/fringe/ - Fringe

>>34944

>What is your take on geniuses? What allows them to achieve such heights of intellect?

Being fat (storing a lot of energy) and not spending it in anything else (procreation, exercise, work, procrastination (tv, pornography)). Your pic is a good example

>>34945

What do you mean by fat? How fat? If you mean, just a little fat, sure. I agree

with you on that. A little fat can be beneficial health-wise, both mentally

and physically. If you mean obese, I've got to disagree entirely.

Considering how obese the world today is and how very little obese-geniuses

there are, not to mention the host of health problems associated with it,

obesity, certainly is bad.

However, yea, a little fat, good, too much fat, bad. I believe you're only

talking about a little, you may not be, we'll see when you clarify your

position in a reply.

A state of waste metabolically as in, eating loads of calories and gaining

little fat is certainly good, your brain uses a fuck ton of energy so if

you're eating a lot and not gaining weight, while not doing much exercise,

logic would say that you're feeding your brain well.

Either that or you have cancer, cancer patients have unfathomable appetites.

>>34948

That would be correct. Besides the fact that overeating puts unnecessary stress and difficults concentration, it is associated with highly passive tasks, which is one of the reasons for obesity increasing greatly in this age. Hours can go by in a couch or a chair while the flow of feel-good-chemicals continue, creating pathways that reinforce further the link of such a wasteful activity and hinders improvement in whichever areas you are oriented. Stretching it a little bit, around a 20% of body fat could be optimal, though very arbitrarily

>>34954

The defition of overeating really depends on the person I think.

Some people have really fucked up hormones that cause them to instead of using

energy to store it all as fat. A few studies have shown people maintaining

weight on 800 calorie diets, which is absurdly low.

This is usually a result of long-term bad eating + completely sedentary

lifestyle, along with other factors.

If you can eat loads of food, without gaining weight, you probably should.

I for example can, I eat regularly like 3500+ calories a day without gaining

weight while others on the same diet would pile on pounds indicitating

a problems with bodily functions, I would say, specifically hormones.

You may think I'm overestimating my caloric intake, I'm not, I record all

food intake, so I know how much of everything I'm getting.

I think diet is an extremely important factor with intelligence, what

other factors do you believe are important?

I believe light exposure is another important factor.

Within the last century, we've gone more indoors

and get less and less natural sunlight, what has happened along with that?

More and more obesity and diseases. Of course, moderation in everything.

Too much sunlight is obviously bad (sun cancer and many problems) but it seems

to me, that today, very few people are getting enough light. Looking at

other plants and animals we can see how amazingly fundamental light is in

regulating bodily functions, such as hormones. I would say that it's one

of the most underlooked things in modern medicine.

You can fix light underexposure by obviously… going out into the sun, another

option is to get an array (2-3) of "heat lamps" and shine them on yourself,

obviously not into the eyes, the back is probably a good area. I think

bursts of around 10-20 minutes at a time, a few times a day, would mostly

make up for lack of sun exposure as long as you supplement with vitamin d.

And let's not get into the vast array of harmful medicines peddled today.

>>34955

>This is usually a result of long-term bad eating + completely sedentary lifestyle, along with other factors.

I FUCKING KNEW IT. I fucked up my body with my long-term bad diet and lack of exercise. Keto is truly the only way.

>>34956

Eh, I'm actually not that fond of a keto diet. It's pretty high-stress and

increases risk for many diseases but in particular, kidney stones, which

aren't fun at all. Ketones are good but the process of creating them within

the body (ketosis) is very taxing.

Not to mention it's a pretty disgusting diet, in terms of taste and texture.

All that fat, eugh.

>>34955

In the genetic aspect, persons with different alleles of the receivers D4 show different capacity of their attention executive functions (error related negativity, and N2) while polymorphisms in the gene of the catechol-O-methyltransferase are able to predict those. Both are related with dopamine, and you get a good look of how true this is with twins. Measuring with an electroencephalogram, it appears that kids with a lower educative level are less capable of ignoring irrelevant information. Babies that get habituated easily to stimulus show greater sensorimotor development, prefer complex stimulus, play in a more sophisticated way, they are faster exploring their surroundings, resolving problems, making concepts and perform better at intelligence tests. Do realize that a baby getting habituated to a stimulus means that he stops paying attention to it, which means that those that get habituated faster are either grasping the outlines, the form, the movement, the number of elements etcetera faster or are quicker making associations. So those would move faster onto the next stage, learning faster.

A good environment improves attention and abilities of self-regulation, which are of course ideal to keep a good outlook, manage stressful situations and learn more. Those factors allow a more appropiated adaption to the environment, and in exchange this adaption leads to more interactions with the environment that prompt even more chances of learning. Besides, the environment can also keep the motivation high or decrease it. The people that surround us affect us greatly. People with obese friends will gain weight, and people with fitter friends will develop stronger physically. Kids that have to travel often are prone to have great creativity, be open to new ideas and think outside of the box.

The deterioration of many of those mechanisms can be prevented with aerobic exercise, bilingualism, a higher educative level, musical practice and even meditation. Personally, I prefer anaerobic exercise. It increases greatly connections between neurons, makes you much more aware of your surroundings and increases lung capacity.

Light exposure allows to keep a balanced emotional state. Better results are produced in exercise and exams with proper ilumination and temperature.

As for the medicines, oh well, I remember having asthma and many allergies. The year I stopped taking medicines was the year I started getting better. Everyone who I know that still take them go through dreadful spring seasons

>>35003

Good post

Combination, obviously. Although I also know about a private psychological model intelligence agencies might soon have access to (if I give it to them) which can tell you which two 18ths of the population with certain neurophysiological structures 90% of field-revolutionary geniuses are from.

Otherwise, it's a lot about the many factors which are relevant interacting with some base genetic stock, from different cognitive types and different sub-species heritages.

I'm pretty sure I have genius potential. I was always extremely creative and would score highest test scores in my country from a couple of days work where others spent months, and I got these scores whilst on the edge of dropping out because all of my attention went to personal intellectual obsessions.

But I also have some terrible genes from one parent and poor self control, and wasted tonnes of energy on pornography and emotional turmoil, and above all had many extreme health issues. Also I probably got cursed. Over time the factors can just build up against you.

I think the modern age can pretty much militate against genius as well, in that it's so hard to go against mind-controlling systems.

I know I could have made a different path or humanity's future but am on the edge of suicide because of my failures. Just waiting on a few health treatments to see if they tip the scales back towards not being a disgrace to what I thought was my destiny.

I am a genius. Someday you will all know my name.

>>34945

>>34948

>>34954

>>34955

>being fat makes you smarter

>this is what landwhales actually believe

Oh fringe, never change

>>35187

I'd appreciate if a moderator could ban this fool. The amount of fat we're

talking about is nowhere even NEAR landwhale.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-04-underweight-middle-age-dementia.html

https://news.yahoo.com/does-midlife-obesity-protect-against-dementia-232835758.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11525841/Middle-age-spread-may-protect-against-dementia.html

"… People who are obese in middle age run a lower risk of developing dementia later, said a large and long-term study Friday whose findings challenge the prevailing wisdom. On the other end of the scale, however, being underweight in the 40-55 age bracket was associated with a higher risk, the researchers found. While admitting they were "surprised" by the potential protective effect of obesity, the team cautioned against jumping to conclusions."

"…A BMI of 25 and higher is classified overweight, and 30 and over obese. Anything less than 18.5 is generally considered underweight, though for this study the researchers set the bar at 20. Over two decades, the researchers found, "the incidence of dementia continued to fall for every increasing BMI category with very obese people (a BMI over 40) having a 29 percent lower dementia risk than people of a healthy weight."

"…Just over 45,500 of the total study group developed dementia. "Compared with people of a healthy weight, underweight people (BMI under 20) had a 34 percent higher risk of dementia," added the authors. The underweight category is a wide one, ranging from lean to skeletal, said Qizilbash, who described the increased risk as "significant"."

>>35003

A good environment is very important I think. Surrounding yourself with people

that are going to foster you, not hinder you, is one of the most important

things I think, but it's also one of the hardest, as you generally have little

control over the people around you and it's VERY hard to find people that

are good people.

>>35149

Everybody, ever, has been hindered by their environment in someway.

What I'd like you guys to weigh in on, is what can we do, today, right now?

What can be done? Direct. Action.

>>34955

5k calories master race here, I am a whole new step up in the evolution of the Race.

>>35149

>I know I could have made a different path or humanity's future but am on the edge of suicide because of my failures. Just waiting on a few health treatments to see if they tip the scales back towards not being a disgrace to what I thought was my destiny.

Check out the Meditations Superthread if you want to try some dangerous meditations that could give you that suicide you want if you can't fix the health issues… or just hang on in there, I'm fixing my own problems, and if I succeed I would help someone like you as well if I met you.

>>35580

>>49983

>>49984

>>49985

>>49986

>>49987

>>49988

>>49989

>>49990

>>49991

>>49992

>>49993

>>49994

>>49995

>>49996

>>49997

>>49998

Environment. Too often is a genius child left by the wayside when his or her parents lack the resources to give him or her the soaring career arc he or she deserves. They grow up bitter and broken, their destiny denied.

>>34944

what is your definition of genius? someone who just has an incredibly high intellect, or someone who is able to make absolutely profound discoveries in a field? while there is definitely overlap between the two, they are very different. Intellect is a combination of genetics, overall health and fitness, and energy (obtained from diet, vitamins, stimulants, nootropics etc)

making great contributions to a field will not happen to someone who only has a high intellect but i not dedicated to the field. To make great contributions to a field, you must literally devote almost all of your mental energy to it.

>>34944

Depends on what you call a genius. From my personal experience the idea of "smartness" that usually goes around is one of desensitization to everything that involves one's own being, while at the same time spouting a few quotes or "studies" here and there. It seems to be a basic "put down" of the whole universe.

In scientific circles really the most accepted point of view seems to be that of the materialist fundamentalist which is the process of explaining everything by killing everything. I wouldn't consider that smart, in fact I consider that the height of stupidity.

From my point of view you can't be smart without being wise, you can't be smart without a having deep appreciation for everything in which you are involved and that appreciation alone is enough to develop your curiosity of how those things are done. A "smart" person who doesn't know how to use his body is really not smart at all. A smart person knows not just the sciences, but is aware of the basic implications of the scientific point of view. A smart person reads not for knowledge but to develop his own mental capacities of thinking and criticizing what is being said while at the same time holding the recognition that whatever conclusions he might come to are up to further inquiry and should be regarded only as a temporary measure. A smart person knows the arts in his own being and through his own being, such as visual aesthetics, how to please a woman, cooking, and even how to build a house or make clothes.

If we take this definition of a genius, then really most people who are called smart are not really smart at all. Now to answer your questions from this point of view, assuming the individual who have an interest in becoming a genius is in the average condition we find in society.

The First thing would be to get distance from society itself. We have gone through the educational system and I think we all know the problems with it, so after receiving this "education" we need to step back from it. The formula for intelligence is I^2, it is intelligence looking at intelligence, that is why the "real outcasts" of society are usually smarter then most people. After that you need to begin the process of childhood primitiveness again, in a way that is not really going back to childhood but going forward to it. You'll need to relearn everything, starting by the most basic things such as how to breath. It will take quite some time and you might not become a top physicist, but you certainly will discover through this process what your real interests are and if physics is one of them you will become a top physicist by inner necessity. The third step is to repeat the process sporadically. Things like diet and exercise will be found by necessity through this method.

idk what happens when we die (nor does anyone here no matter how much bullshit they spew out of their mouths about how their theory is 100% true) but if the reincarnation stuff is true, these people probly werent pieces of shit trying to use sigils and thoughtforms to seduce women or gain money. Fuck your self serving goals. Try using magic to help the world for once.

>>50018

very desurving

>>34955

skinny genius here

i've always eaten like shit and been skin and bones, and still always been smarter than everyone around me. like, literally everyone

diet is important, but certainly not everything. i've been eating real food for about 2-3 years now and i feel a lot better and my head is much clearer so it is important.

>>34955

>>51949

i also eat twice as much as most people and don't gain weight.

also never got much sun except during the summer

>>50327

>starcraft II

ROFL

>>49983

>>49984

>>49985

>>49986

>>49987

>>49988

>sageboming a get on /fringe/

>no mention of Bandler, Grinder, Bateson, or McKenna

You guys have no clue what you're talking about.