Venting I hate @GGWP

[twojei]

I don't know why the fuck this nigga always has to write everything in such a super intellectual and high IQ way.

@GGWP

 

[GGWP]

If I was truly intelligent I would be courting stacies at Harvard rather than rotting on blackpill forums

 

[twojei]

If I was truly intelligent I would be courting stacies at Harvard rather than rotting on blackpill forums

Stop complaining, you are wasted potential.

 

[GGWP]

Stop complaining, you are wasted potential.

I honestly believe that AI will be smarter than Terence Tao in a few months, so it's over for nerdcels.
Emotional intelligence and connections are a lot more important.

 

[bell]

If I was truly intelligent I would be courting stacies at Harvard rather than rotting on blackpill forums

I've lost count of the number of times I've witnessed 'roidcel hapa princes who study compsci or engineering and sleep with hot racerback-wearing wasian girls and thought "that could never be me", IQmogged into an early death.

 

[TenzenT]

I've lost count of the number of times I've witnessed 'roidcel hapa princes who study compsci or engineering and sleep with hot racerback-wearing wasian girls and thought "that could never be me", IQmogged into an early death.

If you are under 22, iqmaxxing works(max until 25, already increased my iq by 5 points in seven months) 122

 

[LOOKISM-LOGIC]

I don't know why the fuck this nigga always has to write everything in such a super intellectual and high IQ way.

@GGWP

So much for an enlightened monkcel.

 

[LOOKISM-LOGIC]

If I was truly intelligent I would be courting stacies at Harvard rather than rotting on blackpill forums

Thats not something that requires intelligence.

I could see why one would think so, but just no, nah.

 

[GGWP]

Thats not something that requires intelligence.

I could see why one would think so, but just no, nah.

Oh really? I suppose you could make the case that many of those admitted to Harvard are endowed with connections rather than talent.
My perspective is that those who cluster in blackpill forums tend to be defeated in many aspects of life to the point that they are not concerned with social image; you rarely see incels or looksmaxxers boast about academic achievement. In fact the only notable exception I recall is WorthlessSlavicShit working on his graduate studies. He posts some of the only things worth reading on that blasted forum.

I agree with you in some semblance. I witnessed firsthand that the people who do best in university are middle-class individuals who are attractive, liberal and have a status quo mindset. They are the 'I heckin love science' types that are neurotypical, above average in attractiveness and decently well off; there is no push for them to diverge from the status quo and by virtue of their attractiveness professors and students alike are more amenable to their vogue struggle which mirrors the 'coming of age' of the media they consume. They are accepted into the tribe and have little need to venture into unfamiliar factual or ideological territory because all of the normies pool their coursework together and help each other out, so they all converge to the same opinions. They tend to be 'smart' but narrow in intellectual scope because things just 'work' for them. I have witnessed firsthand the tendency for fiscal-genetic bourgeoise to distribute social advantage. I would not know the contents of an exam until I took it but these individuals would somehow swindle the professor into spilling everything weeks in advance, organize study sessions together on the topics and distribute the knowledge among their tribe. The attractive always win by acting as a magnet for social benefits like this.

I would actually say university selects against intelligence now. ChatGPT can do everything better than an undergraduate can in every degree. Therefore university now selects for people that are scummy enough to use AI to get superior marks in everything and socially savvy or likeable (attractive) enough to avoid getting reprimanded for it.

In my opinion, when it comes to university it is more important to be attractive, well-off and have an average or above-average IQ. You do not need to be hyper-intelligent to do well at university unless you pursue advanced Doctoral research. I have no personal experience with Harvard and cannot therefore comment on how hard it is to get into.

 

[TenzenT]

Oh really? I suppose you could make the case that many of those admitted to Harvard are endowed with connections rather than talent.
My perspective is that those who cluster in blackpill forums tend to be defeated in many aspects of life to the point that they are not concerned with social image; you rarely see incels or looksmaxxers boast about academic achievement. In fact the only notable exception I recall is WorthlessSlavicShit working on his graduate studies. He posts some of the only things worth reading on that blasted forum.

I agree with you in some semblance. I witnessed firsthand that the people who do best in university are middle-class individuals who are attractive, liberal and have a status quo mindset. They are the 'I heckin love science' types that are neurotypical, above average in attractiveness and decently well off; there is no push for them to diverge from the status quo and by virtue of their attractiveness professors and students alike are more amenable to their vogue struggle which mirrors the 'coming of age' of the media they consume. They are accepted into the tribe and have little need to venture into unfamiliar factual or ideological territory because all of the normies pool their coursework together and help each other out, so they all converge to the same opinions. They tend to be 'smart' but narrow in intellectual scope because things just 'work' for them. I have witnessed firsthand the tendency for fiscal-genetic bourgeoise to distribute social advantage. I would not know the contents of an exam until I took it but these individuals would somehow swindle the professor into spilling everything weeks in advance, organize study sessions together on the topics and distribute the knowledge among their tribe. The attractive always win by acting as a magnet for social benefits like this.

I would actually say university selects against intelligence now. ChatGPT can do everything better than an undergraduate can in every degree. Therefore university now selects for people that are scummy enough to use AI to get superior marks in everything and socially savvy or likeable (attractive) enough to avoid getting reprimanded for it.

In my opinion, when it comes to university it is more important to be attractive, well-off and have an average or above-average IQ. You do not need to be hyper-intelligent to do well at university unless you pursue advanced Doctoral research. I have no personal experience with Harvard and cannot therefore comment on how hard it is to get into.

There is no issue with university at all, just need to be a brainwashed NT or decide to behave like a sheep, i prevent to be a liberal and it works.

 

[TenzenT]

There is no issue with university at all, just need to be a brainwashed NT or decide to behave like a sheep, i prevent to be a liberal and it works.

pretend to be*

 

[Rikoel]

There is no issue with university at all, just need to be a brainwashed NT or decide to behave like a sheep, i prevent to be a liberal and it works.

Is it really that bad? I'm in STEM field, and in my school, especially my field, the average IQ is probably 125+, and nobody acts like a sheep. People are quite open-minded, and don't get "triggered" or anything like that.

Probably much worse in humanities then.

 

[Magonia]

Is it really that bad? I'm in STEM field, and in my school, especially my field, the average IQ is probably 125+, and nobody acts like a sheep. People are quite open-minded, and don't get "triggered" or anything like that.

Probably much worse in humanities then.

When people are talking about triggered university students they are not talking about STEM
If you had 125+ IQ you would know
I dont know if its still that way but last i checked its hard to find a school that doesnt force you to take an sjw class

 

[Rikoel]

When people are talking about triggered university students they are not talking about STEM
If you had 125+ IQ you would know
I dont know if its still that way but last i checked its hard to find a school that doesnt force you to take an sjw class

Why mad, lol? I was just asking if it's really that bad, seemed kind of exaggerated to me.

 

[Magonia]

Why mad, lol?

obvious low iq or idiot savant.
You think it isnt abusive for you to be forced to take sjw classes?
You arent aware that not fitting in with the far left on campus makes you a target?
Are you even from USA or a normal western country?

 

[GGWP]

Is it really that bad? I'm in STEM field, and in my school, especially my field, the average IQ is probably 125+, and nobody acts like a sheep. People are quite open-minded, and don't get "triggered" or anything like that.

Probably much worse in humanities then.

Its probably changed a lot, when I was in college doing STEM (early 2010s) it was pretty bad. It was decently prestigious but it might have just been the culture at that time.

 

[Rikoel]

obvious low iq or idiot savant.
You think it isnt abusive for you to be forced to take sjw classes?
You arent aware that not fitting in with the far left on campus makes you a target?
Are you even from USA or a normal western country?

Haha, sorry, but that doesn't seem to be the case. You sound a bit insecure about your own intelligence, otherwise, why the passive-aggressive tone?

Are those classes actually mandatory? Like I said, I'm in STEM, so I genuinely don't know, that's why people ask questions.

And again, the discussion was about Harvard if you scroll up. I added a personal anecdote because higher IQ tends to correlate with openness, and I doubt a Harvard biologist or business student would be overly "woke." But maybe I'm wrong, that's why I'm contributing.

I'm from the West, just not the US

 

[Rikoel]

Its probably changed a lot, when I was in college doing STEM (early 2010s) it was pretty bad.

Might be, I just have my own anecdote. Which isn't that way anymore

 

[twojei]

So much for an enlightened monkcel.

 

[Magonia]

Haha, sorry, but that doesn't seem to be the case. You sound a bit insecure about your own intelligence, otherwise, why the passive-aggressive tone?

Are those classes actually mandatory? Like I said, I'm in STEM, so I genuinely don't know, that's why people ask questions.

And again, the discussion was about Harvard if you scroll up. I added a personal anecdote because higher IQ tends to correlate with openness, and I doubt a Harvard biologist or business student would be overly "woke." But maybe I'm wrong, that's why I'm contributing.

I'm from the West, just not the US

I think you dont know Harvard and the american education system.

you dont know how bad it really is. I am telling you

 

[Rikoel]

I think you dont know Harvard and the american education system.

you dont know how bad it really is. I am telling you

Yeah I guess so, I really don't have a "woke" impression of Harvard. Maybe in some subjects, but I wouldn't know

 

[bell]

Oh really? I suppose you could make the case that many of those admitted to Harvard are endowed with connections rather than talent.
My perspective is that those who cluster in blackpill forums tend to be defeated in many aspects of life to the point that they are not concerned with social image; you rarely see incels or looksmaxxers boast about academic achievement. In fact the only notable exception I recall is WorthlessSlavicShit working on his graduate studies. He posts some of the only things worth reading on that blasted forum.

I agree with you in some semblance. I witnessed firsthand that the people who do best in university are middle-class individuals who are attractive, liberal and have a status quo mindset. They are the 'I heckin love science' types that are neurotypical, above average in attractiveness and decently well off; there is no push for them to diverge from the status quo and by virtue of their attractiveness professors and students alike are more amenable to their vogue struggle which mirrors the 'coming of age' of the media they consume. They are accepted into the tribe and have little need to venture into unfamiliar factual or ideological territory because all of the normies pool their coursework together and help each other out, so they all converge to the same opinions. They tend to be 'smart' but narrow in intellectual scope because things just 'work' for them. I have witnessed firsthand the tendency for fiscal-genetic bourgeoise to distribute social advantage. I would not know the contents of an exam until I took it but these individuals would somehow swindle the professor into spilling everything weeks in advance, organize study sessions together on the topics and distribute the knowledge among their tribe. The attractive always win by acting as a magnet for social benefits like this.

I would actually say university selects against intelligence now. ChatGPT can do everything better than an undergraduate can in every degree. Therefore university now selects for people that are scummy enough to use AI to get superior marks in everything and socially savvy or likeable (attractive) enough to avoid getting reprimanded for it.

In my opinion, when it comes to university it is more important to be attractive, well-off and have an average or above-average IQ. You do not need to be hyper-intelligent to do well at university unless you pursue advanced Doctoral research. I have no personal experience with Harvard and cannot therefore comment on how hard it is to get into.

Knew a curry like this. A very annoying libtard. Whenever I open social media it's as if his image were being refracted in every comment section. This to me seems like a consequence of lazily-applied rationalism where all views are equally amenable to error and falsifying protocols, so all views are equally worthless--but this almost always just results in them expecting people to cabin their own preferences because... like... the stats... bro... These are the people who watch Dean Withers and agree with him. There's a lot I could say on this topic but I don't think any of it hits the mark.

Haha, sorry, but that doesn't seem to be the case. You sound a bit insecure about your own intelligence, otherwise, why the passive-aggressive tone?

Are those classes actually mandatory? Like I said, I'm in STEM, so I genuinely don't know, that's why people ask questions.

And again, the discussion was about Harvard if you scroll up. I added a personal anecdote because higher IQ tends to correlate with openness, and I doubt a Harvard biologist or business student would be overly "woke." But maybe I'm wrong, that's why I'm contributing.

I'm from the West, just not the US

I think "wokeness" is a misnomer. It isn't wokeness but hubris, hubris which is closer in proximity to libtardism than anything else. "Openness" is treated as an end, it's purely inventive, informing a social attitude rather than charting a direct path to any opposing counterculture.

 

[Rikoel]

I think "wokeness" is a misnomer. It isn't wokeness but hubris, hubris which is closer in proximity to libtardism than anything else. "Openness" is treated as an end, it's purely inventive, informing a social attitude rather than charting a direct path to any opposing counterculture.

I see what you're saying, and you're kind of right. I agree a lot of "open-mindedness" today can just be a social costume, a way to signal values without actually questioning anything. I still think there's a difference between that and being fully ideologically rigid or hysterically woke. From what I've seen (outside the US at least), most high-functioning students, especially in STEM or business, just want to get things done, not perform activism. But yeah, maybe in elite US schools it's a different kind of environment entirely.

I'm from the Nordics where the high baseline of egalitarianism makes things feel more grounded ideologically(less performative). Or I would hypothesize this.

 

[bell]

I see what you're saying, and you're kind of right. I agree a lot of "open-mindedness" today can just be a social costume, a way to signal values without actually questioning anything. I still think there's a difference between that and being fully ideologically rigid or hysterically woke. From what I've seen (outside the US at least), most high-functioning students, especially in STEM or business, just want to get things done, not perform activism. But yeah, maybe in elite US schools it's a different kind of environment entirely.

I'm also from the Nordics where the high baseline of egalitarianism makes things feel more grounded ideologically(less performative). Or I would hypothesize this.

I'd relate it back to an earlier post of yours where it's less to do with "activism" and more to do with clique-finding, with some regard for relationships and "breaking in" to stronger social footholds. I don't think these are the students participating in pro-Palestinian rallies. That might be the case in the US, I don't know.

In Commonwealth countries I'd like to think that things aren't as diseased, but I would still be surprised if conservative ideas had any purchase at all in these institutions. I see this with a lot of Asian students for instance, where an idea doesn't just hold on the merits but is tied to a social obligation as well, so that an idea can be "challenged" and ought to be, but only because of some social harm that idea brings. They aren't going to protest against it, but if confronted they're likely to lean one way. So it probably turns more on whether that idea can be tied to the idea that "good = normal", or anything that promotes a "healthy" worldview.

 

[Rikoel]

I'd relate it back to an earlier post of yours where it's less to do with "activism" and more to do with clique-finding, with some regard for relationships and "breaking in" to stronger social footholds. I don't think these are the students participating in pro-Palestinian rallies. That might be the case in the US, I don't know.

In Commonwealth countries I'd like to think that things aren't as diseased, but I would still be surprised if conservative ideas had any purchase at all in these institutions. I see this with a lot of Asian students for instance, where an idea doesn't just hold on the merits but is tied to a social obligation as well, so that an idea can be "challenged" and ought to be, but only because of some social harm that idea brings. They aren't going to protest against it, but if confronted they're likely to lean one way. So it probably turns more on whether that idea can be tied to the idea that "good = normal", or anything that promotes a "healthy" worldview.

Yeah, true, it's less about overt political stances just absorbing what's seen socially viable.

Yeah they're not. People in my uni meme about them. As the people doing these small "rallies" near my campus are mostly just international students. Who knows, US is a weird place.

Yeah, honestly a STEM place is a bubble, I really have no clue what's going outside of it either. My sister is a doctor, even she doesn't seem to care about social issues. I've talked to some females outside STEM, like psychology and food sciences, and they didn't seem to care much either. People just don't seem to care for shit here. Nobody really talks about politics etc. They kinda just give half-arsed reply to agree just so the person grilling them would shut it and move on.