GENIUS FORUMS

Rryan wrote:

in societies that are heavily controlled and enslaved by technology, the number of rapists will be incredibly high which is the case for Japan.

Where did you get that information? I would like to research it further.

Where did you get that information? I would like to research it further.

I don't think this is validated information, it is just an opinion (hypothesis). Not a bad hypothesis if you ask me though. The stereotype of Japan as being loaded with hentai (perverts) is not totally unjustified. But again this has many cultural/historical origins as well as the simple fact that people are generally alienated. I think that an over abundance/reliance on technology causes people to become alienated from each other, they more exist as internet relationships or text message friends instead of being in each others physical presence. So when all you know of women is what you read in your dirty manga (comics) or what you see on the internet (porn) or who you know on the internet (screen names like Elizabeth Isabelle) then I can see a perversion of perception and attitudes that can ultimately produce rapists and hentai. But there are statistically more (keyword reported) rapists in America than there are in Japan. And most of the statements Ryan made about Japan can easily be applied to America as well.

Sky,

I thought you were posting past 100? You're pulling a Jay-Z.

Comment ended up on wrong thread-deleted.

For God's sake Ryan, marry her. Be a gold-digger. Have you no brains? You could try to interest her in some alternate type of wedding (I did a witch at midnight in the forest myself) - but the wedding is unimportant.

Geez, the universe hands you life on a platter and you quibble.

When you divorce, get a reasonable settlement.
_________________
BirdofHermes

Adam wrote:

most of the statements Ryan made about Japan can easily be applied to America as well.

That is actually why I wanted more data. I do not think that I, especially as a female, can directly do anything about Japan, but I try to do what I can where I can and I happen to be in America so that is probalby where I can make the most impact.

Adam wrote:

I think that an over abundance/reliance on technology causes people to become alienated from each other, they more exist as internet relationships or text message friends instead of being in each others physical presence.

True. As much contact I have with people, sometimes I go through extensive periods where I struggle to recall the last time I saw anyone in person or even had contact with a non-recorded voice over the telephone. When that sort of thing still bothered me enough to keep track, my record was 6 days. One of the articles I posted on my website went in depth about how much of an impact a cashier at a grocery store could have by being the only person someone saw in a week. I recognize that elders are sometimes in that situation, but the article focused on Al-Queda and their reported reasons for hating America, and what a difference could be made by the few Americans they could encounter before completing a planned terrorist strike.

Ryan,

I once said:

Intelligence can not be faked, but personalities can.

In fact, they often are. Many teenagers and children go through a period of "trying on" different personalities to see which one works best for them. Employers expect employees to fake a nicer personality while at work.. If a person fakes a personality they do not like, as you pointed out there is a danger of the person actually taking on the characteristics of that persona. The tool of faking a personality is by faking being who you really want to be until you become that person, then you are no longer faking it. "Who you really want to be" does surface as a function of having the right reasons to be who you want to be, which is where good reasoning skills come in. It sounds like there were some parts of CP that you liked too, but it was your motivation that caused you to feel evil. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to examine if there are any reasons that are good and ethical to incorporate any pieces of CP's personality into the real you. Most people have the gift of understanding at least some others enough to know what would please them. Courtesy has been called the grease of the wheels of civilization, although as you pointed out, it can also be used for evil purposes. Con artists are great at that.

Ryan wrote:

My biggest weakness and dishonesty is I have this gift where I can study someone to the point where I know exactly what to say to please them and then I just play with them to entertain myself; And then I derive more gratification just off the thought that the entire ‘show’ is just a manipulation of my own making: it’s quite evil really. Both of us end up being in a state of elation through incredibly dishonest means.

Getting the "gratification just off the thought that the entire ‘show’ is just a manipulation of my own making" does sound evil to me too, but putting both yourself and someone else in a state of elation without harming anyone would be a good thing. The point of harm you are experiencing is the dissonance between what you have done and your ethical code. Pleasing someone to cause mutual happiness, I think is ethical - rather than just to say "Ha-ha! I manipulated you into being happy! I was able to manipulate you!" which would be unethical.

The most common example of this that I can think of is sexual intercourse. Although most humans have a sex drive, often sexual intercourse is intitated by the one who is motivated by his or her own drive and the other may or may not be stimulated into a sex-drive urge, but if he or she does not become stimulated by his or her sex drive, he or she may be sexually stimulated enough to want to have sex anyway out of the sheer pleasure of bringing pleasure to his or her partner. This is ethical because there is no "ha-ha" to it, only the pleasure of pleasing.

Elizabeth wrote:

I once said:

Intelligence can not be faked, but personalities can.

In fact, they often are. Many teenagers and children go through a period of "trying on" different personalities to see which one works best for them. Employers expect employees to fake a nicer personality while at work.. If a person fakes a personality they do not like, as you pointed out there is a danger of the person actually taking on the characteristics of that persona. The tool of faking a personality is by faking being who you really want to be until you become that person, then you are no longer faking it.

I think the idea of a "real" personality is just wishful thinking that comes from the desire for souls to exist.

How would you determine what someone's "real" personality is? What criteria would you use? And from whose point of view? I bet you could take any person's view of their own personality and then take all the views of others who know that person and none of those views would match or even resemble each other.

What if you did know someone's real personality and then, say, the next day they became the victim of a near-fatal car crash and sustained brain damage so that all they could say is "blub blub blub"? Which would be their real personality, the old one or the new one? Most people would undoubtedly say the old one, but it's not hard to see that this view has no basis in reality, since something that's real can't just disappear like a mirage.

All personalities are fake in my view. People always act according to the circumstances they find themselves in. If you put them in adverse circumstances, their personality is going to change, even drastically.

Matt Gregory wrote:All personalities are fake in my view. People always act according to the circumstances they find themselves in. If you put them in adverse circumstances, their personality is going to change, even drastically.

Rather, I would say there is no such thing as a fake personality. No matter how a person thinks or acts, it is always manifested through their actions, making it in fact, their personality no matter how superficial or generic it may be. Even if one's personality is constantly changing, no matter how drastically, it still remains unique to the person during each and every particular moment.

Matt,

I agree with a lot of what you said.

My perspective on your observation:

since something that's real can't just disappear like a mirage.

is that the contracted "is" is actually the point of reality. The car accident victim in your example had (past tense) one personality, and has (present tense) a new personality. I understand the vantage point that to an extent, reality is what we make of it to many people, which would be different from the ultimate reality.

Reality can also be what we make it to be. If we have a lump of clay, what we really have is a lump of clay. If we mold it into a bowl-shape and bake it in a kiln, now we really have a bowl. If we drop it, we probably really have pieces of clay. Was the bowl a mirage? No. It wasn't there one minute, it was there another minute, and a minute after that it was gone. The pieces, like pieces of a personality, were there when it was a lump of clay, when it was a bowl, and when it was reduced to shards. There could be a philosophical argument that "bowl" is just a concept, therefore it was a mirage - but I think you can derive my perspective from the example.

Matt wrote:

How would you determine what someone's "real" personality is? What criteria would you use? And from whose point of view?

I agree with what you followed up with, in that how most people see themselves is vastly different from how the rest of the world sees them. As my personal consideration, I would use the person's own perspective of what they think their "real" personality is, meaning the one they use entirely of their own volition (not influenced by an employer, authority figure, or through threat or use of violence by another to intimidate and control their behavior). The value judgement of that personality, however, would be a matter of perspective. The person may view it as one thing and others may view it another way - but however it is viewed, the set of behaviors during that time period, in my opinion, would be their "real" personality.

Iolaus wrote:

Geez, the universe hands you life on a platter and you quibble.

What I have learned is that the universe gives you a multitude of possible outcomes just to screw with you and then you must figure out based on your own logic what you should choose and whatever you do choose will determine the quality of your being.

Here is a metaphor:

Each dirt road is littered with potholes and overgrown bushes, but the question is: which of these possible roads has the fewest number of obstructions start to finish compared to the others?

If you pick the best road then the quality of your being should mature to a higher state then if you chose the roads with more friction. The more friction we have on the road has a relationship to our fear of death.

The rich woman who wants to marry me is quite an obstruction in the road, she is everything I dislike about humanity. Speaking with her is a test of character on my part and one of my coping strategies is that I will playfully mock her ignorant statements in a gentle way as a means to teach her, but of course she doesn’t change so I end up poking fun at some of her same perspectives the next time we speak

What I have learned is that most people are a collection of about 20 incorrect opinions that revolve around self.

One danger with women is that making her laugh with childish antics is one thing, but if one pushes the gentle poking fun too far then they develop a masochistic relationship to you that they continually want fed by making fun of the same childish worldviews that never change.

I already had to cut off a few women from my life because these types of masochistic relationships developed.

AlyOshA

And most of the statements Ryan made about Japan can easily be applied to America as well.

I forget who posted this, but someone from the forum stated that he was talking to an American cab driver who was ranting about how much he hated his life; he went on to say how his wife controlled him; and how he felt controlled by driving a cab everyday; he ended the conversation by looking over at the person and saying: “haven’t you ever had the urge to go out and just rape some chick?”

The desire to rape is a power/control issue. Many times it is caused by someone who feels controlled in their life so they have the desire to control someone else as a means to make themselves feel less controlled.

If you compare rape statistics in places like America, Japan, London compared to small rural communities like Tibet, I would imagine there would be quite a difference in findings.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

Getting the "gratification just off the thought that the entire ‘show’ is just a manipulation of my own making" does sound evil to me too, but putting both yourself and someone else in a state of elation without harming anyone would be a good thing. The point of harm you are experiencing is the dissonance between what you have done and your ethical code. Pleasing someone to cause mutual happiness, I think is ethical - rather than just to say "Ha-ha! I manipulated you into being happy! I was able to manipulate you!" which would be unethical.

And the ethical code is based on the concept of truth; when I encounter individuals that are too weak for a concept of truth then I will suspend the concept altogether and strictly deal with pleasing their subjective states in the same way I would behave around a child. When I play with children I am not a relentlessly serious philosopher; children want to play with a goof and because most humans are like children I transform into a goof and I play.

However I wonder whether I lose part of my own integrity in that proces; It is a feeling that I have compromised the concept of truth in the name of ignorance. But like I said before: there is that no suffering that accompanies the action; I leave the situation feeling quite happy and so does she.

In that sense it is perfectly ethical, but the concept of truth has been violated and the quality of my being has suffered for it. So I suspect, but it is still something I am wondering about.

Generally there are two perspectives on this: Philosophers such as Solway would say we should always behave with the concept of truth close to our heart and we will never misbehave or stray off the path.

However there are other philosophers such as UG krishnamurti that suggested that once that godly subjective state has been achieved, you don’t have to strictly obey the concept of truth; it is more of a guide; and you can rely purely on what your instinctive intuition tells you to do.

With this girl, I observed that she was child-like and I automatically transformed my will to match hers and we played, I didn't really think about it; it is an automatic thing.

It is only afterwards that I think about the concept of truth.

I used to do this as a child as well; The reason why I had so many friends as a child is because I had no will of my own; I would micmic the will of others; I was like a Chameleon.

Elizabeth wrote:

I agree with what you followed up with, in that how most people see themselves is vastly different from how the rest of the world sees them. As my personal consideration, I would use the person's own perspective of what they think their "real" personality is, meaning the one they use entirely of their own volition (not influenced by an employer, authority figure, or through threat or use of violence by another to intimidate and control their behavior).

But how can use someone else's perspective when you can never know what it really is? You can't look at the world through someone else's eyes. And even if you could, I don't think it would be any more valid than your own personal perspective on them because I would even go so far as to say that nobody can fully know their own personality, which would put you both in the same boat. In fact, I think it's possible for someone to know a person better than they know themselves because most people don't examine themselves and therefore don't know themselves at all.

But in saying these things I just contradicted myself because now I need the support of the idea of a real personality in order for statements about "knowing oneself" to make sense.

I guess there has to be some set of limits to a person's behavior that makes it impossible for that person to behave in ways that are possible for others, shaped by their physical and mental abilities, and that could be considered their personality. I don't know, I'm just thinking over here.

Sky,

I thought you were posting past 100? You're pulling a Jay-Z.
_________________
- Scott

busted

yes true

but i thought this issue important enough using people in the name of possible potential genius what about:

truth courage honesty wisdom perfection

has integrity no value

btw a marriage is not legal unless consummated so why not just be a 'genius gigolo'

'all she wants is to tell her friends she is married'

does anyone actually believe that

she will control every bit of him that she can so if he does marry her he will get his 'just desserts'

he will be lucky if he ever even gets his hands on the remote control

'boy toy' or 'stud service' or both

while i am at it there is another option

i don't know what level schooling ryan has but i lived off grants and scholarships for ten years i have friends with master's and doctoral fellowships

and ended up with two degrees which allow me to work not 9 to 5 in music and music business

but still be self supporting and mostly free with my time

songwriters can make lots of money

check out the forbes dead millionaires list most are rich by right of copyright

anyone who is truly sincere can find a way to be self supporting if they have the potential for 'genius'

i believe buddha called it 'right livelihood'

"And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood."

though of course these precepts are silly and beneath the necessity of attention of 'geniuses'

also the statement

'people who marry for money usually end up earning it' has nothing to do with morality it has to do with reality

stepmomster II married my father and being in california she got half but she worked hard for it but as soon as she dies quess who get's the other half it is in a bypass trust so it will also be tax free

and i have inherited money from my mother's side of the family a number of times

i spent it all i love luxury a friend once said i had raised 'self indulgence to an art form'

my first car was a classic corvette 100 grand and i did not even know how to drive

but i never ever paid for a guy

though they have many times offered to pay anything for me

but the only thing i am willing to sell is my intellectual property fortunately i have plenty

and i am not even a 'genius'

right

Matt wrote:

You can't look at the world through someone else's eyes.

No, but you can ask. I just realized that this is one of those aspects of life where I'm different from most people. Usually I get a lot more truth out of people than most other people do (and that isn't just from being trained to be a mental health counselor, that's mostly something that I was born with). I'm calm, most people recognize that I'd understand and not judge them harshly for who they are, and some people have pretty much complained that there is something about me that just makes them tell me the truth. (more-so, people complain that something about me makes them do what I ask, at least short-term). I forget that I developed a hypnotic voice as a defense mechanism so that I could survive my father's outbursts, and I don't use it intentionally, but when I want to know something and ask an adult in person, I almost always get the truth as they see it. Of course, all I really get is their perspective because if they think something's true but it isn't, they give me what they think is true, or if they know that they don't know, that's what they tell me. More people could get more truth from others though by asking calmly and not being too judgemental.

Another way others could ascertain which personality I consider "real" is by looking at the other conditions I mentioned:

the one they use entirely of their own volition (not influenced by an employer, authority figure, or through threat or use of violence by another to intimidate and control their behavior).

This alone might give a false perspective, foremost by the influence that the observer has on the other person's personality if the other person is aware that the observer is present. A survey of people's opinions of what the person is like, then narrow down to the information that is repeated most often would give another clue. All of the above together would synthesize an operational picture.

Ryan wrote:

The rich woman who wants to marry me is quite an obstruction in the road, she is everything I dislike about humanity.

Marrying her would be the worst mistake of your life.

Sky wrote:

'those who marry for money usuallly end up earning it'

You would more than "earn" it in this case, you would pay loan-shark interest rates on it.

Ryan wrote:

One danger with women is that making her laugh with childish antics is ... then they develop a masochistic relationship to you that they continually want fed by making fun of the same childish worldviews that never change. I already had to cut off a few women from my life because these types of masochistic relationships developed.

Let's see, you play dumb and attact women who really are as dumb as you are pretending to be, and get annoyed by their stupid behavior. That is a result of unethical behavior. Additionally, since you are attracting all these dumb women (by being goofy), all you start seeing around you are dumb women, and where does that lead your opinion of women? How many are just being goofy with you because you earned the reputation as the class clown?

Do you think that if you presented the real Ryan that someone who liked you for who you really are would actually be able to see the real you and the two of you would really enjoy each other? Here's a clue: really smart women are not attracted to guys who act dumb. They might put up with foibles, and some even have enough of a caregiver streak that they might take on someone with some bigger flaws (but I can't picture you being happy with someone who wants to mother you), but the more well-balanced a woman is, the more well-balanced of a man she wants to spend her time with - and the less she would trust some goof-ball. And the faster she will put up walls of her own if you are being followed around by a dumb woman. A dumb woman can be dangerous enough to a man, but that is nothing compared to how dangerous she could be to anyone she sees as potential competition for a love interest. Smart women don't play that dangerous game, so you get left with the ding-bat.

Elizabeth wrote:

Let's see, you play dumb and attact women who really are as dumb as you are pretending to be, and get annoyed by their stupid behavior.

Not exactly, 99% of the time I am meek, quiet, nothing, alone. However causality brings women into my life, I don’t look for them; and almost always they are so incredibly child-like that I dumb down my intelligence to entertain them like children and after we depart I return to being meek, quiet, nothing, alone.

If I meet an intelligent woman, I'll be what I am, however all the women that I have met thus far lack psychological awareness. They are 'pure character'.

Elizabeth wrote:

Do you think that if you presented the real Ryan that someone who liked you for who you really are would actually be able to see the real you and the two of you would really enjoy each other?

I don’t have a desire to meet a Juliet and get married. This marriage idea that I first started contemplating with Kevin is based on the assumption that I will never see my wife and perhaps I can look after one of her condos when she is constantly traveling or what not. I dislike her indulgent values, but if I never see her then it isn’t a problem.

I am not looking for a female companion; all I am looking for is a way to free myself from civilization.

If an intelligent women comes into my life and wants to help with the survival thing then that is fine, however I am not looking for it and I suspect this will not happen based on the vast number of women that I have met.

Sky wrote:

'all she wants is to tell her friends she is married'
does anyone actually believe that
she will control every bit of him that she can so if he does marry her he will get his 'just desserts'

One can only be controlled if one allows it to happen. I don’t compromise when it comes to control.

Sky wrote:

i don't know what level schooling ryan has but i lived off grants and scholarships for ten years i have friends with master's and doctoral fellowships

This option is no different than welfare, you are leeching off the government to earn yourself a mediocre education which is useless; I attend university currently and it is a mediocre program at best. Welfare is the same thing.

Sky wrote:

songwriters can make lots of money.

I don’t want to attempt to earn a living based on dreams and hopes.

Sky wrote:

anyone who is truly sincere can find a way to be self supporting if they have the potential for 'genius'

A true genius is useless to the present society for the most part. He tries to help, but many times his tinkering only makes matters worse.

Sky wrote:

i believe buddha called it 'right livelihood'

The right livelihood is a back to the land movement; growing your own food, but I don’t own land so I have a problem. People who make art settle for less in my opinion.

Sky wrote:

i spent it all i love luxury a friend once said i had raised 'self indulgence to an art form'
my first car was a classic corvette 100 grand and i did not even know how to drive.

You sound like an intelligent girl… : P I'm afraid you and I would clash, I have the values of a genius; minimalism is of the highest intelligence.

sky wrote:

but the only thing i am willing to sell is my intellectual property fortunately i have plenty

I have respect for QRS because they don’t charge money for truth; the most honest individuals charge nothing for their genius.

weak ryan weak

kevin wrote some software for pocket money

that is what i meant by intellectual property

One can only be controlled if one allows it to happen. I don’t compromise when it comes to control.

i am confused what is it you are compromising - you do admit that you are compromising

so she pays the bills and when she wants something you will refuse (in the areas where you are not compromising) so she either cries and/or gets mad because since she does not have to work and has no lofty aspirations she is going to expect your attention and if she does not get it eventually what do you think will happen - things will get nasty or/and she will exercise her one power and dump you and alimony for a guy i don't think so

what about children

what if she wants children

you refuse her children she can get an annulment

i notice you skipped over the consummation issue

and you know that QRS and i agree on at least one thing and that is celibacy

the car bit was when i was 18

obviously you would have done similar as this person has only one thing that you admit to liking - money so where is the minimalism

i got to minimalism because i realized that that car was a royal pain and so was most of my stuff

but it was my stuff paid for by me

you know you should not do this ryan

you know it is a major compromise

as for living off dreams

according to QRS my chances of writing a good song are greater than you becoming enlightened even though you are male

here is a thought

you agree with cause and effect don't you

we can call it karma can't we

so it is my karma to have money fall on me with no effort so i thought 'i wonder what would happen if i put forth a little effort'

i got paid $100 an hour by a guy in my building who held a patent by showing him how to get his 'idea' licensed and collecting royalties instead of investing in production and distribution

it was easy because it was exactly the same principle as used in songwriting

as far as a medicore education the quality is up to you - after my first years i chose my classes by professors i did not read the menu i asked for the best and i got it till one day my diplomas showed up in the mail - i was cut off for 'overachievement'

we would not clash because i wouldn't waste my time on a gigolo very unappealing contemptible in fact

but then it is the world's oldest profession now isn't it so in the interests of equality go for it

but you will live to regret it

but maybe you need the lesson

Ryan wrote:

all I am looking for is a way to free myself from civilization.

Learn to hunt, sell what you do own and get a tiny bit of cheap land as far from people as you can get, and go for it.

sky wrote:and i have inherited money from my mother's side of the family a number of times

i spent it all i love luxury a friend once said i had raised 'self indulgence to an art form'

my first car was a classic corvette 100 grand and i did not even know how to drive

Then in another thread you wrote:

sky wrote:yes i am completely free from sexual desire

and have been for a long time

lust has no hold on me

Do you see the hypocricy? You make the bold statement of claiming lust has no hold on you, yet you go on to say that you "love luxury". Your lust for luxury is the same as a lust for sex, both being pleasures of the flesh. With that said it's fair to say that lust still has a very strong old on you.

sky wrote:

you know you should not do this ryan

I probably wont, but if she gives me an offer I cant refuse, who knows? She has been independent her entire life; her parents have always been separated so long distance relationships do not bother her. She told me that she has gone months without seeing old male companions so who knows...

But yes, if she became too much of a compromise, I would end the whole thing.

sky wrote:

we would not clash because i wouldn't waste my time on a gigolo very unappealing contemptible in fact

haha, that’s hilarious. I wonder if Kevin will change my name from Ryan to The Cosmic Gigolo.

sky, just think of me as a superhero to my sex. Think about it; historically women have used their beauty to live off the sweat and hard work of dumb men for eons and eons so now its our turn.

Now its the Cosmic Gigolo's turn to take the power back, whose with me on this?! Quinn? Solway? Cory?.... Millipodium? Suergaz? Guys?

The Cosmic Gigolo.

lol

sky wrote:

i have no desire for sex i have no fantasies about sex

I dont believe you, I think you're not being completely truthful. How old are you? perhaps after a women goes through menopause then the urge may subside, but the organism is programmed with it and if you are still in your twenties, it is highly unlikely that sexual desire has been completely ended.

I suspect that you believe that an enlighened person is supposed to have no sexual desire so you are projecting your ideal onto us.

I suspect that sexual desire is a necessary biological urge that never goes away completely. No sages have ever documented such a thing.

One of the major purposes of this body is to reproduce, it is programmed. It is a necessary part of the design.

Ryan,

That does seem to be a difference between most men and most women - men are more likely to lust after a female body than a female is likely to lust after a male body. Female lust for males is more likely to be secondary to falling in love with something about his personality.