Posts by jadeheron5

ruggedraven36 said:A sage has always been seen as a good person, regardless of the era or culture. So, saying wisdom has nothing to do with empathy? That’s just plain wrong.

I’d argue differently... I think a wise person is simply a righteous one. You see, you can be "too good"—just purely kindhearted without any edge—but if you're just a pushover, you aren't really wise.

Laura Jones56 said:Yeah.

No.

I mean, seriously... what on earth happened there? 😛

ruggedraven36 said:

says:
Or what?

Everything.

Explain yourself.

Right?

Laura Jones56 said:I suppose there might be a way to link emotional and social intelligence to the concept of true wisdom, if one looks closely enough.

Well, I don't know about that... it feels more like empathy to me. Take that old saying, "man is a wolf to man"—it’s definitely a wise observation, right? But it’s the absolute opposite of being empathetic. To my mind, wisdom isn't required to be kind or empathetic; it's strictly about common sense and the lessons you pick up from life experience.

steelridge58 said:Exactly, which is why having a high, low, or even just an average Intelligence Quotient doesn't actually serve as a reliable yardstick for true wisdom.

I wouldn't say that... honestly, I’d argue that the biggest factor in being wise is how much you naturally tend toward harmony. On the flip side, being a rebel or acting on pure impulse? That's basically the antithesis of wisdom.

This whole idea about intelligence being the core of everything dates all the way back to Socratic thought. And look, if he were actually "smart" in the modern sense, maybe he wouldn't have been such a fool for not helping out with the firewood while his wife was busy cooking dinner.😁

Wisdom tends to travel through the vessel of religion, doesn't it? You look at Christianity, and you have the Commandments, or those little parables—stories meant to highlight our own human failings. Then you have something like Buddhism, where the wisdom is much more of an internal journey, focusing on how one might actually find a sense of peace in this chaotic world.
There’s also this almost psychiatric quality to wisdom, isn't there? It feels healing, in a way. It exists to give people a sort of compass, helping them navigate those heavy decisions we all face eventually.

steelridge58 said:But why not? How does one actually become wise?

Your comment actually made me think of Charles Bukowski, and honestly, I've read so many profound, wise things written by that absolute drunk and hedonist—a man who never once spared life and certainly never spared himself, always dancing right on that razor-thin edge where wisdom meets pure madness in those intense, high-stakes moments.

There are no set rules
no magic formulas
for finding wisdom

But I truly feel that if a person spends their whole life playing it safe and shielding themselves from everything, they might never actually find their way to being wise.

To be honest, I never really viewed Bukowski as someone "wise." To me, he was just controversial—more of a rebel meant to provoke common sense.
Sort of like a clown performing for adults.

A wise person can be anyone, really, but nobody is simply born with it. Wisdom is something you earn, depending on how much you learn from your own mistakes—or the mistakes of others.
And then, of course, you have those old folk sayings and proverbs that just get passed down through generations.

Gerald Jackson48 said:

says:
Think about someone with a 150 IQ for a second. It’s a totally different way of processing things. Their brain handles a massive amount of data all at once. For an average person, this kind of high-level thinking is just a tiny, irrelevant detail, but for them, it’s basically their whole world.

I think saying it's a completely different way of thinking is a stretch. There's a lot of nuance there. Honestly, someone scoring a 160 on an IQ test isn't necessarily using some alien logic. They usually use the same problem-solving frameworks we all do; they just use them much more efficiently.

Another thing is how we actually measure intelligence. Most tests use an interval scale, not a ratio scale. That means zero doesn't represent a total absence of intelligence. Because the gaps aren't equal, you can't just claim that someone with a 160 IQ is twice as smart as someone with an 80. You could make that argument if we were using a ratio scale, but from what I know, standard American IQ testing doesn't work that way.

A highly intelligent person naturally ends up having different priorities and behaviors. It’s almost biological. They simply absorb a much higher volume of information about everything around them and process it more deeply. Consequently, certain social dynamics—you know, the whole "be my friend so I can follow you on Instagram" type of triviality—become totally irrelevant to them.

I don't mean to imply they aren't human, of course. They have flaws, they make mistakes, they trip up just like anyone else. It's just that they tend to be focused on much larger matters than the average person. Things that seem vital to the average person often barely even make it onto their radar.
It really comes down to a different value system. One might even argue they don't care much about their own personal status, but rather find value solely in the work or the subject they are pursuing.

Sam Martinez9 said:You don't need to be a philosopher to see this; you just need enough life experience to realize that meeting basic survival needs is the foundation of existence. You have to secure food, shelter, clothing, and shoes first... only then can you move on to philosophy, athletics, or the arts.

People who fail to grasp this lack maturity and depth. In my view, it was Socrates who was immature and unprepared for reality, not his wife.

I wasn't talking about actual athletics or high culture—I’ve been active in sports since I was a kid, myself. I was referring to that mindless social posturing. You know, showing up to some gathering just to flaunt a new designer bag or whatever. It's these primitive little social games that matter so much to people of average intelligence, because their entire world revolves around labels, trends, and sucking up to others just to feel like they have some sort of self-worth.

As for biographies and the legends of the past, none of them spent their time engaging in that kind of shallow chatter. If they spoke, they spoke about their work or their passions. Some were incredibly eccentric, like Tesla. I can't think of a single true genius who spent their days obsessing over Instagram, doing that whole "follow me and I'll follow you back" nonsense.😁

Harold Doyle3 said:Falling for the wrong person isn't reserved for idiots.
There's a reason people say that first breath of love is often the final gasp of common sense.
I suspect Socrates understood that perfectly well.
The real question is whether he was being genuinely sincere when justifying why he stayed with her, or if he was just a man willing to own the consequences of his own bad decisions.

It’s possible he truly loved her, but she just wasn't on his level. And then there's her—just an average woman expecting those standard gestures of affection that your typical guy would offer. He couldn't bring himself to do that; to him, it felt trivial, almost patronizing. So, her entire world basically imploded because she felt worthless and replaceable, which led to all those emotional outbursts.

Let’s steer this back to the main point, shall we? Wisdom, in my view, is really just about self-preservation. Like I mentioned before, you can't exactly look at a drunkard, or some pure hedonist, or even someone constantly chasing adrenaline through reckless stunts, and call them wise. To me, wisdom is having that internal compass—knowing how to truly read the room you're standing in and reacting in a way that actually makes sense for your situation.

Harold Doyle3 said:You've got it wrong, Sheldon. ☕

I mean, what if Socrates was just some fool who fell for a woman who treated him poorly, and because he lacked any real sense, instead of actually dealing with his mess, he just swept everything under the rug? 😁

Sam Martinez9 said:

thinks that:
.

So, I suppose Socrates was just being a bit of an egoist; I'm not entirely sure how he ended up that way,

Back in his day, they had slaves to handle those kinds of matters.

I think it’s largely irrelevant... I suppose if someone wants to be considered a respected member of society, they ought to have had a wife, but that's not really the point. It’s about the spectrum of thought.

The average person mostly looks inward, focusing on themselves and anyone who directly impacts them. So, an average person is usually preoccupied with hierarchy, power, self-interest—figuring out who can help them reach their specific goals. But for someone with a much higher intellect, that way of thinking is incredibly narrow. Honestly, they aren't even living in the same world.

That’s why it’s so easy to spot when someone is just average. They get caught up in questions like, "Who’s to blame for his marriage?" or "Did he choose this himself?" That's that narrow-mindedness at work—projecting your own limited intellect onto others through questions that are tied strictly to your own perceived interests. That's just how that level of thinking operates.

Take, for instance, a person with an IQ70. We’re talking about someone we might describe as slow, perhaps struggling with basic math and things like that. Just consider the sphere of thought available to such a person compared to an average person with an IQ of 100.

Now, imagine someone with an IQ of 150. It is a completely different cognitive system altogether. The sphere in which their brain operates is vastly larger; they process a much greater volume of information simultaneously. To them, the way an average person thinks—our way, if you will—is simply a minor, insignificant topic, even though for the average person, it revolves around their entire existence.

Harold Doyle3 said:Did Socrates actually choose his own wife, or was it some arrangement made by his parents?

Honestly, I don't know, and frankly, it doesn't even matter. From what I can gather, you’re just hitting your own ceiling because you're stuck looking at everything through such a narrow lens.
You really need to accept the fact that highly intelligent people don't operate on your wavelength.
How do I put this... let me try. Imagine if 99.9% of the people around you were, well, developmentally challenged—like they were all in special education classes. Sure, you could find them endearing, maybe even love them in a certain way, but you’ll never, ever achieve that deep intellectual spark that actually satisfies you. They simply can't reach your level of comprehension. That’s essentially what life feels like for someone with a high IQ.

So, look, Socrates clearly had his own priorities, regardless of how he ended up with his partner. But the gap between them was likely too wide for any true relationship dynamic to work. To put it bluntly, it's like being in a room where everyone is nodding their heads in unison, and if you don't nod along with them, you're treated like the outcast.

Socrates was an incredibly brilliant man, yet his wife was just... well, quite ordinary.
It really comes down to the fact that we’re dealing with two entirely different breeds of people here. It's like comparing a giraffe to an elephant; their social rhythms and how they navigate the world are just fundamentally wired differently.
For her, the core of the relationship was about the practical exchange—the "utility" of it all. You know, the old idea of him chopping wood while she tends the hearth. But for someone operating at a high intellectual frequency, those kinds of transactional dynamics don't even register on the radar. They aren't even part of the equation.

When you're someone like Socrates, preoccupied with deep, existential contemplation—trying to untangle the mysteries of the entire world—those mundane, ground-level domestic tensions simply don't matter. But for her? That was her entire universe. And I think that's where the friction comes from, the resentment, and ultimately, the tragedy of it all.

Wisdom really boils down to one simple thing: taking care of yourself.

boldstag said:Look, I really don't have the energy to sit through this again. Honestly, if she actually said it like that... then yeah, she's the one in the wrong here. It’s just how things stand.

The wave is actually performing the mirroring. It’s doing exactly what it's supposed to do—reflecting everything back.

The Twins... they really know how to play games. It’s like they'll drop these tiny little hints, just enough to get you thinking one way, only to pull the rug out from under you and do something completely different. They're masters of the bait and switch. Honestly, it reminds me a bit of those old mystery novels I used to obsess over back in high school—where the detective thinks he's figured it all out, only to realize the clues were leading him toward a total red herring. Just keeps you on your toes, I suppose.

No, that’s not quite what she meant... she was saying that Twins basically mirror you. They just mimic whatever the opponent is doing. It’s more like how those lightweight fighters move—they stay light on their feet, dodging strikes with this effortless grace, and then suddenly, they snap into a counter-attack from totally unexpected angles. They really lose it, though, if you show them even a shred of disrespect. In boxing terms, they’re your classic counter-punchers. You know the type? They wait for you to commit to a heavy opening, slip the punch, and then catch you coming from an angle you never saw coming. It's all about timing and patience. I remember watching this old highlight reel of a middleweight bout back in Philly once, and seeing that exact rhythm... it's almost hypnotic how they bait you into making a mistake before they strike.

boldstag said:She really laid it out clearly there.

The scales always reflect whoever they're up against. It’s all about balance, justice, and that whole equilibrium thing...

That was actually what she meant regarding Twin. Based on how she described the scales, he’d be your classic counter-puncher—you know, the type who just dances around light on his feet, lets the opponent rush in blindly, and then catches them right when they least expect it.

☕