Mine about 140 depending on what test you use.
You are still a faggot.
It is impossible within the confines of a polite conversation.
- If the other party were very trusting of the speaker
- If the other party were truly motivated to grasp the concepts being used
- if the other party were to actually do the work (which might take weeks or months) they would be truly changed by the ramifications of the new concepts and the new, improved world model.
For example: Where does money (fiat currency) come from? How is it created? Under what circumstances is it destroyed? What are the long term implications; especially WRT the boom and bust cycle?
Someone with an IQ of 84 literally can't get the concepts involved in this discussion. They just can't. No amount of work will get them there.
Even having such a discussion with you would require that we have enough shared culture (and attached concepts) to be able to discuss the matter.
If you didn't know what fiat currency was or how it is created, I'd probably rely on about an hour of animated videos to get you there.
I don't want to try to sum up a literal hour of very careful scripted and animated educational videos so I can establish the base foundations for the conversation. More to the point the person I am talking with won't have a single useful or interesting thing to say on the subject. Why would I even bother?
So, define impossible buddy. Can it be technically done? Sometimes. Often even. Is is utterly, completely pointless on every single occasion? Yes.
I talk to people, and it just takes so fucking long.
You have to use "scaffolding" to frame the topic if it is anything at all interesting or controversial.
Here is how it goes. You pick a topic. How about Money Laundering in Ukraine.
- Start by encouraging the other person to talk on the subject. Show empathy and understanding.
- Repeat back to the other person what they just said, to demonstrate that you understand their feelings and PoV.
- Using the most mild tone and depreciating language suggest some minor changes to their (straight from MSNBC) worldview. "Have you considered..." Or "Have you ever thought about..."
- If you did step one and two well enough, they MIGHT be in a place that they can accept a tiny little nugget of new information. Don't push to hard or you will alienate them and they will stop listening.
- Watch the other person squirm because they don't like the way this new information makes them feel. They instinctively understand that for the new information to be true, then they must have been very wrong about a bunch of stuff for a long time, and they don't like that.
- Use emotional language to deliberately manipulate the emotions of the other person so they are more likely to be persuaded.
- Watch them agree with you (because you are pretty clearly very knowledgeable and consistent) then walk away and immediately reject or forget everything you discussed because they don't like the way it makes them feel.
People don't have to be dumb to require this process. l have met very smart people who are 100% emotional thinkers; that is they think with their feelings and use their mind to rationalize their decisions.
I have also met people who are smart but very firmly in the grip of the Dunning Kruger effect.
I am not even that smart. My IQ is about 150, but I am absolutely, deeply, obsessive about discovering the real, actual, measurable truth of the world. I am delighted to be shown wrong, because I can correct my worldview.
So I don't talk to a lot of people. There is literally nothing for us to talk about that isn't utterly trivial and insignificant.
Hunter Biden is a great artist. His paintings sell for tens of thousands to discerning art-enjoyers.
Your jealousy is palpable. Seethe more, chud.
/s
I think you'll find that the beginning and end of their "morality" is: Hating the right people.
I am good THEREFORE the things I do are good. They are bad THEREFORE it is good for me to hurt them.
That is as complex as these "good guys" get.
No they don't! They honestly don't give a toss about morality.
There is no truth but power. They CAN do this to people. This is a demonstration of raw power. What are you going to do about it? Cope and seethe more?
Both Ragan and Trump pursued this policy, IRL.
It is a bit complicated, because government services and departments can have a broad range of efficiency. Waste is waste. Governments can more efficent, there just isn't usually much incentive for them to do that.
The only way to meaningfully address "divorce rape" is to to have the children be exclusively in the father's custody by default. It follows that fathers should get 80% of the marital assets, because they must care for the children.
The reality is that the courts and society would still be stacked against fathers, but father's would still start negotiating from a much better position.
Do you see this happening? Ever? I don't.
Well, single, strong, independent women who don't need no man.
Married women tend much more towards conservative in their voting patterns. They want to keep their man's money.
Get a passport, bro.
Come on guy. Womens' boxing! All the excitement of a pair of twelve year old boys swinging at each other in the ring!
How can you turn your back on such a display of athletic excellence?!
Guy, do you think passport bros are tradcucks?
Imagine a world where deserving people got Karmic bitch slapped!
I'd even look forward to my just deserts if others got theirs.
It isn't the state. The media is controlled by a select, moneyed, special interests that have also captured the Democrat party.
The state doesn't control the media. The cabal that controls the media also controls the state.
The Night Dive remake (that came out last year) is very faithful to the original. It is inexpensive and well done. Give it a try.
Shodan is one of the greatest villains ever written. All of the good parts of GLADOS were taken directly from Shodan.
It was the only ending where anything really changed for the better. HELIOS still needed the cooperation of the people to get anything done. That ending of the game ended with HELIOS issuing a bunch of eviction notices (and locking doors) and arrest warrants. People decided to go along with that.
It was clearly a better ending than the one where everything went back to the stone age and 90% of people immediately starved to death.
System Shock had a 3D engine with mouse look. It came out the same time as Doom. It is still a great game.
I nominate the Imp.
"Trust but Verify" you say? We should ... write that down somewhere.
So here is the thing, guy. The only credible investigations of false rape accusations put the number at about 40%. It is probably more.
As a counterpoint, there is a credible study that says of the female collage students surveyed about 40% admitted to behavior considered to be sexual assault. You know, like blackmailing a guy into sex, or having sex with him while he is too drunk to resist, or even using violence to get sex.
So until our society manages to overcome this crippling blind spot when it comes to women, I think that vigilante justice to "protect the children" is probably going to be a fucking terrible idea. In the same way that "Me Too" was a terrible idea, but with more bloody violence.
Travis and Gregory McMichael sentenced to life in prison for the death of Ahmaud Arbery.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59912361
If you don't remember the case, Ahmaud Arbery charged the pair and just about got his hands on one of their weapons before being shot. It was about as clear as self defense gets.
My point is that self-defense is a defense in court that requires you to admit the crime and then justify your actions. It doesn't work if you can't find an honest judge or honest jury.
Wait, you yanks can get 128oz sodas? For real? That sounds awesome!
Its also fucking free and easy.
It is the absolute minimum possible participation in government.
You want to do more? You can do more. You can do so much more. But the minimum is voting.
I am just pointing out that an IQ of 140 is getting close to the absolute upper edge of testability.
At higher than 140, the flaws and irregularities of the test are thrown into sharp relief. Tests have culturally specific content and only rank people within a statistically significant population of test-takers. Relating that ranking to a specific score is not trivial. For example, you might be in the top two percent of the people who take this particular test. What does that mean compared to other tests? What IQ is that?