Research Study

[ChangeTheWorld]

Hello, I am undertaking a research study, and as part of it I am currently conducting a survey. The survey can be found on dreamsurvey.tk Please take some time to answer the questions. The more participants the better, so tell your friends as well. I will be releasing the results as well as some details on the study once the survey is completed, since I do not want the answers to be biased. Thank you. - CTW

[moongrass]

I filled it out, kinda fun!

[ChangeTheWorld]

I filled it out, kinda fun! Thanks! I have already gotten the results of 12 individuals, one of which was pseudo-answered.

[Philosopher8659]

Hello, I am undertaking a research study, and as part of it I am currently conducting a survey. The survey can be found on dreamsurvey.tk Please take some time to answer the questions. The more participants the better, so tell your friends as well. I will be releasing the results as well as some details on the study once the survey is completed, since I do not want the answers to be biased. Thank you. - CTW The survey relied on false principles of grammar--it could not be answered in many points. I have noticed that many people who make surveys don't understand a great deal of what they are doing. I would think that anyone who was intelligent, would first learn the principles of grammar before they tested the human mind, for it either complies with these or it does not. If one does not know them, just what are they testing? Now, if you are looking for some very strange results from a lucid dreamer, see how much of my Language and Experience on the Archive could possibly fit into your test.

[ChangeTheWorld]

The survey relied on false principles of grammar--it could not be answered in many points. I have noticed that many people who make surveys don't understand a great deal of what they are doing. I would think that anyone who was intelligent, would first learn the principles of grammar before they tested the human mind, for it either complies with these or it does not. If one does not know them, just what are they testing? Now, if you are looking for some very strange results from a lucid dreamer, see how much of my Language and Experience on the Archive could possibly fit into your test. I apologize for my bad english, yet I feel I must let you know that I am, in fact, not american. I was born a cuban and then moved to germany. I've lived in the US for almost a month now, therefore my english isn't perfect. I assure you that if I were to conduct the same survey in spanish or, preferrably, german, my language would be much, much better. I appreciate any constructive criticism, so I would kindly ask you to please point out the specific mistakes I have made and I will be sure to look into them. - CTW

[Philosopher8659]

Well, you made my point. You did not comprehend my meaning. However, your response is near to standard. Why can one or more words be or not be predicated of another? Is predication the same as assertion and denial? If I use an ostensive without reference, is the statement grammatically correct or not? I said principles of grammar, I did not say that the principles of grammar were different for different languages. When you ask questions using idioms--by what measure do you determine if the answer also is in reference to a particular idiom? If the foundation of grammar is not known, and you can verify that by a simple internet search, by what standard do you assume that one can construct an intelligence test using these unknown principles? I.e. is a standard response in reference to culture or to intelligence? They are not the same. Does one use relative or absolute questions in a test?

[Mathias]

Dude... chill out. It's not your survey, stop giving him a hard time for no reason.

[ChangeTheWorld]

Well, you made my point. You did not comprehend my meaning. However, your response is near to standard. Why can one or more words be or not be predicated of another? Is predication the same as assertion and denial? If I use an ostensive without reference, is the statement grammatically correct or not? I said principles of grammar, I did not say that the principles of grammar were different for different languages. When you ask questions using idioms--by what measure do you determine if the answer also is in reference to a particular idiom? If the foundation of grammar is not known, and you can verify that by a simple internet search, by what standard do you assume that one can construct an intelligence test using these unknown principles? I.e. is a standard response in reference to culture or to intelligence? They are not the same. Does one use relative or absolute questions in a test? Clearly your mental abilites exceed mine, and since I cannot be bothered to look further into your arguments, we have but two options: One, we could let the issue rest and allow the thread to continue as it was originally intended to. Two, you could give me a brief insight on what exactly you mean and try to explain your points a little simpler, so that I may comprehend what you are trying to say. Some may find my response a little odd since people tend not to admit their inferiority as opposed to a critic, yet I do not see any shame in admitting that I am unable to understand what you are saying. I do hope we will be able to solve the issue and look forward to your response. Dude... chill out. It's not your survey, stop giving him a hard time for no reason. While I do appreciate your assistance, I must say that I also appreciate that Philosopher expresses his opinion and thoughts on the survey. Whether they conflict with mine or not, he has the right and is welcome to do so.

[RooJ]

I really wouldn't worry about it too much, I'd recommend only taking philosopher8659's advice once he learns to communicate with his target audience.

[moongrass]

I'm sorry but I am enjoying this conversation a lot. I do not really take sides so ill just make this general comment and see how this all unfolds.

[Philosopher8659]

Two, you could give me a brief insight on what exactly you mean and try to explain your points a little simpler, so that I may comprehend what you are trying to say.. An isight is contained within the dialogs of Plato. He was working with the metaphysics of language which never became understood or developed, however, I have been working on it, and take the primitive elements of it step by step in Langauge and Experience. You do know, from psych books, that very high IQ people process information differently. This will explalin the difference, which, simply stems from something very basic to all life forms. The advancement of mankind is through linguistic skills, by which I do not mean the ability to speak several languages, but by thinking and speaking in accordance with the mataphysics which cover all languages---- Although man, I do not believe has ever, for he cannot yet understand it, composed an IQ est for these principles, there are works--very old one's that do. The Works of Plato is one of them. Link to page of language and experioence; Language and Experience : John J. Clark : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive Link to the pdf on that page: http://www.archive.org/download/Lang...Experience.pdf It is an understanding never before developed outside of some very, very old works. My main point being is that a psych test of a population is self defeating when by construction it limits who can respond.

[ChangeTheWorld]

An isight is contained within the dialogs of Plato. He was working with the metaphysics of language which never became understood or developed, however, I have been working on it, and take the primitive elements of it step by step in Langauge and Experience. You do know, from psych books, that very high IQ people process information differently. This will explalin the difference, which, simply stems from something very basic to all life forms. The advancement of mankind is through linguistic skills, by which I do not mean the ability to speak several languages, but by thinking and speaking in accordance with the mataphysics which cover all languages---- Although man, I do not believe has ever, for he cannot yet understand it, composed an IQ est for these principles, there are works--very old one's that do. The Works of Plato is one of them. Link to page of language and experioence; Link to the pdf on that page: It is an understanding never before developed outside of some very, very old works. My main point being is that a psych test of a population is self defeating when by construction it limits who can respond. See? Now I have understood what you have been trying to say and can respond accordingly. Thank you for clarifying your point. Now, see, this survey was done out of pure curiosity. I did indeed say that it is part of a reseach study, which is any investigation done in order to understand a scientifc topic. Thus, whether its a team of Harvard-level scientists searching for a cure for cancer or a curious high school student informing himself about the cerebrum and its activities during sleep, both of these examples are considered research. In this case, it is the latter. I have an intense desire to understand and know about the brain and all of its activities. I thus investigated the topic and while doing so, I asked myself questions. These questions can be found on the very same survey that is supposed to be the subject of any discussions going on in this thread. So as you can see, the survey is being conducted out of pure curiosity and therefore has no real purpose (aside from the fact that people tend to be more interested in surveys when they assume it to be part of a professional research). That is the reason I simply could not be bothered to put much effort into constructing the survey. Indeed, this does mean that the only reason I even answered your criticism was because I felt that you are quite the intelligent being and it is my personal belief that anyone of intelligence and good will is to be respected, all the more because these two qualities have become so rare nowadays. I nonetheless appreciate the thought and time you put into expressing your thoughts. Not to mention the interesting literature that you have posted. I have bookmarked the links and will definitely read both pieces. I really wouldn't worry about it too much, I'd recommend only taking philosopher8659's advice once he learns to communicate with his target audience. Why, that is nonsense. Advice is something precious, for it indicates the presence of human cooperation. When people give each other advice, they cooperate in order to improve something, be it themselves, their environment, or anything else. Only a fool would not appreciate advice. When a person gives someone advice, they are trying to help. Therefore, it is only logical that the one to adjust is not the teacher, but he who wishes to be taught. Still, I appreciate your attempt at assisting me.

[moongrass]

That is a very good thought, "the one to adjust is not the teacher, but he who wishes to be taught." I totally agree.

[RooJ]

With all respect Changetheworld I disagree, I think it's a two way thing, not just the job of the student. Most great minds don't sit on their respective branch of knowledge, mocking those below who can't quite reach. Most intellectuals don't treat their intended audience like a dictaphone caring not if said audience understands. They have wisdom and the understanding that communication that can't be understood isn't communication at all. Great minds lower a rope to bridge the gap if they want people to understand them, eg analogies, alagories and simplifying speech.. and I ask you, if they care not for helping people understand, why persist in speaking at all? The brain gets used to familiar ways of working and thinking, one can't suddenly speak a new language without first learning it, and a good teacher can make that process a great deal easier. If I'm honest I find philosopher very interesting, I just think it's a shame that he struggles so often to communicate his idea's with others here. An idea that can't be shared will inevitably die with those incapable of sharing it. That being said his new reply is much clearer and I don't wish to derail your thread any further so I'll leave it there. Best of luck with your research =)

[Philosopher8659]

If I'm honest I find philosopher very interesting, I just think it's a shame that he struggles so often to communicate his idea's with others here. An idea that can't be shared will inevitably die with those incapable of sharing it. An idea has no individual existence and due to the abilities of individual minds, to that extent alone can it exist. There is no amount of great ideas that will ever be found in a cats mind, etc. Among mankind there is a psychological division--one I am well aware of to the extent that I do not fret over the fact that most men will never understand even one beautiful idea. There is nothing I can do to change that--only they can--and then to their own limit, but they will never get there unless they, themselves, put for the mental exercise to get there. Reacting to their own emotion is the earmark of an undisciplined mind. However, my postings on the internet archive is because I am working on constructing the material to eventually set up a site dedicated solely to resources in dialectic, as Plato understood it. It will take me a long time, however, I do it not only for myself, but for those who will desire such a place to go to seek to improve their own understanding. For those who believe that there is a right way for the mind to function--which is not what they have been aclimatized to since birth. The audio-books will allow people to listen and contend with ideas estblished in some coherent form--mental exercise instead of just wasting thinking time.

[RooJ]

Exactly, An idea has no individual existence and so must be shared or lost. Among mankind there is a psychological division--one I am well aware of to the extent that I do not fret over the fact that most men will never understand even one beautiful idea. There is nothing I can do to change that You give up on people too easily , a large number of highly complex and beautiful theories have been developed and made accessible to the general populous. The real skill is in the teachers ability to convey complex idea's to an audience that hasn't been studying the same subject they have for the last x amount of years. With even a basic understanding the student should then be able to delve into the subject themselves.

[Philosopher8659]

Really? Then you do not believe that, for example, the Judeo-Christian scripture is sealed to man's understanding? And, as written, that man will some day start to comprehend it? i.e. that the mind must evolve before it can become proficient at reasoning? The works of Plato is also sealed by the same method--the use of principles of reasoning to construct the work. These are two works constructed unlike any others I have ever come across. The truth of the sealing may be got, also, from my Language and Experience--if you can follow it. You think a person's ability is the task that a teacher has to overcome? Just like it is up to the physical trainer to lift weights for you? Or to cure the cripple? ROFL There is a concept perhaps developing in your mind there, standards in experience to maximize development, this I will agree on. There is no person that has ever lived, or that will ever live that can teach another anything. Everyone learns themselves by experience. Therefore, one of the first principles that one develops in their own mind is their own responsibility for how they react to any perceptual information. We can react rationally, or emotionally, i.e. irrationally. That is the function of the human mind, it is responsible for environmental information and how it can or cannot be used to maintain and promote the life of one's own body. In a nut-shell, the mind is composed of two parts, emotion, which is a deriviative of physical need, and rationality. Emotion is a material difference, rationality is a form. A true psychology is the application of form over material difference, i.e. the craft of any thing. Thus, emotion is the material difference of a rational mind. The rationality is the form by which we satisfy our needs. In all events, it is our life to make or discard, not anyone elses.

[d3nd3]

lol i find your posts very amusing ^.^

[Philosopher8659]

My cat, also, often finds me very amusing.

[RooJ]

Really? Then you do not believe that, for example, the Judeo-Christian scripture is sealed to man's understanding? And, as written, that man will some day start to comprehend it? To believe that would be a leap of faith. I'm doubtful that will happen with texts that are written in such a way as to be easily misinterpreted. In any case, how would you know you correctly comprehend it? Many think they comprehend it now. The works of Plato is also sealed by the same method--the use of principles of reasoning to construct the work. These are two works constructed unlike any others I have ever come across. Although I expect you mean all of his work, is there any of his works in particular that you believe stand out in this regard? You think a person's ability is the task that a teacher has to overcome? Just like it is up to the physical trainer to lift weights for you? I think for a teacher to be worth anything they need to be able to pitch their idea's to the level of their students. For all the ego ive witnessed in your posts i honestly dont think your idea's will amount to anything unless you learn this basic principle. And its a poor analogy, instead imagine the student in a room without weights. The weights your students have to exercise with are your words. By failing to explain your idea's you make it harder for the student to gain muscle/knowledge. By supplying weights that the student can't possibly lift you prove yourself not good enough to be a physical trainer . There is no person that has ever lived, or that will ever live that can teach another anything. Everyone learns themselves by experience. Then would a teachers job not be to direct experience in the most efficient and comprehensible manner? Im unsure how the rest relates to our discussion, in any case i guess to search for knowledge with a desire to understand someone must surely be a rational rather than irrational act. We should probably take this to PM, thread hijacking is a crime.

[ChangeTheWorld]

We should probably take this to PM, thread hijacking is a crime. I beg of you, don't. Instead, make another thread. This conversation is very interesting, and I am fascinated by the topic.

[Philosopher8659]

You made my point.

[RooJ]

You made my point. Sure... If it helps you sleep at night we can pretend you were right all along

[Oros]

I must say that there were some weird questions on that survey xD