No, but I can use contextual clues like other accolades to extrapolate from my own experience with that person here (like being a Nobel laureate, for example).
To your point though, more like one in 100 million I suppose if I’m to be more accurate.
To your point though, more like one in 100 million I suppose if I’m to be more accurate.
Additionally, Nobel Prizes only cover a handful of fields out of hundreds of possible fields people could work in. I would put it at more like 1 in 100,000 or 1 in a million.
From my view point it really depends on if the Nobel laureate won the prize for IQ or productivity; or whether the category has any relation to the two aforementioned categories. If I remember correctly only very specific Nobel categories meet the aforementioned criteria.
Is this some kind of nihilistic moral relativism thing you’re playing at here? Otherwise I’m unclear what your point is.
You implied I’ve never been exposed to extremely smart people and couldn’t fathom someone like Bob existing, I think I’ve made it pretty clear that’s a silly argument you made from a bad assumption.
I thought my point is obvious. I'm saying your descriptions are unconvincing.
The obvious path forward is to describe your "bubble" in further detail. What was the nobel prize for?
> A factor in my judgement about whether the people I’ve met who dwarfed me with their intelligence were actually intelligent? Yeah I’d say it’s a factor :).
I think this sentence shows you're unable to sense the implications of my statement. Why would I care about your judgement at all? Nobody cares, especially if we think you live in a <small> bubble. Does this clarify the next step? I'm basically asking for a more detailed description of your "bubble" so that I and others reading can make their own judgements about your bubble and the validity of your claim.
So far your arguments of "academia" and "nobel prize" are unconvincing to me. Is that not obvious? I thought it was, I guess I need to be more explicit next time.
Why do you expect a stranger on the internet to prove the relative intelligence of everyone around them, to you
Why do you expect a stranger on the internet to answer your question?
I'll answer your question regardless: I'm not expecting shit. My question was more of statement about why I disagree with him and why his opinion is invalid to me. I don't think he had an answer. I only ask for a "proof" out of politeness.
Also, someone who isn’t expecting an answer doesn’t pedantically repeat their condescending question across the thread.
This is very unlike Your post which is full of malice. Yeah let's talk about our academic circles. I offer mine freely: UCLA. Not that great of a school honestly. It also depends on which department your in.
Now yours: UC Santa Barbara. You never offered it, yet I know it. So how smart is your academic bubble? I feel if it was bigger you'd be smarter about how you approach strangers on the internet. If you approach with malice, they can return your query with equal malice... or greater. Sometimes far greater.
edit: looks like you found @whynaut on github? I don’t repeat usernames, though.
> unlike your post which is full of malice
Hah! You need some serious introspection.
The only connection you could possibly draw to UCSB from anything in my life or profile is this username/that @whynaut person, because I’ve never stepped foot there or even considered it. Not sure what lying gets you here.