Wizards

[ScottTheSculptor]

 

Wizards

 

Galileo, Leonardo, Michaelangelo, Maxwell, Armstrong. These were wizards. Einstein and Newton are "fallen" wizards. They were full wizards until

 

they became pack mind in the process of being famous and important. (lots of other types of wizards, art-music-dance-literature-etc, couldn't name

 

them all)

 

A wizard is simply any individual that has failed the to transition from chilhood learning mode into the "pack mind" of a normal human adult. This is a

 

possible human configuration - though considered abnormal due to the infrequency of its occurence.

 

All wizards have the neurochemical balance of those five years of age. They are strongly empathetic and can not stand to see or "imagine" anyone

 

being hurt from their actions. All sensory information is being stored and the deductive reasoning of a five year old is applied. They are not swayed

 

by suggestion and are endlessly curious. At that age humans are not self aware. They have no ego. They do not and can not 'rank" themselves.

 

They find the pack mind endlessly confusing and terribly short sighted. There is no sexual drive to mate and create a pack. Sex is just another thing

 

to figure out - and it gets boring once all is learned. Possibly avoided altogether because of the illogical pack rules and behaviors associated with

 

sex. Wizards tend to be celibate by neurochemical balance (being celibate does not *make* you a wizard). Wizards do not find pack activities to be

 

compelling once they have been experienced. Wizards *loathe* repetition of experiences.

 

Society, seemingly, designed the educational system to eliminate wizards. Only those that "Clark Kented" or were pushed from the pack early sneak

 

by - totally under the control of their own subconsciouses (no ego). Once that hurdle is passed then the wizard naturally continues to learn and will

 

seek a source of knowledge but one that is accessible by those "not of the pack". If they head for a university it is a complex dance to gain the

 

knowledge without being spotted. If spotted and successfully trapped they are "turned" to the pack of science or art, shift their neurochemical

 

balance, and lose their abilities. In the "workforce" the wizard goes from job to job learning one after another and becoming bored as soon as the

 

knowledge source drains. The wizard will naturally choose "useful" as their role in the pack. They don't "get" the pack but the pack has a genetic

 

behavior written into it that "allows" wizards and celebrates their knowledge. Shamans, witch doctors, wise men, seers, oracles, pholosophers -

 

these are different versions of wizards.

 

Severed from a pack the wizard will withdraw. This, I believe, is necessary in order for one to become "self aware". The wizard, at some point, must

 

turn their problem solving skills inward. If ensconced in the pack they will continue to solve the problems of others. If enough knowledge has been

 

gained from life experiences and from active seeking, then deductive reasoning will prevail, the wizard *will* sort out the truth - they will "figure it

 

out". And when they figure it out they want to *show* you - just like a five year old.

 

 

[Phi for All]

No offense, but in my experience, wizards can't be bothered to learn the math that would easily show them where they went wrong. Instead, they spend an almost equal amount of time looking for the magic that will let them skip over the hard work and gain fame and fortune the easy way. They are the criminals of the scientific world. They claim that Einstein and Da Vinci and Newton were free thinkers like them, but those men actually learned science and math first before they challenged the concepts of the day.

 

"I've talked to thousands of scientists and they all reject my ideas. It must be them that's wrong, because even though I never spent the time to learn what they did, I somehow know that I am right! All of THEM are clueless assholes!" cries the wizard.

 

Free thinkers? Meh, you get what you pay for.

[CaptainPanic]

Phi, I agree with almost all your post, except this bit:

[...], but [Einstein and Da Vinci and Newton] actually learned science and math first before they challenged the concepts of the day.

They probably challenged the concepts all the time, but that only led to something good when they actually learned science and math.

 

Regarding the OP:

It's sad when someone doesn't want to work with the "pack". The "pack" isn't evil, and doesn't pollute the mind. All by yourself, being a "wizard", you're quite unlikely to ever get anywhere:

 

1. You need to be challenged to be able to develop yourself. And you need someone else to challenge you.

2. Unless you want to develop your work alone, and just keep it for yourself, you need to speak the language of the "pack" anyway (the "pack" isn't gonna adapt to your language). And that language happens to be math, and it's written in the textbooks that will apparently brainwash you into a "pack mind".

 

Pack minds can communicate to other pack minds. Wizards cannot communicate to pack minds (and pack minds often cannot communicate to wizards either). But it's very important to know that wizards cannot communicate among themselves either. They are just alone with their theory... and nobody else understands it. And as soon as there are other people that understand it and give feedback, they are forming their own "pack"... and that will be the end of the wizard.

 

So, it's a bit of a problem there: either you will be misunderstood forever because you don't speak the same scientific language as everyone else, or you get a "pack mind".

[ScottTheSculptor]

the thing about the pack mind . . .

 

 

 

You judge others

 

you determine the status of an individual before *bothering* to look at their ideas.

You accept statements from those with credentials with no question. If the higher ranked individual says that it is so then everything is right with the world.

Anyone outside the pack is "evil".

 

With that said; the pack has evolutionary advantage.

 

The single mindeness of the mob will accomplish all goals. This is "human". Get a bunch of them thinking the same way and you can build pyramids, send a man to the moon, destroy the environment.

 

 

 

All children are wizards. they learn at a fantastic rate. they do not judge the value of information based on the color of the source.

 

Even without evidence it is logical that some children would stay in that mode longer.

 

 

 

 

 

The pack controls education. the pack excludes any that do not conform with the pack.

 

 

The greatest thinkers were not of the pack.

How is that lazy and evil?

[mississippichem]

My teachers often encouraged questioning of authority by requiring that we work proof or "show that [insert equation here]" problems.

[Phi for All]

We'll never change each other's minds, ScottTheSculptor. This is one of those areas that people like you can't comprehend, because you have convinced yourself that your way is best and that your way is the only one that promotes "free thinking".

 

But you come into a place we've set up to share ideas with our peers (you're probably calling it "the den"). We have witnessed how profound and powerful this sharing is, and how it requires us all to speak the same language in order to be more than individuals. We're trying to add to the mountain of amassed human knowledge here by building on what has been built before and you're trying to tell us to ignore all that, tear it down and listen to a bunch of individuals who all have different plans in different languages, few of which can stand a little constructive criticism.

 

It seems to you like your ideas are rejected outright, but that's not the way it is, not really. If an architect came to me and wanted to show me a design that was based on a flawed foundation, I would point out the foundational flaws and tell him to fix them before I look at another page. He may scream that I rejected his design outright (like you have), but it would waste both of our time to look further than that. If there is even a slight chance that building will fall over because of the foundation, no matter how elegant the rest of the design is, I am not going to bother.

 

Does that sound callous? If I continued to waste both our time and look the whole plan over, wouldn't I still come back to the beginning and say, "Gee ScotttheArchitect, it's a really elegant design and you sure have some untrapped wizard ideas, but I just can't trust it because of these flaws in the foundation. Fix those and then see if your ideas will still work and then bring it back to me!" Please, please, PLEASE tell me that makes sense to you.

[TonyMcC]

Unfortunately I have a couple of wizards among the younger members of my family. I say "unfortunately" because no one will employ them.

[CaptainPanic]

the thing about the pack mind . . .

 

You judge others

 

you determine the status of an individual before *bothering* to look at their ideas.

You accept statements from those with credentials with no question. If the higher ranked individual says that it is so then everything is right with the world.

Anyone outside the pack is "evil".

Really?

 

It sounds like you're judging others too!

 

I just explained you (in my previous post) what's going wrong with the communication between the 'wizards' and the 'pack minded people'... and it seems you completely ignored that (did you bother to look at that idea?).

[ScottTheSculptor]

We'll never change each other's minds, ScottTheSculptor. This is one of those areas that people like you can't comprehend, because you have convinced yourself that your way is best and that your way is the only one that promotes "free thinking".

 

But you come into a place we've set up to share ideas with our peers (you're probably calling it "the den"). We have witnessed how profound and powerful this sharing is, and how it requires us all to speak the same language in order to be more than individuals. We're trying to add to the mountain of amassed human knowledge here by building on what has been built before and you're trying to tell us to ignore all that, tear it down and listen to a bunch of individuals who all have different plans in different languages, few of which can stand a little constructive criticism.

 

It seems to you like your ideas are rejected outright, but that's not the way it is, not really. If an architect came to me and wanted to show me a design that was based on a flawed foundation, I would point out the foundational flaws and tell him to fix them before I look at another page. He may scream that I rejected his design outright (like you have), but it would waste both of our time to look further than that. If there is even a slight chance that building will fall over because of the foundation, no matter how elegant the rest of the design is, I am not going to bother.

 

Does that sound callous? If I continued to waste both our time and look the whole plan over, wouldn't I still come back to the beginning and say, "Gee ScotttheArchitect, it's a really elegant design and you sure have some untrapped wizard ideas, but I just can't trust it because of these flaws in the foundation. Fix those and then see if your ideas will still work and then bring it back to me!" Please, please, PLEASE tell me that makes sense to you.

 

more pack mind. I didn't show the sectret symbols? No math means stupidity?

 

 

therefore ideas are not even considered.

 

You made up your mind far before coming up with "if I continued to waste . . ."

 

 

 

Science is supposed to be about the ideas - you pontificate about how people should *act*. use our math on that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joining with the pack and calling all outsiders "stupid, evil, wrong, "delusional" ? - yep, someone with a advanced degree.

 

 

 

Erdos is a wizard

[Phi for All]

Except for the observable fact that everything we have today we got from pooling our minds and talents and working together towards something more than just our individual ideas. As communication and travel advanced, so did our knowledge base. We grew as we communicated with each other, in common languages like math. Look at what we accomplished when we were just isolated tribes as opposed to now when we're an interconnected worldwide society.

 

You're looking at it all wrong. We're still individuals, with our individual thoughts. We're just smart enough to realize we have a vast well of knowledge we can tap into at will if we can just pull our heads out of our basements long enough to realize we need to speak the same language to be understood.

 

I think you've just come up with a different language and you're pissed that people don't want to speak it with you. You call us a "pack" and claim we're snubbing you, but it's really just that we've all spent a lot of time learning things in a way that works just great, and you come along with a new way that seems to be flawed and ask us to switch.

[mississippichem]

more pack mind. I didn't show the sectret symbols? No math means stupidity?

 

 

therefore ideas are not even considered.

 

You made up your mind far before coming up with "if I continued to waste . ..

 

There is no way you can know what someone else is or isn't considering. That is a very cheap and fallacious style of debate.

 

Its difficult to describe even simple concepts like velocity without mathematics. How fast is an object moving? Fast? Really Fast? Not that fast? Without a quantitative description, we can't even really define velocity, much less agree about how much an object has.

 

I also think that you are neglecting the fact that people who go against the "pack" are wrong much more often than right. By the way don't ask me for a statistic to prove my assertion because that would require the use of mathematics which would make us both members of the narrow minded pack of the establishment that actually require evidence to accept a claim.

[ScottTheSculptor]

Then please don't read my posts.

 

 

 

You made up your mind

 

You b"believe" in gravity, spacetime, neutrons, fusion, antimatter.

But they are all false.

 

And you don't even attempt to understand.

[mississippichem]

Then please don't read my posts.

 

 

 

You made up your mind

 

You b"believe" in gravity, spacetime, neutrons, fusion, antimatter.

But they are all false.

 

And you don't even attempt to understand.

 

Did you even read my post? Well argued.

[Ringer]

Erdos is a wizard

 

Are you talking about Paul Erdos, the mathematician?

[Phi for All]

Are you talking about Paul Erdos, the mathematician?

No way. Paul Erdős' Wikipedia entry starts off saying, "Erdős published more papers than any other mathematician in history, working with hundreds of collaborators;" That doesn't sound like what ScotttheSculptor is talking about.

[Ringer]

That's why I asked. It's the only Erdos I am aware of and I couldn't understand why he would be talking trash about math and then pull out the most prolific mathematician ever.

[Daedalus]

I think this thread is insulting to actual wizards. Let me explain... A wizard in the traditional sense, actually studies physical phenomena and learns / shares their information with other wizards. They exploit their knowledge of the universe to create wonderful devices and perform amazing feats, which to the average person seems to be magical.

 

I think the movie, "The Prestige", puts it best with the magician's explanation of Nichola Tesla in that he is a true wizard. The magician can only trick the audience into believing that they know something about the world, and they hoard their knowledge so that others won't be able to expose them as frauds. But a true wizard needs no illusion, because they know mathematics and the laws of nature which makes them truly powerful and awesome.

 

A wizard is simply any individual that has failed the to transition from chilhood learning mode into the "pack mind" of a normal human adult.

It is my belief that you are confusing wizards with magicians. Mainly because it is the magicians of the world who have failed the transition from the chilhood learning mode. This is clearly demonstrated in how a magician covets their illusions and tries to trick their audience instead of mastering nature and accomplishing truly amazing tasks.

Edited October 2, 2011 by Daedalus

[Fuzzwood]

Then please don't read my posts.

 

 

 

You made up your mind

 

You b"believe" in gravity, spacetime, neutrons, fusion, antimatter.

But they are all false.

 

And you don't even attempt to understand.

 

Prove it.

[swansont]

Then please don't read my posts.

 

 

 

You made up your mind

 

You b"believe" in gravity, spacetime, neutrons, fusion, antimatter.

But they are all false.

 

And you don't even attempt to understand.

!

Moderator Note

 

SFN Rule #1 tells you not to attack people; attack the argument. Present your idea and defend it on its merits. Not by name-calling. If you wish to challenge accepted science, present evidence. That's the primary rule of speculations. So start following the rules.

 

Do not derail the thread further by responding to this warning

[ScottTheSculptor]

So.

 

 

 

I say that the greatest scientist in history are wizards.

 

 

 

That they are not pack mind.

That they have no ego.

 

 

And the pack mind of science decides that I am anti math.

 

 

 

If you would dare read my posts you would find that my mathematical knowledge eclipses most in this forum.

 

 

 

Math is not reality.

 

that doesn't mean that I think that it is "evil".

 

(evil is a pack mind construct)

 

 

 

Please *attempt* to argue the idea instead of attacking me or blaming me for imagined attacks.

[uncool]

If you would dare read my posts you would find that my mathematical knowledge eclipses most in this forum.

 

I have read your posts, and I have found no such thing anywhere.

Math is not reality.

No, but it models reality surprisingly well.

that doesn't mean that I think that it is "evil".

 

(evil is a pack mind construct)

 

 

 

Please *attempt* to argue the idea instead of attacking me or blaming me for imagined attacks.

That is exactly what people have been doing here. You have only evaded their arguments.

 

For example: what evidence do you have that the people you named are "wizards", and that they were as you say they were?

=Uncool-

[Phi for All]

I say that the greatest scientist in history are wizards.

 

 

 

That they are not pack mind.

That they have no ego.

This is an extraordinary statement that requires evidence. How can a human have no ego?

 

 

If you would dare read my posts you would find that my mathematical knowledge eclipses most in this forum.

This is demonstrably untrue. People who have read your posts find your math lacking. Are you talking about established math or some kind of wizard math?

 

 

Math is not reality.

 

that doesn't mean that I think that it is "evil".

 

(evil is a pack mind construct)

For a "pack mind construct", you seem to be the only person using the term. What does that say about your mind?