PDA

View Full Version : Manufactured Intelligence



Browning151
12-30-2013, 10:28 AM
I'll just leave this here:


The Left is Too Smart to Fail

The infrastructure of manufactured intelligence has become a truly impressive thing. Today as never before there is an industry dedicated, not to educating people, but to making them feel smart. From paradigm shifting TED talks to paradigm to books by thought leaders and documentaries by change agents that transform your view of the world, manufactured intelligence has become its own culture.

Manufactured intelligence is the smarmy quality that oozes out of a New York Times column by Thomas Friedman, Maureen Dowd, Frank Bruni and the rest of the gang who tell you nothing meaningful while dazzling you with references to international locations, political events and pop culture, tying together absurdities into one synergistic web of nonsense that feels meaningful.

There's a reason that there's a Tom Friedman article generator online. But it could just as easily be a New York Times article generator that sums up the hollowness of the buzzword-fed crowd that is always hungry to reaffirm the illusion of its own intelligence.

We all know that George W. Bush was a moron. And we all know that Obama is a genius. We have been told by Valerie Jarrett, by his media lapdogs and even by the great man himself that he is just too smart to do his job. And it's reasonable that a genius would be bored by the tedious tasks involved in running the most powerful nation on earth.

But what is "smart" anyway? What makes Obama a genius? It's not his IQ. It's probably not his grades or we would have seen them already. It's that like so many of the thought leaders and TED talkers, he makes his supporters feel smart. The perception of intelligence is really a reflection.

Smart once used to be an unreachable quality. Einstein was proclaimed a genius, because it was said that no one understood his theories. Those were undemocratic times when it was assumed that the eggheads playing with the atom had to be a lot smarter than us or we were in big trouble.

Intelligence has since been democratized. Smart has been redistributed. Anyone can get an A for effort. And the impulse of manufactured intelligence is not smart people, but people who make us feel smart. That is why Neil deGrasse Tyson, another obsessively self-promoting mediocrity like Carl Sagan, is now the new face of science. Sagan made science-illiterate liberals feel smart while pandering to their biases. Tyson does the same thing for the Twitter generation.

Self-esteem is the new intelligence. Obama's intelligence was manufactured by pandering to the biases and tastes of his supporters. The more he shared their biases and tastes, the smarter he seemed to be and the smarter they felt by having so much in common with such a smart man.

Obama Inc. built his image around the accessories of modern manufactured intelligence, premature biographies, global reference points and pop culture. This marriage of high and low with an exotic spice from the east embodies modern liberal intelligence. Take a dash of pop culture, mix it with an important quote, throw in some recent technological development that promises to "change how we all live", mention your time in a foreign culture and draw an insipid conclusion.

That's not just the DNA of every other New York Times column, TED talk and important book by an equally important thought leader sitting under the floodlights at your local struggling chain bookstore with its portraits of great writers on the wall and the tables groaning under unsold copies of Fifty Shades of Grey, Malcolm Gladwell, Candace Bushnell and Khaled Hosseini.

It's also the DNA of Obama Inc. It is its assumption of intelligence through compassionate self-involvement, progressive insights derived from an obsession with the self and the sanctification of Third World references, real or imaginary, invoking the spiritual power of the Other, the totem of alien magic, to transcend the rational and the pragmatic. It is upscale Oprah; egotism masquerading as enlightenment, condescension as compassion and soothing quotes as religion.


Once upon a time, bright young American men went to Europe and wrote books about the world. That was our notion of intelligence. JFK did it and was widely praised for his intelligence. Today bright young American men and women go to the Third World and write their books about the world, mining the compost of their Flickr accounts, Tumblr updates and Twitter feed for deep thoughts.

Intelligence to a modern liberal isn't depth, it's appearance. It isn't even an intellectual quality, but a spiritual quality. Compassionate people who care about others are always "smarter", no matter how stupid they might be, because they care about the world around them.

An insight into how we live matters more than useful knowledge. Skill is irrelevant unless it's a transformative progressive "changing the way we live" application.

Obama and his audience mistake their orgy of mutual flattery for intelligence and depth. Like a trendy restaurant whose patrons know that they have good taste because they patronize it, his supporters know that they are smart because they support a smart man and Obama knows he is smart because so many smart people support him.

The thought never rises within this bubble of manufactured intelligence that all of them might really be idiots who have convinced themselves that they are geniuses because they read the right books (or pretend to read them), watch the right movies and shows (or pretend to) and have the right values (or pretend to).

Smart is surplus when you have Gladwell sitting under a full DVD set of The Wire prominently displayed on your bookshelf right alongside a signed copy of The Audacity of Hope.

Marxists thought that Marxism was smart. Progressives measure intelligence in progressivism. Its only two qualities are "world awareness" and "progressive future adaptation".

Obama hit both these qualities perfectly with his Third Culture background and the appearance of modern technocratic polish. Not just a politician, but a thought leader, he had the pseudo-celebrity quality of their kind, able to move smoothly from a celebrity panel about Third World microfinance, to a Jay-Z concert to a fundraiser for DIY solar panels for India to a banquet for a political hack.

Everyone who encountered him thought that he was smart because he made them feel smart. And that is the supreme duty of the modern liberal intellectual, not to be smart, but to make others feel smart. Genuine intelligence is threatening. Manufactured intelligence is soothing. And those intellectually superior progressives who need to believe that Obama is smart in order to believe that they are smart cannot stop believing in his brains without confronting the illusion of their own intelligence.

Manufactured intelligence isn't smart. It's stupid. It's as stupid as building windmills for sustainable energy in places where the wind hardly blows, as stupid as calling inflated budgets "investments" and as stupid as believing that a man is smart because he can reference poverty in the Third World.

It's easy to tell apart fake intelligence from the real thing. Manufactured intelligence fakes "smart" by playing word games. It constantly invents new terms to provide the enlightened elites with a secret language of Newspeak buzzwords that mean less than the words they are replacing. The buzzwords, Thought Leader and Change Agent, quickly take on cultist overtones and become ways of describing how the group's leaders would like to use power, than anything about the world that they describe.

Manufactured intelligence is a consensus, not a debate. It's not arrived at through a process, but flopped into like a warm soothing bath of nothingness. It's correct because everyone says so. And anyone who disagrees is clearly stupid and lacks awareness of the interconnected ways that the world synergistically works. And probably doesn't know science, Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson either.

Real intelligence is the product of constant debate. It is forever striving to overthrow the consensus and willing to challenge anything and everything. It uses a specialized vocabulary only to describe specialized phenomena, rather than replacing existing words with new words to describing existing phenomena in order to seem as if it understands the future better by going all 1984 on it.

Finally, manufactured intelligence is self-involved. It mistakes feeling for thinking. It deals not with how things are or even how we would like them to be, but how we feel about the way things are and what our feelings about the way things are say about what kind of people we are.

Liberal intelligence is largely concerned with the latter. It is a self-esteem project for mediocre elites, the sons and daughters of the formerly accomplished who are constantly diving into the shallow pools of their own minds to explore how their privilege and entitlement makes them view the world and how they can be good people by challenging everyone's paradigms and how they can think outside the box by climbing into it and pulling the flaps shut behind them.

Perpetual self-involvement isn't intelligence regardless of how many of the linguistic tricks of memoir fiction it borrows to endow its liberal self-help section with the appearance of nobility.

Liberalism isn't really about making the world a better place. It's about reassuring the elites that they are good people for wanting to rule over it.

That is why Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize for having good intentions. His actual foreign policy mattered less than the appearance of a new transformative foreign policy based on speeches. Gore promised to be be harsher on Saddam than Bush, but no one remembers that because everyone in the bubble knows that the Iraq War was stupid... and only conservatives do stupid things.

Liberal intelligence exists on the illusion of its self-worth. The magical thinking that guides it in every other area from economics to diplomacy also convinces it that if it believes it is smart, that it will be. The impenetrable liberal consensus in every area is based on this delusion of intelligence. Every policy is right because it's smart and it's smart because it's progressive and it's progressive because smart progressives say that it is.

Progressives manufacture the consensus of their own intelligence and insist that it proves them right.

Imagine a million people walking in a circle and shouting, "WE'RE SMART AND WE'RE RIGHT. WE'RE RIGHT BECAUSE WE'RE SMART. WE'RE SMART BECAUSE WE'RE RIGHT." Now imagine that these marching morons dominate academia, the government bureaucracy and the entertainment industry allowing them to spend billions yelling their idiot message until it outshouts everyone else while ignoring the disasters in their wake because they are too smart to fail.

That is liberalism.

Sultan Knish: The Left is Too Smart to Fail (http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-left-is-too-smart-to-fail.html?m=1)

No, it's not some study from an Ivy League institution or something of that nature, it's merely an opinion. Some will dismiss it, some will think it hits the nail square on the head.

Discuss.

Sinfix_15
12-30-2013, 10:52 AM
been hitting on this for a while now. liberal "education".

geoff
12-30-2013, 01:58 PM
Am I the only one that read this and instantly thought...BlankCD???

Vteckidd
12-30-2013, 02:04 PM
marked for later

.blank cd
12-30-2013, 02:42 PM
This opinion piece is minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Sinfix_15
12-30-2013, 02:49 PM
Am I the only one that read this and instantly thought...BlankCD???

Nope. BlankCD is the perfect mascot for this topic.

Vteckidd
12-30-2013, 04:55 PM
It's easy to tell apart fake intelligence from the real thing. Manufactured intelligence fakes "smart" by playing word games. It constantly invents new terms to provide the enlightened elites with a secret language of Newspeak buzzwords that mean less than the words they are replacing. The buzzwords, Thought Leader and Change Agent, quickly take on cultist overtones and become ways of describing how the group's leaders would like to use power, than anything about the world that they describe.

Manufactured intelligence is a consensus, not a debate. It's not arrived at through a process, but flopped into like a warm soothing bath of nothingness. It's correct because everyone says so. And anyone who disagrees is clearly stupid and lacks awareness of the interconnected ways that the world synergistically works. And probably doesn't know science, Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson either.
Blank to a T.

Vteckidd
12-30-2013, 04:55 PM
This opinion piece is minutes of my life I'll never get back.

In your world, everything that isnt your view is an opinion piece.

.blank cd
12-30-2013, 05:33 PM
Blank to a T.Its a pseudo-conservative opinion piece and you still don't understand what he's saying.

"Blank uses big words I don't understand that sound 'liberal', so he's playing 'word games'"


In your world, everything that isnt your view is an opinion piece.

In my world, or reality as other intelligent people call it, it's an opinion piece when it's clearly delivered as an opinion piece. Which this is.

Whether the author knows it or not, he's just trying to legitimize the voice of people who have no knowledge of any subject but insist on having opinions on it, insist that their opinions are right, and insist that those who disagree with them (liberals, as he calls them) are wrong. This is called "willful ignorance".

True liberals and conservatives will engage in a constructive debate amongst themselves. The willfully ignorant will continue to espouse their ignorance.

Browning151
12-30-2013, 07:46 PM
Blank, if you were truly the intellectual you claim to be you wouldn't have to remind us of it so often, we'd all know it from your well thought out clear, concise arguments but you try to use words to make your arguments appear deeper and more thoughtful than the bullshit diversions and non-answers they mostly are.

Echonova
12-30-2013, 09:34 PM
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”

― Stephen R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change

.blank cd
12-30-2013, 10:54 PM
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”

― Stephen R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change

This

Sinfix_15
12-31-2013, 07:52 AM
Its a pseudo-conservative opinion piece and you still don't understand what he's saying.

"Blank uses big words I don't understand that sound 'liberal', so he's playing 'word games'"



In my world, or reality as other intelligent people call it, it's an opinion piece when it's clearly delivered as an opinion piece. Which this is.

Whether the author knows it or not, he's just trying to legitimize the voice of people who have no knowledge of any subject but insist on having opinions on it, insist that their opinions are right, and insist that those who disagree with them (liberals, as he calls them) are wrong. This is called "willful ignorance".

True liberals and conservatives will engage in a constructive debate amongst themselves. The willfully ignorant will continue to espouse their ignorance.

You continue to validate this thread. It sums you up perfectly.

Vteckidd
12-31-2013, 09:01 AM
LOL how many times in this thread will he claim hes the smartest in the room?

Blank what is your degree in and where do you work

.blank cd
12-31-2013, 10:39 AM
LOL how many times in this thread will he claim hes the smartest in the room?

By my count, 0. You guys do a good job of affirming that for me.

Vteckidd
12-31-2013, 10:52 AM
By my count, 0. You guys do a good job of affirming that for me.


In my world, or reality as other intelligent people call it

Inferring you are intelligent and others are not.

Mike 1, you 0.

But im used to this

Sinfix_15
12-31-2013, 03:26 PM
Couple theoretical questions.

Person A has a PHD in psychology from Harvard, where he is now a professor. He also works as a democratic strategist and helped design some teaching programs for common core. He received a Noble Peace Prize for developing a curriculum that would change the way America's youth viewed gun culture and make them more open to the idea of gun control.

Person B has an engineering degree from the army school of engineering. After working a few years at the local auto manufacturer as an industrial electrician, he decided to open his own shop doing custom fabrication on offroad trail rigs. While in the army, he was awarded a distinguished service cross for rescuing soldiers from behind enemy lines.


Question - Which one is more intelligent? why?



Scenario - Person A and Person B are abducted by Aliens who are doing experiments to see how humans would adapt to being relocated to another planet. Person A and Person B are placed on planet C and given a pack of alien equipment to assist them. The bag consists of alien tools that are unlike human tools, a guide book in alien language that tells you about local animal and plant species and a map in alien language that directs you to an export pod that is located 30 miles away from the current location. The export pod will have to be piloted by persons A and B to escape. An operation guide comes with the export pod, but it is also in alien language. Person's A and B are in different locations and will not cross paths.

Question - Which person is more likely to complete the task assigned? why?


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bc186I-CUAABXxh.jpg

.blank cd
12-31-2013, 05:02 PM
Why did you find it necessary to mention that person A works as a democratic strategist and reference common core, Nobel peace prize, and gun control, and that person B is a veteran decorated for rescuing soldiers behind enemy lines?

Sinfix_15
12-31-2013, 05:13 PM
Why did you find it necessary to mention that person A works as a democratic strategist and reference common core, Nobel peace prize, and gun control, and that person B is a veteran decorated for rescuing soldiers behind enemy lines?

You're the smart one, right? Are you implying that my fictional character biographies are not plausible? Does an assumed political affiliation change how you would assess the intelligence of each individual? Do these seemingly insignificant details change the way you view intelligence? If i said one was black and one was white, would that change anything? What if i said one of them shops at the GAP and the other at urban outfitters, would those details matter? Maybe part of the "exercise" is for you to decide what is and isnt important. Maybe what you think is or isnt valuable is on topic which the subject of this thread.

Person A is an educator, his career path is plausible. His achievements, like person B, are exaggerated to help distinguish them. Answer the question.

Feel free to create your own fictional biographies and ask your own question if you desire.

.blank cd
12-31-2013, 05:23 PM
Then you should have your answer.

Sinfix_15
12-31-2013, 05:48 PM
Then you should have your answer.

The answer is in how you answer.

Echonova
12-31-2013, 10:36 PM
Technically speaking...


Only the speaker/writer can imply, only the listener/reader can infer.

Echonova
01-01-2014, 09:15 AM
http://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/j402/Echonova2/1560674_10152107331692726_1720871061_n-Copy_zpsabbee88a.jpg

Sinfix_15
01-01-2014, 10:50 AM
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s268/Virtutis/LiberalsAreMorons_zps1f671f7f.jpg (http://s154.photobucket.com/user/Virtutis/media/LiberalsAreMorons_zps1f671f7f.jpg.html)

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s268/Virtutis/LiberalMorons_zps9a1a06db.jpg (http://s154.photobucket.com/user/Virtutis/media/LiberalMorons_zps9a1a06db.jpg.html)

Echonova
01-01-2014, 02:31 PM
We need the Mother Fucking "Like" button back.

Echonova
01-01-2014, 10:44 PM
http://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/j402/Echonova2/1531923_576073125801533_1655056739_n_zps43b26930.j pg

BanginJimmy
01-02-2014, 04:27 PM
Blank what is your degree in and where do you work


Dont confuse education with intelligence. They are not synonymous. My employer employs a LOT of highly educated idiots and a lot of minimally educated scholars.

.blank cd
01-02-2014, 04:27 PM
Dont confuse education with intelligence. They are not synonymous. My employer employs a LOT of highly educated idiots and a lot of minimally educated scholars.

That's why I didn't answer that question. I'm intelligent enough not to.

Vteckidd
01-02-2014, 04:29 PM
That's why I didn't answer that question. I'm intelligent enough not to.

LOL

SUUUUURE.

I was just curious a man of your superior intellect must have more than a local technical college degree right?

.blank cd
01-02-2014, 04:31 PM
Possibly. Coulda dropped out of high school, could be a Harvard grad.

Why would it matter?

BanginJimmy
01-02-2014, 04:32 PM
That's why I didn't answer that question. I'm intelligent enough not to.

That would be your second "I'm smarter than you" comment of this thread.

.blank cd
01-02-2014, 04:37 PM
If that's how you guys want to interpret it. And we all know the participants in this forum are experts at interpretation. Lulz.

Vteckidd
01-02-2014, 04:39 PM
That would be your second "I'm smarter than you" comment of this thread.

IM SMARTER THAN YOU

Sinfix_15
01-02-2014, 07:15 PM
bump.

BanginJimmy
01-02-2014, 07:16 PM
IM SMARTER THAN YOU

You forgot the ' in I'm. You must have gone to public school.

Echonova
01-02-2014, 07:27 PM
You must have gone to public school.

Is that the place where they let colored children in to learn along side poor white people's children?

Browning151
01-02-2014, 07:59 PM
That would be your second "I'm smarter than you" comment of this thread.

Shocking isn't it?

BanginJimmy
01-03-2014, 03:22 PM
Is that the place where they let colored children in to learn along side poor white people's children?

Yep. Dont worry though. Us good Georgia God fearing folk are looking to fix that.

Echonova
01-04-2014, 07:46 PM
Yep. Dont worry though. Us good Georgia God fearing folk are looking to fix that.The only way they could do that is to bus poor black children into rich white affluent ares and vice-verse, and we all know that won't happen.




























Oh wait.

Echonova
02-01-2014, 09:52 PM
Cruel, heartless Obama mocks his most loyal, unquestioning supporters - Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/cruel-heartless-obama-mocks-most-loyal-unquestioning-supporters-133552482.html)








Oh my Lulz.

Sinfix_15
02-02-2014, 07:35 AM
first black president giving a speech that devalues education when the demographic that supports him the most unanimously are the least educated in this country. irony at it's finest.

SHOCKINGLY!!.. the least educated demographic also has the highest rate of unemployment. who cares as long as they keep lining up to vote democrat, right?


no worries Barry O........ you wont have to twist your supporter's arms to talk them out of getting a 4 year degree. Putting down that welfare check to pick up a shovel.... now THAT is going to be a challenge.

.blank cd
02-02-2014, 11:01 AM
Must be a slow news day at the daily caller.

Could someone highlight the part where he devalued education? I didn't see that part.

Unless I'm still in the hands-over-eyes Obama hating spin zone.

BanginJimmy
02-02-2014, 02:24 PM
Must be a slow news day at the daily caller.

Could someone highlight the part where he devalued education? I didn't see that part.

Unless I'm still in the hands-over-eyes Obama hating spin zone.



Lets call a spade and spade and say that EVERYONE that endorses our current education system devalues education.


For what we spend on education, we should have the most highly educated society in the world. The reality is that we have a moderately educated society that falls further behind the rest of the world every year.

I just saw recently that NY state spends 20k per year, per student. Average class size of 25 student (pulled that number from my ass but its reasonable), and they are spending 500k per classroom. Salary for plus benefits for that teacher is roughtly 150k a year. Supplies, maybe 50k a year, and maybe 100k a year for other overhead costs. WTF is the other 200k a year going to? Now imagine they have 10k classrooms state wide. If administration is really that expensive, they are overpaying for these lackluster administrators.

.blank cd
02-03-2014, 09:28 AM
Lets call a spade and spade and say that EVERYONE that endorses our current education system devalues education.

Not that I'm thrilled with the public education system in the U.S., but I'm not seeing even a tacit endorsement

Echonova
02-09-2014, 10:11 PM
Not that I'm thrilled with the public education system in the U.S., but I'm not seeing even a tacit endorsementhttp://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/j402/Echonova2/1902026_709636405723074_1170257799_n_zpsb2616ca7.j pg

Sinfix_15
02-10-2014, 12:47 AM
http://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/j402/Echonova2/1902026_709636405723074_1170257799_n_zpsb2616ca7.j pg

only thing missing is Obama saying "let me be very clear...."

ISAtlanta300
02-10-2014, 03:45 PM
only thing missing is Obama saying "let me be very clear...."

"If you like our current love affair, you can keep it!" - Obama