Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Think for Yourself, Schmuck! => Topic started by: Cain on December 12, 2006, 07:40:50 PM

Title: Extelligence
Post by: Cain on December 12, 2006, 07:40:50 PM
I was just wondering what you thought of the concept of extelligence and how it can be used both in breaking down and keeping a certain concept of reality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extelligence
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: LMNO on December 12, 2006, 07:46:16 PM
I suppose it's the sample of the pool you take from.

That is, if all your time-binding intelligence (books, etc) agree with each other, your reality will stay pretty static.  If they all contradict each other, your reality will be much more interesting.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Hangero on December 12, 2006, 09:17:29 PM
Well, I might have read it entirely wrong, and it might have all flown right over my head, but here is what I picked up:

Since they acknowledge that there is an objective world, I think it can't say there is any way to break down "reality".  I heard them mention a subjective world, where perceptual influences could alter things, and that would certainly be subject to collapse and deterioration.

Since that subjective world is unreal (given their postulated existence of an objective world) it can be seen as only a bastardization of that real objective world, and would be thus something to work away from. 

It all sounds a LOT like Plato's forms.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: LMNO on December 12, 2006, 09:21:11 PM
Did we read the same wikipedia article?


Because I didn't get that at all.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Hangero on December 12, 2006, 10:37:28 PM
That's why it has a disclaimer  :cry:
I've never come across the phrase before, probably didn't read it thoroughly enough either.

EDIT*
I misread the stuff that was actually being attributed to Popper as being attributed to Stewart and Cohen.  I'll have to compose another message when I'm feeling less careless.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Jenne on December 13, 2006, 02:22:48 AM
Ha! I thought it sounded mightily linked to the notion of realia.

This part explains why:

QuotePhilosophers, notably Popper, have also considered the relation between subjective knowledge (which he calls world 2), objective knowledge (world 1) and the knowledge represented by man-made artifacts (world 3).

Here's the wiki on realia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realia
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Starship, take me on December 13, 2006, 04:57:00 AM
I have this ongoing thought experiment about compiling a database of all observable events here on Earth (i.e. every wave of the oceans, conversation, birth, death, plant germinating, ad infinitum).

I suppose if such a database were freely available to all people, the species might see a great increase in extelligence, intelligence, or any other type of -telligence.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: B_M_W on December 13, 2006, 06:47:52 AM
I think the NSA and the DHA and the CIA have a job for you...
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Starship, take me on December 13, 2006, 07:03:00 AM
Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on December 13, 2006, 06:47:52 AM
I think the NSA and the DHA and the CIA have a job for you...

Well, I'll probably wind up in a CIA prison in Uzbekistan anyway.  Of course, I might enjoy being a quadruple agent and narcing on all the Three Letter Agencies.

:mrgreen:
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: B_M_W on December 13, 2006, 07:11:35 AM
That sounds like a dangerous but hilarious passtime.  :lol:
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Jenne on December 13, 2006, 04:37:22 PM
You'll make millions on book and movie deals, at the VERY least.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Starship, take me on December 14, 2006, 01:30:42 AM
Quote from: Jenne on December 13, 2006, 04:37:22 PM
You'll make millions on book and movie deals, at the VERY least.

Hmmm... we could use the extra funding, seeing as how construction on Platform 18 has slowed a bit.
Title: Re: Extelligence
Post by: Jenne on December 14, 2006, 03:24:16 AM
It's worth giving it a thought or 3, I think.