CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I am simply a genius, there is no other way to put it.
That sentence is known in grammar as a comma splice. You've taken two independent clauses and tried to connect them with a comma.
Also, claiming to be a genius is not something geniuses really do a lot of. Having interacted with you personally, I can confirm that you are not a genius. You are a delusional sociopath who has a narcissistic personality disorder.
Sorry, but I don't have any interest in participating in your delusional circle jerk. I have better things to do than tell everybody how clever I think I am.
Can this be proven by quantifiable standards? For example, if I were to scientifically test you with not only an IQ test but multiple other tests of my own design such as giving you a hyper-complex essay to read and monitoring your reading speed as well as how you interpret it and retain the information would I get border line super human results from you?
You do realize a 10 would be a total polymath and literally seem superhuman right? If you are a 10 then you should have a mega-high IQ and be good at literally everything in very obvious ways as well as in ways the average human couldn't even appreciate.
No. Geniuses are all fundamentally specialists but some enable their ingenuity to seep into areas they're not specialised in better than others. You have a concept of 'true genius' that doesn't exist. All geniuses are freaks of nature in only 1 or 2 areas. For me it's thinking strategically (X happens, then causes Y, which leads either to Z or A etc etc) as well as comprehending how others are thinking in most situations. The first kind was innate, the latter was due to the innate strategic thinking meeting studying psychology for a long time as a hobby.
The other areas you see that seep into are things where I'm with or against human beings in some way but not directly at peace with them. I struggle when just 'chilling' with people for an extended period of time, I need my introverted time to recharge and comprehend what happened and will happen etc.
When I say "good at literally everything" I should have been more clear. It is much more accurate to say you would have the ability to learn almost anything with great efficiency if you put your mind to it. For example Nikola Tesla could have easily made himself a billionare if he dedicated his mind to market-strategy and business-politics but he saw money and business as a cumbersome and corrupting thing. Also Sun Tzu could have been a scientist or inventor, but he focused on strategy. Someone who is only truly great at one or two things by default rather than by choice is not a maxed out human intellectually for the same reason that a dog is not an average human intellectually if it learned how to speak english coherently despite still thinking on a dog level in everything else. 10 is more than just a genius, it is a demi-god that pushes the limits of humanity. It borders on being something other than human, and requires a general understanding of things and special way of thinking.
Let's say there is an AI that can beat any human at math and chess, but only those two things. It is clueless at everything else, but in math and chess it is beyond any human being that could possibly exist. Is that AI more of a genius than a human being who truly understands reality in general at a border-line superhuman level and is proficient in a huge variety of areas?
I am actually that level of genius but that's not required to be a 10. My adaptability to put my intellect into any and all forms (rapping, poker, debating etc) is something severely rare, even among geniuses. It is due to me mastering strategy, as you say, and it gives me a ridiculous advantage to strategise how I will learn something new and use it rapidly, better than others doing it.
I am actually that level of genius but that's not required to be a 10. My adaptability to put my intellect into any and all forms (rapping, poker, debating etc) is something severely rare, even among geniuses.
Didn't you just imply that someone else was a vote cheat?
Do you want to explain who else on the site agrees with your claims of being a severely rare supergenius, and hence upvoted your laughably delusional nonsense?
Pally pal, you are so pallypal right. I downvote and then upvote the same comment often, to stop people editing and downvote with a singular account and identity until Andy bans it.
Pally pal, you are so pallypal right. I downvote and then upvote the same comment often, to stop people editing and downvote with a singular account and identity until Andy bans it.
Why do you want to stop people editing? Do people not have the right to edit their own posts in your universe?
I have figured out the nature of the tests, it will take longer to actually make them though. If you ace all of these tests I will legitimately consider you a genius.
Yeah but I will need a time when I'm fully awake and no distractions. Can't just do it when you want that instant necessarily because I know when I can truly be at my peak.
Yeah but I will need a time when I'm fully awake and no distractions. Can't just do it when you want that instant necessarily because I know when I can truly be at my peak.
Fair enough, you can do them whenever you are ready. It may take me up to a month to create them all though.
The same reason that you guys copy paste and bold text
But I don't intentionally try to stop people from editing their own posts. I simply quote what they have written. If someone says something in a flash of anger, I think they should free to take it back when they calm down.
except with less effort and more guaranteed pay-off for doing so.
Less effort, sure. No guaranteed pay-off in openly admitting you downvote immediately after denying it. Not unless you consider exposing yourself as a liar a guaranteed pay-off.
Which in fairness, you probably do. You're a strange boy.
You are the single worst abuser of downvoting and upvoting abuse. Don't know who the hell doesn't know that at this point, everyone on this site knows you are the biggest and worst abuser of it. I literally began upvoting to cancel you out today for the first time ever and you're whining.
You are the single worst abuser of downvoting and upvoting abuse.
Do you have any direct evidence of this?
Let me answer that for you. No, you do not have any direct evidence of this. You are someone who makes lots of accusations, allegations and assertions, but who is unable to ever evidence any of them on account of them all being equally false.
Don't know who the hell doesn't know that at this point
Probably everybody who doesn't make up their own fake facts and then self-qualify them as true.
you are the biggest and worst abuser of it
You've said that already. Repeating false premises over and over again was something the Nazis did a lot of. Are you a Nazi?
I literally began upvoting to cancel you out today
No you didn't. That's another lie. You claimed you were a genius and then upvoted your own post to create the false impression that somebody else on this planet agrees with you.
Why can't you stop lying, Mingiwuwu? I mean, that's one of your other accounts, isn't it? You're actually sitting there accusing me of what you are openly doing yourself, which is multi-accounting. The difference is that I freely admit to it, and do not try to seize false moral high ground by accusing other people of what I am goddamned well doing myself!!!!
I didn't use the multis to upvote until today for a year at the very least and even then it was a one-off thing that goodlistener got banned for because NathanAllen lied to Andy about who Nom was and who goodlistener was in relation to him, there is no lie involved on my part.
You are a scumbag who became the scummiest of all and then preaches to others for defending against your belligierent vitriol-filled verbal bullying and multi-account abuse.
Shut up Mingiwuwu. The fact of the matter is that you are a world class hypocrite. You are a nasty little person who comes here to belittle other people and bore them to death with your delusions of grandeur about being a "super rare genius". Your shtick is plain boring and you will never have any talent in life other than annoying people.
You are a scumbag who became the scummiest of all
You're plain old-fashioned mad, mate. Get help. Your loathing is pitiful. It's like trying to have a conversation with a rabid dog. Wipe the dribble off your face and call your doctor.
you will never have any talent in life other than annoying people.
Shut up you ugly, stupid, hypocritical, sociopathic, pedophillic piece of shit. Literally all you do is sit here on the internet trying to think of ways to make people feel bad about themselves. You're an insecure failure and your mommy didn't love you so you take it out on everyone else, and your only skill in life is manipulating language and using big words to create the illusion that you are intelligent. Mingiwuwu is more interesting, more talented, and more trustworthy than you.
Out of the two of us, you are the one with the inferior understanding of grammar... Well, you have an inferior understanding of pretty much everything compared to me but the bar is quite high when it's me that you're having to beat. :)
I have excellent reading comprehension, in my opinion.
Do you remember three days ago when you read an article about the wave/particle duality and interpreted it to mean, "electrons can only ever be in one out of two places"?
Ahahahaha! You are delusional to the point that it's a legitimate form of entertainment.
You said before that you read at genius speeds lol.
I will try to make a balanced and legitimately genius-type test. It will be hard though because I can't ensure you not cheating at something like math (which is also going to be hard because I suck tremendously at it) and I am not a genius myself. I may just skip things like math and focus on what I can actually comprehend enough to test someone on and which can be designed to be cheat-proof.
I seriously want to attempt to test you. Will you partake in a series of tests if I design them?
If you want to declare yourself a genius there are actual legitimate tests for that. Replying to your own posts and designing your own tests is not the qualifier for genius you delusional, bent-nosed buffoon.
If you want to declare yourself a genius there are actual legitimate tests for that.
IQ tests are flawed because they only measure a particular type of intelligence. It's possible for someone to score average on an IQ test but still be a genius.
IQ tests are flawed, therefore my own made up tests won't be?
IQ tests were also "made up" by humans. I have special authority to make a genius test because I understand the mind of a genius better than anyone on my level of raw intelligence (which is only a few orders of magnitude above average but with the thinking techniques and wisdom of a genius).
You are just so astonishingly stupid. What possible evidence do you have that you can produce a better IQ test than presently exists? Show me this evidence that you are more qualified to judge a person's intelligence than the standard IQ test.
Just shut up. You're retarded. Everything you write is goddamned stupid and a waste of everybody's time who reads it.
That's exactly what you're doing otherwise you'd just use the official IQ test. This idea you have about testing the genius of your puppet accounts with a test you have invented yourself is concrete evidence that you are unwell. I've suggested you get help many times but all you seem to be interested in doing is arguing. In jumping from one stupid premise to another.
I'm trying to make a test that deals with the things IQ tests can't deal with.
Then show me evidence you know what these things are and evidence that you are qualified to measure them. Also, show me evidence that these things are indicative of "genius" and then explain why you interpreted Mingiwuwu's claim of being a genius to mean, "I'm a genius, but only in the things the IQ test can't test for".
Shut up fool, what I have in mind is nothing like an IQ test. I'm not even going to read the rest of your garbage because I can't afford to waste my time thinking about you and your constant need to validate your own existence by attempting to feel superior to others by lowering their self esteem.
"Shut up fool" is not the evidence I requested you provide in order to justify your ludicrous rhetoric.
what I have in mind is nothing like an IQ test.
I am fully aware of that because obviously you are not a genius and hence, if you actually test for genius, you are going to fail.
IQ tests can't measure the density of a person's skull, so how about I beat you in your stupid head with a tree branch? If I can get to 100 blows without caving your skull in that must mean you are a genius. Are we agreed?
I think this is actually a more difficult question than it seems. It's very easy to simply say something like "Hawking has an IQ of 180, and mine is 140, and the average is 110, therefore I am halfway-ish between average and super-smart", but IQ is not a conclusive or comprehensive measure of intelligence, and people always over-report their own smarts.
We as humans like to think that we are smarter than we are, which necessarily means most of us are less intelligent than we think.
I would rather you asked other people how smart they think I am: if they are unbiased and analytical enough, and their own ego or smarts aren't related to the equation in any way, they will usually provide a fairly accurate conclusion to the question.
Can you elaborate? I am not sure which part of my comment affirms your belief that this topic is stupid (not that I disagree: quantifying intelligence is a subjective task, in that the paradigms we use to do it are formed from a preconceived idea of what actually constitutes "intelligence").
Without coffee? Probably a 5. With coffee, I'll be nice to myself and say a 7, maybe 8 on a good day. This is assuming there is only one type of intelligence instead of the 9 types that psychologists refer to. Otherwise, I'll have to rethink the answer.
