Occams Razor

[Telarus]

Sorry, didn't mean to drift the topic. I like Alphapance and eighteen buddha strike's take.

Antero Alli says that on any of the 'circuits' you're operating on, there are cycles of "receive information, internalize information, transmit information".

I think the line between insanity/creative-genius lies in something going wrong in one of those stages (depends on the insanity, but the one that causes the most psychological problems in Antero's model is internalizing the information). Keep in mind that you can receive/transmit information to yourself (we all carry around feedback loops).

[Adios]

Sorry, didn't mean to drift the topic. I like Alphapance and eighteen buddha strike's take.

Antero Alli says that on any of the 'circuits' you're operating on, there are cycles of "receive information, internalize information, transmit information".

I think the line between insanity/creative-genius lies in something going wrong in one of those stages (depends on the insanity, but the one that causes the most psychological problems in Antero's model is internalizing the information). Keep in mind that you can receive/transmit information to yourself (we all carry around feedback loops).

Honestly, I don't see how a topic like this can drift. I appreciate your input.

There is so much information out there trying to pick through it is almost overwhelming.

[Xooxe]

I always figured that those with more complicated motivations end up taking many varied approaches at exploring a subject.

[Kai]

First, affirmative to the 10% myth. We use all of our active neurons. The rest must function as required support and nutrition supplying cells. The ratio comes out to be around 9:1, but that doesn't mean we have these secret untapped neurons and we would all be superhuman geniuses if we could only turn them on.

Genius has been defined variously as the ability to achieve and grasp insight, among others. It is a function of intelligence (cf Angel Tech - Antero Ali for my definition).

The difference between genius and insanity...well, how are they similar? Both seem to find previously unexamined connections (under some definitions of insanity)

However,

Whereas a genius can control (or at least guide) this process to ordered output and utilize this output,

an insane person has essentially no control or ability to guide the process, making the result more random (eg. word salad).


As in all priors, the usefulness is in predictivity of reality. Geniuses have higher (80%?) rates of predicting reality, whereas a insane person probably comes down to a coin toss (<50%), which is akin to the pattern in random static.

Incidentally, there's been some articles on Less Wrong recently about the Wei Dai Master/slave model of psychology. Under this model, a genius would be someone whose normally slavish conscious part of mind would have largely revolted against the Master unconscious fitness optimized mind. An insane person, on the other hand....But then, the OP never defined the terms "genius" and "insanity" so I can't really infer what we are talking about there.

[Adios]

First, affirmative to the 10% myth. We use all of our active neurons. The rest must function as required support and nutrition supplying cells. The ratio comes out to be around 9:1, but that doesn't mean we have these secret untapped neurons and we would all be superhuman geniuses if we could only turn them on.

Genius has been defined variously as the ability to achieve and grasp insight, among others. It is a function of intelligence (cf Angel Tech - Antero Ali for my definition).

The difference between genius and insanity...well, how are they similar? Both seem to find previously unexamined connections (under some definitions of insanity)

However,

Whereas a genius can control (or at least guide) this process to ordered output and utilize this output,

an insane person has essentially no control or ability to guide the process, making the result more random (eg. word salad).


As in all priors, the usefulness is in predictivity of reality. Geniuses have higher (80%?) rates of predicting reality, whereas a insane person probably comes down to a coin toss (<50%), which is akin to the pattern in random static.

Incidentally, there's been some articles on Less Wrong recently about the Wei Dai Master/slave model of psychology. Under this model, a genius would be someone whose normally slavish conscious part of mind would have largely revolted against the Master unconscious fitness optimized mind. An insane person, on the other hand....But then, the OP never defined the terms "genius" and "insanity" so I can't really infer what we are talking about there.

I am not sure it can be defined, please continue.

[Kai]

I'm concerned that, without coming to terms, our discussion will be about definitions.

[Captain Utopia]

Then what terms would you suggest?

I just found a topic on lesswrong which I assume is the one you are talking about?  My understanding is, that if as you say - genius lies the slaves rebellion (learning to recognise and throttle ability of the master to control events by setting long-term goals?), then insanity would be more like the master trying to function without the slaves input - the instilled-from-birth day-to-day interactions and niceties which are the established currency of human interaction.

Whereas the slave is a fairly smart auto-pilot, the master gets distracted easily and can't focus upon a single goal in the presence of the sensory overload presented by the physical world.  Similar to the way even the slave can't concentrate given too much stimulation.  So then does the slave act like a sort of cognitive shield which allows the master to formulate the terminal values for the slave?

If so, you might like this poem.

[LMNO]

I'm concerned that, without coming to terms, our discussion will be about definitions.

I'm pretty much coming from the perspective that this is an elaborate metaphor, so the definitions will of course be somewhat flexible and mutable.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I'll go one better than first hand, I'll give you first person. When I'm at my most creative it feels no different from when I was clinically batshit. That's the reason I can't bring myself to stay in that place for too long at a time. It's the fear I'll pass the point of no return.

[Adios]

I'll go one better than first hand, I'll give you first person. When I'm at my most creative it feels no different from when I was clinically batshit. That's the reason I can't bring myself to stay in that place for too long at a time. It's the fear I'll pass the point of no return.

Can you enter and leave what you describe as 'that place' at will, or does something have to drive it?

[Adios]

I'm concerned that, without coming to terms, our discussion will be about definitions.

I'm pretty much coming from the perspective that this is an elaborate metaphor, so the definitions will of course be somewhat flexible and mutable.

Pretty much.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I'll go one better than first hand, I'll give you first person. When I'm at my most creative it feels no different from when I was clinically batshit. That's the reason I can't bring myself to stay in that place for too long at a time. It's the fear I'll pass the point of no return.

Can you enter and leave what you describe as 'that place' at will, or does something have to drive it?

Haha! I dunno if I'd describe it as "will" it's more like a mood that comes along. When I feel myself going into it I can either go with it or fight it - that's the "will element" but as to actually summoning it in the first place, no. I think maybe I could but I never really tried. Eventually I have to fight it tho or I'd be right back in hell.

[Adios]

I'll go one better than first hand, I'll give you first person. When I'm at my most creative it feels no different from when I was clinically batshit. That's the reason I can't bring myself to stay in that place for too long at a time. It's the fear I'll pass the point of no return.

Can you enter and leave what you describe as 'that place' at will, or does something have to drive it?

Haha! I dunno if I'd describe it as "will" it's more like a mood that comes along. When I feel myself going into it I can either go with it or fight it - that's the "will element" but as to actually summoning it in the first place, no. I think maybe I could but I never really tried. Eventually I have to fight it tho or I'd be right back in hell.

Does it anger you that when you are at your best is when you can least enjoy it because you have to keep your guard up all the time?

If you don't want to answer my questions I understand.

[Captain Utopia]

Personally, when I'm at my creative best it's not what I'd call my "best", especially in terms of not giving as much attention to loved ones around me.

[Lies]

Just FYI, people can be both genius's and dumb fucks at the same time
-
examples -http://www.cracked.com/article_18638_4-nobel-prize-winners-who-were-clearly-insane.html