt314.jpg (2MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4128x2948px

Let's roll!

File: 1444227131916.png (2MB, 4128x3365px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4128x3365px

>>22932622

>>22927865
Can I have your contact info?

>>22931433
JoshuaLowery is my KIK and I'll give skype through there.

>>22931433
SeanB124

>>22929198
I play both XY and ORAS. But all of my good mons are on X.

Dogs are awesome. I will one day have one.

>>22931433
Skaneateles

>>22931433
hey qt

>>22930714
I rarely eat chicken, because it's not something I can hunt or fish myself.

You're wrong, though. I eat food so spicy it'd make you cry.

>>22931048
Give me your email and I'll be in touch.

>>22931816
>How did you come to such a conclusion?
It seems to me that there is no other quantifiable method for definining intelligence, although it doesn't solve the problem of qualifying one's actions as either smart or stupid. It is still better, in my opinion, than looking at less meaningful achievements, such as the highest attained level of education or the amount of money earned.

>You sound pretentious indeed
I'll have to ask you to clarify; is it because of what I stated in my collage, or ingrained into my style? You see, the fact that I call myself intelligent seems to be enough to trigger a reaction like this in most people, and even you seem to have paid it an unnecessary amount of attention in saying that I'm "The kind of person who'd call herself intelligent without ever talking to a truly intelligent person in her life".

I'm not offended by your opinion, worry not.

File: better template.png (4MB, 4128x3365px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4128x3365px

I can't tell if I'm posting to take up my own time or in a serious manner anymore

File: yeboi.png (3MB, 4008x2876px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4008x2876px

M/18/Liverpool

kik: newdawnfades_

I wonder if this will work.

>>22934492
>It is still better than looking at less meaningful achievements, such as the highest attained level of education or the amount of money earned.
Very true but what about more meaningful achievements ala Vonnegut, Oppenheimer or Einstein?

>I stated in my collage, or ingrained into my style?
Both. The info graph is full of "lel I am so clever and deep" stuff, seeing it without your writing before, I'd assume you're teen.
Calling yourself intelligent certainly gives some extra points but if there is something to back it up, it wouldn't count a pretentious. I can tell that you're most likely smarter than the average (let's just ignore the trouble of qualifying it all and the countless variables) but the things you showed so far, are not enough to "earn the right to call yourself intelligent" not the optimal wording but I think you'll get what I mean.

The reason for the quote was your style to argue about the whole smoking thing in contrast to Spider-chan. (For the love of Raptor Jesus, please let's not revive it) it stemmed too much on your own views and convictions, boarding into naive at times, even though the logic itself was mostly sound. Basically lacking a more distant perspective, which is very common with smart people, who didn't meet smarter ones yet.

>I rarely eat chicken, because it's not something I can hunt or fish myself.
So you generally hunt for your own meals? In Europe? That's pretty interesting for sure.

File: qt infographic.jpg (2MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x2857px

>>22931816
Fix'd! Thanks dude.

File: tuqti.png (1MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4128x2948px

25/m/Aus

File: 1438702165192.png (3MB, 4128x2948px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2948px

27/m/tx!

File: smd.png (4MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4000x2857px

22 / F / US

>>22934878
>what about more meaningful achievements ala Vonnegut, Oppenheimer or Einstein?
Their actions, inactions and choices are those of intelligent people. Vonnegut is a brilliant author, Oppenheimer and Einstein both exceptional scientists, but what really speaks volumes about their intelligence is how they all were strongly anti-war. Despite Einstein and Oppenheimer developing the nuclear bomb, they both were against their use, and Vonnegut, having witnessed the bombing of Dresden first-hand, voiced his loathing for war in his literature.

>seeing it without your writing before, I'd assume you're teen.
I'm ok with that. People are free to make assumptions based on as little information as they please, and truth be told, these collages are completely lacking in information. Just as you don't judge a book by its cover, I wouldn't judge people by these 'infographics' (the name is fitting; the infographics you see all around the net are similarly devoid of real information, quoting instead some random, obscure and meaningless facts). Indeed, I find these to be nothing but a silly lekking ritual; the only threads on 4chan where one can reliably find new people to talk to.

>not the optimal wording but I think you'll get what I mean.
I get what you mean. I've learned that to find the type of dialogue I'm looking for, the best way is to make egregious claims of my intelligence. This brings forth two types of people; those who insist that no intelligent person would ever say they are intelligent, and those who wish to prove me wrong by challenging me intellectually. The former I've no interest in, but the latter can provide for a great opportunity to talk about a multitude of subjects, to learn new things and to become a better person.

(1/2)

>>22934878
(2/2)

>So you generally hunt for your own meals? In Europe? That's pretty interesting for sure.
I've lived in many places, and it has always been customary for me and my family to hunt and to cultivate food. While not all I eat is something I've personally killed or grown, a great majority of it is.

Right now I'm located in a rather remote spot in Europe. There are very limited options for agriculture here (mountainous terrain, very little arable land, cold climate), but hunting and fishing are possible. I have a very large stock of frozen game and fish, and I'm eating some almost every day. I prefer not to eat animals that have been grown in torturous environments for the sole purpose of getting slaughtered and eaten, and if that were to be the only meat I'm offered, I'd rather eat vegetarian.

>>22935613
Contact?

>>22935713
List yours.

>>22935757
My contact? Got a preferred form?

>>22935757
my skype is james.matthews83 (83 isnt my year of birth but im in your range)

>>22935769
Kik, if you have it.

>>22935774
Genericusername08

File: Ult_QT_Info.jpg (4MB, 4000x2857px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4000x2857px

24/M/USA, WI

>>22934896
Send skype req!

>>22935647
>the best way is to make egregious claims of my intelligence.
Not to butt in, but are you being honest here? It seems like a rather roundabout method, though I can't say that it doesn't work and I can see that it would eliminate people that confuse modesty for intelligence (or at least assume that the latter includes the former). I'm interested in how it was developed. Just an idea you had one day, or maybe you had been predisposed to genuinely make egregious claims about your intelligence and it only developed into an actual method after seeing the results? Though it strikes me as at least vaguely dishonest, it's at least interesting and the concept hadn't ever crossed my mind before.

This reminded me of something I had heard before, something about modesty or humbleness being a poor trait to pair with intelligence, because the modest/humble intelligent person that says "I'm not intelligent" essentially lies about themselves and possibly deprives the world of their gift in some measure. Something at least along those lines (though I might be completely butchering it), and now I can't remember exactly what it was or who said/wrote it, so if anyone can tell me that would be aces.

>>22935647
>Vonnegut, Oppenheimer or Einstein
I love your reasoning and prioritising their attitude against war over their achievements in science/literature, but wouldn't this go against your previous idea to see intelligence as absence of stupidity, given the latter is something all three displayed liberally at far bigger things than smoking. Although I guess this could also use a definition of stupidity. (absence of intelligence seems to work pretty well ...) While I see crap like money or degrees as laughable as quantifiers, more meaningful achievements sound like a better choice than lack of silly choices. Also this begs the question of meaning ... but this thread is lame enough without Philosophy lite.

> truth be told, these collages are completely lacking in information
>The former I've no interest in
Stuff like that gives you pretentiousness points. Over focusing on the mundane and giving it more attention than it deserves in the first example and over focusing on your own valuation, even in the context of an opinion in the second.

I'd say the comparison with book covers is faulty too, the infographics seem pretty solid to create a sneak peak into the person, a first impression, that is obviously not enough to judge a person but far from being completely irrelevant, specially if the person spent some time on theirs, and the fact that the person spent a lot time on the shit, yidda yadda.

The "making egregious claims in hope of challenge" thing reminds me of a friend (and myself), and from my experience another thing that a more intelligent person wouldn't do, be it for efficiency sake alone ... but I get the feeling that I am making circles around a missed point now.

>>22935652
Pretty much confirmed my impression of a principled person, and you got my admiration for following through. Your lifestyle is so contrasting to my own, it's quite fascinating, specially given the similarities in other aspects. Would love to learn more about you for sure. I assumed your location being in East Europe/North European part of the ex Soviet states first … but given your literature choices and "rather remote spot" it sounds more like Finland now.

If you're interested in staying in contact, what medium do you prefer? Email, or was it just to exchange Skype?

>>22936008
calm down lad, you're trying too hard

>>22935989
>are you being honest here?
Honest in what sense? Regarding my arrogance? We're looking at a paradox of some sort here. If I were to admit to lying, wouldn't it mean my supposed intellect was fake, as the only thing backing it up was my insolent behavior? Conversely, if I insisted that I was being truthful, wouldn't that imply that my claims for intelligence have been false; merely the fruits of my self-importance?

Take this how you will: I am intellectually capable and unafraid to display it, if doing so grants me a benefit I consider worthwhile. In this case, the benefit is the conversation we're having right now; not only interesting in its own right, but also a way to introspection on my part.

>I'm interested in how it was developed
"Monkey see, monkey do." I've noticed a trend like this on /b/, primarily: a thread is created with an ungracious statement that the OP is more intelligent than the rest of /b/. This may or may not be true, but what is certain that it attracts a very specific demographic; the two groups I mentioned in my previous post. Me, I'm there to challenge OP, but usually I end up talking to other like-minded people and we have a good time solving puzzles or talking about a plethora of subjects. At that point it is of no consequence whether OP really is more intelligent than /b/, or if they're even taking part in the conversation. I simply adopted this method after having made some changes to it.

(1/3)

>>22935989
>This reminded me of something I had heard before, something about modesty or humbleness being a poor trait to pair with intelligence
You're talking about the Dunning–Kruger effect. It's not just modesty, though, as an intelligent person will often assume the things they're good at are easy for everyone, not just themselves, whereas a less intelligent person will defeat a challenge they find difficult and come to the conclusion that it would've been difficult or impossible for the rest of the world, too. It should be noted that not everyone claiming to be more intelligent than the norm is affected by this effect, or vice versa.

>>22936005
>all three displayed [stupidity] liberally at far bigger things than smoking
They certainly did, and I'm sure there is not one person in the world who hasn't done something stupid, whether knowingly or out of ignorance. If we were to look at Oppenheimer's and Einstein's 'greatest act of stupidity', is it not the nuclear weapon? In their defense, they had very little idea about what was to come in the nuclear age, or in other words, they were uninformed of the consequences of their decision to aid in this project. Einstein voiced his worries after the first nuclear tests, Oppenheimer once his hands were bloodied by the deaths of thousands, but both realized that they had made an error and spent the rest of their lives trying to redeem themselves. Even so, their research sparked a new boom of technological development, giving us nuclear power in its many forms and indirectly saving the lives of thousands, if not millions, by allowing humanity to cut down on polluting fuels and on dangerous mining operations.

(2/3)

>>22936005
>I'd say the comparison with book covers is faulty too
Maybe so, if we only account for the front cover, as the back covers of books tend to be comparable to these sneak peeks; trying to sum an entire being (in this case, a book) into just a couple of sentences. There's a small but meaningful difference, however. The back cover texts of books are usually written by the publisher, these infographics are filled by the person they represent, acting as a curriculum vitae. In this sense, it is indeed telling of a person's character if they pay a lot of attention to the presentation, whereas in the case of books it's mostly a display of how much money the publisher thinks the book would make them.

>another thing that a more intelligent person wouldn't do, be it for efficiency sake alone
I love to challenge myself. Sometimes I solve difficult puzzles (puzzles I often have to come up myself), other times I prefer an eye-opening discourse. As I'm constantly looking for ways to challenge myself (and as a result, to become more cognisant of my own capabilities), this certainly is one of the more efficient ways to do that.

>>22936008
My location tends to change on a yearly basis, if not more often. I'm familiar with all corners of Europe and the former Soviet bloc, but Finland I've never visited. The "rather remote spot" I'm talking about is a village in the middle of a mountain range; for anyone else this location would be "extremely remote", but I've lived in places even further away from civilization.

I prefer email. Skype and other forms of instant messaging don't really allow for long, well-thought-out walls of text, and I find that anything less than that ends up boring me in a short time.

(3/3)

>>22936302
>this certainly is one of the more efficient ways to do that
A more efficient one would be, directly seeking out the more intelligent people who would challenge you, skipping the numerous potential disappointments and saving you more time in the long run. Although it sounds that your way bears some decent fruit too.
What kind of puzzles exactly?

>My location tends to change on a yearly basis, if not more often.
It gets more and more interesting. How do you even ensure things like a place to sleep with such a nomadic life? A recreational vehicle sounds somehow off given the rest so far.

>Skype
Although walls of text are certainly not the first intent of such software, t depends more on the users; besides there is its own challenging aspect in holding a discussion close to realtime, where the depth suffers, spontaneity and spur of the moment can shine. Anyway, we're stealing too much attention from people seeking their QTs.

"[email protected]" it is.

>>22935613
Add me? kik or skype, both are BourbonSandwich

File: IMT.png (2MB, 4130x2950px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4130x2950px

Sure

>>22936286
>Honest in what sense?
Hah, I have to apologize a little, since it was somewhat a rhetorical question to indicate my, at least initial, disbelief (or at least surprise) in your "egregious claims of intelligence" method. That is, a "you really do that?" to start off my question about how you came to do that. I guess I should say that the "dishonest" later refers not to you saying that you use the method, but rather the method itself, which I just realized could be confusing paired with my initial line.
I'd actually ask you to go more in depth on how you interpreted that line, since I'm not 100% sure that I understood the paradox (though, having just woken up I'm not exactly in the right state to understand much or try to understand much at the moment) but, well, later: *
>"Monkey see, monkey do."
"The simplest explanations..." That does make sense. This bit brings two questions to my mind, but, once again, later: *
>You're talking about the Dunning–Kruger effect.
That does seem to be basically it, though often it seems more focused on the inverse (i.e. the arrogant idiot), as well as being more about knowledge and skill than intelligence, whereas what I am thinking of seemed to be specifically on intelligence itself, but, then, I did say that I had a poor remembering of the concept and could be butchering it. I do swear that there is a quote on this subject that I am thinking of, though, and I'm going to be restless until I figure it out. I think I might have heard it in Marcus Aurelius' book, and am looking accordingly. Nothing yet.

* And so, the promised later:
>>22936521
Is right that the time to leave has come, so I'll leave my questions.
Incidentally, he's also right about the qualities of the faster paced text-based discussions that Skype and other IM software offer. I only mention this since for a while I stuck to only "long, well-thought-out walls of text", but, given the right person, Skype can be just as interesting, just in a different way.

>>22934896
> wants to get in shape
> doesn't want fit guy

>>22938117
B-A-N-A-N-A-S

>>22935613
KIK is JoshuaLowery

>>22936521
>A more efficient one would be, directly seeking out the more intelligent people who would challenge you
If there's a better way than this, I do not know of it.

>Although it sounds that your way bears some decent fruit too.
It does.

>How do you even ensure things like a place to sleep with such a nomadic life?
There's always a house I can sleep in, typically rented, or a building granted by my father's work to use freely. I have spent a fair amount of nights in RV's, but they're not my typical form of residence.

I sent you an email, feel free to respond in whichever way you prefer. You need not solve the attached puzzle yet.

>>22937263
>I'd actually ask you to go more in depth on how you interpreted that line
My understanding was that you were asking if I was being honest about my intelligence and/or my arrogance. The paradox:
>if I lied about my arrogance, the arrogant claim for intelligence would be baseless
>thus, it would seem that I am not intelligent

>if I was truthful about my arrogance, the arrogant claim for intelligence would be based on arrogance alone
>thus, it would seem that I am not intelligent

The above conclusions are reached whether or not I say I was being honest about my intelligence; in either case it could be shrugged off as either arrogance or the lack thereof.

>I only mention this since for a while I stuck to only "long, well-thought-out walls of text", but, given the right person, Skype can be just as interesting, just in a different way.
I have tried instant messaging now and again, but it never seems to satisfy me. Threads of thought are often left untied as the conversation jumps from one place to another, and returning to a previously discussed subject may not be possible. Not only for this reason I prefer email, but also for the freedom it gives me. I'm not on the computer at all times, and having a meaningful Skype conversation requires both conversational partners to be online. Email is more permissive.

>>22938675
I respect the lengths at which you type. [email protected]

>>22938742
I sent you a carte-de-visite.

>>22938879
Ah, I thought someone randomly sent me something

>>22938675
>I'm not on the computer at all times
Yes; this becomes doubly a problem with timezone differences, to the point where you have to set up times with the other party in advance. It is a hassle.
Anyway, if you probably have enough for now, but if you ever want a new person to type excessively long emails at, it wouldn't be unwelcome:
[email protected]

>>22939543
anyway, you*
No "if".

>>22939563
Check your email.

>>22938117
I wouldn't say no to a fit guy, I just don't want to feel bad during sex when I can't keep up because I'm out of shape. I know it sounds petty, but things like that can kill my sexual self esteem and I don't want to deal with that right meow.