File: the truth.png (275 KB, 1280x720)

275 KB PNG

>>16973407
No, but this is. Lol.

>>16973407
Left: OP
Middle: Person that doesn't exist
Right: Person that doesn't exist

>>16973407
It's cope; "midwit" opinions are simply high-IQ + often incorrect, meanwhile the "based" opinions are just low-IQ and sometimes right. I don't think there's been any research on SD differences between people with conservative/rw and liberal/lw opinions though.

>>16973407
Obviously. It has to be. Imagine if you had to analytically justify all the instincts and "common sense" intuitions you utilize every waking moment to function in the world, instead of taking their utility for granted. Think about the sheer number of factors involved in every heuristic you intuitively apply, how they have to be weighed carefully for it to be generally useful in life, which makes them seem sub-optimal in many specific cases.

Dimwits don't reflect on what drives them at all. Midwits reflect only as far as current intellectual fashion calls for it, selectively dismissing the "irrational" behaviors their spiritual leaders single out and calling it "critical thinking". It takes a top wit to start unraveling the reasons behind human behavior, and a good degree of understanding to rid yourself of the hubris of wanting to interfere with it.

>>16973407
If you have to ask, I've bad news for you.

File: Diseased+wet+thorough_ed7(...).jpg (90 KB, 900x966)

90 KB JPG

>>16973407
I've said it before...
That meme was always a psyop forced meme, created to legitimize and empower retards.
When retards are given a voice, misinformation and disinformation gets exponentially more believers and spreaders. When retards' voice is amplified, they become more popular because it's heard everywhere. When retardation becomes the norm, corruption thrives and civilizations fall to their knees. See the Roman empire.

>>16974074
>misinformation and disinformation
Didn't they train you not to use the terms from the internal pamphlets out in the field?

>>16974047
>survery based on "being right"
>inconsistent results
Weird.

The older i get the more i consider this to b true, n i consider myself to be a born midwit (my dad is also probably a midwit or perhaps closer to a highwit) who has slowly transformed himself into a retard as he grows older

I wouldn't say it's "true," but it touches on something valid.
There's a tendency for people who are fairly new to a field to get lost in the theory and overcomplicate things.

The "low IQ" guy in the meme is reacting intuitively to what he sees in front of his own eyes. The "high IQ" guy has the expertise to validate those intuitions. The "midwit" has sufficient knowledge to recognize the shortcomings of relying on intuition alone, but in his rigid adherence to a theoretical framework he doesn't fully understand he comes to conclusions that appear nonsensical to the beginner and misguided to the expert.

Most of the time, though, this meme format is just used as an excuse to justify one's own ignorance.

>>16974843
>Most of the time, though, this meme format is just used as an excuse to justify one's own ignorance.
That's true. And you want to invalidate it because you're actually still the middle wojak.

>>16974845
>this meme touches on something valid
>wahh! You're a midwit invalidating my meme!

>>16974853
>can't into basic reading comprehension

File: 1760685733388672.png (69 KB, 3000x1950)

69 KB PNG

>>16974047
>I don't think there's been any research on SD differences between people with conservative/rw and liberal/lw opinions though
https://gssdataexplorer.norc.org/home

>>16975035
More than just an average (which tells you basically nothing) I am more interested in the distribution of IQ based on political belief, because something tells me it's not a normal distribution

Being political at all is low IQ anyway. You should always judge individual ideas, not whether team A or team B is correct. It's impossible for two most major, and therefore corrupt, political parties to be unironically supported by anybody intelligent.

>>16974843
So essentially a Dunning-Kruger effect is your hypothesis?
Probably correct, as most people have some knowledge of most topics, yet almost none have actual expert knowledge (even if they believe to have it).

>>16975434
>You should always judge individual ideas
Your current IQ cap is 115.

>not whether team A or team B is correct
Your current IQ cap is 100.

>It's impossible for two most major, and therefore corrupt, political parties to be unironically supported by anybody intelligent.
Your current IQ cap is 90.

>>16975437
You're an indian.
Your current IQ cap is at 75.

>>16975439
Mentally ill and projecting. Blows my mind that there still exist imbeciles who will shit out posts like >>16975434 without a hint of irony.

>>16975443
Amazing how you can tell another person they are projecting, when that is exactly what you are doing. Is projecting a fancy word to you that your learnt off 4chan yesterday?
Astounding to me is, cretins of your sort still exist thinking their epic greentext with IQ cap is somehow needed or adds anything substantial beside stroking your massive, fragile ego. Everybody sees it and frankly it's embarrassing. Just stop.

>>16975445
>low-IQ brown seething continues

>>16975453
Go back to India.

Hey can u faggots get the fuck out of my thread? Take ur india n iq obsession elsewhere

>>16975434
you realize not any collection of "individual ideas" makes a coherent policy, right? and what difference does it make how you judge "individual ideas" when you don't get to make any decisions on that level of granularity and wouldn't be under any realistic system?

>>16975456
It's so obvious you're a self-hating jeet it's not even funny.

>>16975459
If at any point you're capable of seriously describing yourself as "democrat" or "republican" then you're just retarded.
If you voted one or another because you thought one political party (from the only choices you've been given) is more optimal, that's different.

A fact you can't make this simple distinction (hypothetical assumption) makes you incapable of further discussion.

>>16975460
>not even funny!!!
Stop projecting you fucking retard, seriously. You even started calling me brown for no reason after i obviously called out your jeet tier chimpout.
If you are not indian, you're one definitely IQ tier, either way consider suicide.

There's a secret fourth category to the right of the monk that agrees with the midwit.

>>16975463
i don't see the words "democrat" or "republican" anywhere in my post. try again?

>>16975467
You're not following the discussion then. Trace it back to the image I've replied to. Either way my post answered it regardless.

>>16975470
i'm discussing a claim you made, specifically:
>You should always judge individual ideas
are you having trouble following?

>>16975459
The brown insect doesn't realize anything, it's just shitting out whatever asinine rhetoric it picked up from its favorite YT "intellectual". Whatever made you think it has the capacity to grasp and address your point?

>>16975459
So you claim that you can't judge individual (political) ideas because political parties exist where you have to vote?
Don't you think that's... retarded?

>>16975478
>So you claim that you can't judge individual (political) ideas
quote the part of my post that claims this

>>16975479
>what difference does it make how you judge "individual ideas" when you don't get to make any decisions on that level of granularity and wouldn't be under any realistic system?
This seems to imply that since there's no difference between judging an individual idea and actual practical application of it, we should not judge individual ideas ie. existence of political parties in modern representative democracies invalidate abstract political ideas due to their realistic uselessness.

Otherwise, what point is there to making that post beside a snarky remark? I fail to see the point otherwise.

>>16975481
>This seems to imply that since there's no difference between judging an individual idea and actual practical application of it ...
this doesn't even make sense

>we should not judge individual ideas
it doesn't say or imply anything about what you should or shouldn't do. try again?

>>16975482
If you're not even going to try to reformulate, you're not engaging in any discussion whatsoever. You have not even answered my simple question.

I've given you to the benefit of the doubt and I got none back, so go fuck yourself.

>>16975483
why would i reformulate it? there's nothing wrong with that question. it's challenging you to explain what "judging individual ideas" has to do with running a society and it's obvious that you don't know

>>16975484
And why would I engage discussion with a snarky retard who can't distinguish between a political idea and what party he can vote for?

>>16975035
Pretty funny how your chart shows "independent" voters to have a lower intelligence than either Democrats and Republicans, and the next thing that happens is one of those "independents" fails to read the chart, acts smug and gets dunked on by everyone else in the thread.

>>16975487
if you can't even explain and justify your own ideas what makes you think you're in any position to judge anyone else's? kek

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY THREAD. GO TO FUCKING POL 4 UR POLITICAL SHITE! GODDAMN RUINING 1 ENTIRE BOARD IS NOT ENOUGH U GOTTA RUIN EVERY FUCKING THREAD WITH UR BULLSHIT TOO. GET THE FUCK OUT!!!!!!!!

>>16975492
It's genuinely funny how they spew most basic 89IQ political shit as well, trying to do a drumpf or democrat blowjob on demand.
What the fuck are those tards doing here?

>>16975484
>it's challenging you to explain what "judging individual ideas" has to do with running a society
NT(retarded)A but I challenge you to explain what dumb monkeys having opinions about things has to do with running a society in general.

>>16975489
>the next thing that happens is one of those "independents" fails to read the chart, acts smug and gets dunked on by everyone else in the thread.
now, now. he wouldn't associate himself with such a label. he's so independent he would tear the poll into shreds in protest

>>16975498
Same way he tore his IQ test results when he saw it's 95. His mind is too independent to be nailed down by any metric.

>>16975496
>I challenge you to explain what dumb monkeys having opinions about things has to do with running a society in general.
how should i know? it's his premise so ask him. just be sure you formulate the question like you're talking to a 5 years old

>>16975459
>you realize not any collection of "individual ideas" makes a coherent policy, right?
And how is that relevant to the post at hand? Nobody talked about policy, nor is it relevant here?
Reminds me of the study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-05195-y
Which shows that individuals high in psychopathy, narcissism and low cognitive ability are the most politically active online. So OP is right in saying that, "being political is low IQ", as that statement is closer to the truth than the opposite.

> and what difference does it make how you judge "individual ideas" when you don't get to make any decisions on that level of granularity and wouldn't be under any realistic system?
>why discuss abstract ideas or better poltiical systems when we can just vote democraft or republicoon bro
HAHAHA back to /pol/ retard.

Moreover, political parties are corrupt to the core, as stated (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B). Although that's by design in the current political system.
Low IQ galore on /sci/ today, damn.

>>16975508
>And how is that relevant to the post at hand?
because presumably you want some kind of organization that actually does things based on your ideas? but an organization can't just run on your wish list, it needs coherent organizing principles

>>16975509
Nobody talked about organizing anything, running society or anything of that sort you drooling fucking retard.
Literally creates strawmen inside his head and fights them.

>>16975511
>brown insect still losing his mind with incoherent rage

>>16975509
Where do you even find the patience for subhumans like this?

>>16975511
>Nobody talked about organizing anything, running society or anything of that sort
then why were you moaning about democrats, republicans, politics etc? are you ok, anon?

>>16973407
No it isn’t

For crypto it is tho lol

>>16975516
Because you brought policy and its practical consequences? Again, nobody talked about this until you brought it up. Are you ok?

>>16975534
that's a lie, though... or maybe you're actually disabled and don't remember how this exchange started?

>>16975535
>coherent policy
Straight from your post, mate.
You are doing mental gymnastics of a schizo.

>>16975535
>arguing with mentally ill insects

File: 347ixne9ckkf1.jpg (133 KB, 1487x2000)

133 KB JPG

>>16975537
Be careful with calling yourself like that, it's not good for your mental health.

>>16975537
yeah, i think i'm starting to see your point

>>16975436
>Dunning-Kruger
The Dunning-Kruger effect has already been deboonked, however.
If you're in the 25%, then it's unlikely that you will underestimate your ability and vice versa.

You can replicate the Dunning-Kruger effect with random data, btw.

"My colleague Ed Nuhfer and his team gave students a 25-question scientific literacy test. After answering each question, the students would rate their own performance on each question as either “nailed it,” “not sure” or “no idea.”

Working with Nuhfer, we found that unskilled students are pretty good at estimating their own competence. In this study of unskilled students who scored in the bottom quarter, only 16.5% significantly overestimated their abilities. And, it turns out, 3.9% significantly underestimated their score. That means nearly 80% of unskilled students were fairly good at estimating their real ability – a far cry from the idea put forth by Dunning and Kruger that the unskilled consistently overestimate their skills."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-dunning-kruger-effect-isnt-what-you-think-it-is/

>>16974053
Kek this

>>16975578
I can see sample bias being a huge deal here.
We'd need bigger studies to confirm or deny this.

For now, I will be looking at Dunning Krugger effect with much higher scrutiny.

>>16975578
>his team gave students a 25-question scientific literacy test.
Yeah, well. Try it with History or Politics or Philosophy or something. Or do this test on /sci/.

>>16975436
I wouldn't even call it a D-K thing. The progression I'm talking about is more like this.
>simple problem; simple solution.
>b-but it's more complicated than that! There's equations and shit!
>but sometimes it really is that simple.

It's why the classic "is it plugged in?" is always the first question tech support asks. Everyone knows your device needs power to function. But it's always good to double check that your problem isn't a simple lapse in judgment before ripping your device apart trying to diagnose a more complex issue.

>>16973407
It can sort of be true in instances where a seemingly counterintuitive conclusion is actually correct. stopped clock and all, you know.

>>16976081
Spoken like a true midwit, whose intuition is always wrong. So he thinks being right must b "counter intutitive".

>>16973407
not as a rule. but it's often the case.
the chart moreso conveys how midwits can often be closed-minded or are not truly truth-seeking.

>>16974053
What is the last one?

>>16976371
If I'm interpreting it correctly, it's indicating that high IQ people tend to think a much larger portion of the population are high IQ, either because of who they surround themselves with, or because they assume that everyone else can think like them, and therefore overestimate the general population's intelligence.

>>16976091
>reading comprehension

>>16976570
His reading comprehension is fine, I don't think you understand the point he was making (or what the meme is saying).
The whole point of the meme is that it's the midwit giving the unintuitive answer on a more "well-informed" theoretical basis. The left and right tails are explicitly providing the answer that most people would find "intuitive" which is why even the low IQ guy can understand it.

He's calling you a midwit for finding the midwit pseudery more intuitive than the obvious answer.

>>16973407
sometimes

>>16973435
this

>>16978021
im the highest iq person in the world and i agree

>>16976673
>>16976570
>>16975578
>>16975541
>>16975511
>>16975494
>>16975492
>>16975478
>>16975460
awww shieet nigga

>>16973407
No because IQ is eugenicist rubbish. No formulation of IQ has been able to find the quanta of intelligence which can be rated, all they can rely on is giving tests which require mastery of certain concepts, like any other skill, to take and therefore can be learned. It does make for very convenient fantasies like this one, though:

>>16974064
> Dimwits don't reflect on what drives them at all. Midwits reflect only as far as current intellectual fashion calls for it, selectively dismissing the "irrational" behaviors their spiritual leaders single out and calling it "critical thinking". It takes a top wit to start unraveling the reasons behind human behavior, and a good degree of understanding to rid yourself of the hubris of wanting to interfere with it.

This is just some off-topic screed about authority and sheeple. Of course they are definitely not a sheep despite repeating a formula that has been repeated by a million insufferable people like themselves. But they have an IQ so I'm sure they're the real free thinkers here.

>>16973407
Is what actually true?

People use this image and put the correct thing on the ends, if that's what you're asking about, it depends on the thing. Say we're talking about NASCAR, you could argue adding electric cars is a midtake and fuck electric is a dumb/smart take. You could also say NASCAR as a whole is stupid

>>16978791
iq is real retard go teach a nigger statistics and see if they understand it


most niggers cant even learn perfect squares because their WMI is too low

>>16975439
lmaoooo fpbp

>>16975035
this is fake data, the average iq or g isnt even 100 its more like 65 and FSIQ is 20 points lower so everyone is retarded as shit

>>16975443
what caste are you hindpoofgt?


> t jutt w 6.5 incher and fair skin 130 g

>>16976673
are you dumb? Do you not understand the bell curve and that the middle is the average "vast majority"? The majority do not come up with the counterintuitive answer.
the majority would get it wrong if common sense intuition leads to the wrong conclusion. the retarded end of the bell curve gets it right because they have no common sense to lead them to the wrong conclusion, and the genius end of the bell curve gets it right because genius.

>>16979150
>The majority do not come up with the counterintuitive answer.
Ok, now where does his post say they do? You're not even a midwit, you're outright a brown jeet.

>>16979150
Most people within 1 SD of the middle go to school and receive basic education regarding underlying theory. They see headlines of popsci news articles and veritasium-level youtube videos. So yes, people in the mid-range of intelligence are absolutely inundated with content along the lines of "ackchually, your common sense is wrong about [thing]."

Cletus the inbred potato farmer hears your fancy-schmancy math speak and says "that's retarded. Just look at the damn thing!"
Meanwhile the expert understands the limitations of the theory the midwit is applying (or at least the midwit's grasp of said theory) and says "you're missing the forest for the trees. Just look at the damn thing."

>>16976081
>in instances where a seemingly counterintuitive conclusion is actually correct.
no you fucking mouth breather it's the exact opposite. the whole point of the meme is that retards and smart people see obvious things for what they are while midwit golems like you fall for any pilpul that sounds clever and authoritative enough

File: 1768452671115077.jpg (61 KB, 600x407)

61 KB JPG

>>16979159
>>16979247

>>16979282
Why are you pointing me to the post where he spells out the obvious for your benefit? Midwits will spout counterintuitive takes BECAUSE they never would have come up with them on their own and associate them with higher intelligence.

>>16979261
that's a rather specific autistic interpretation, I understand you want your brilliance and insight validated and that everyone else is retarded, so good job champ, you won the argument! carry on.

>>16979286
He's right, though. His interpretation is the normal one and you're extremely retarded.

File: isthistrue.png (369 KB, 1600x900)

369 KB PNG

I always imagined it more like this

>>16979319
Vox Day who coined the "midwit" meme would agree.
The midwit isn't 98 IQ or even 102. Those are the people doing roofing who more-or-less know they're average and don't push it (except for blacks, because 100 IQ blacks think they're geniuses, living among... other blacks as they do).
The midwit is 115 IQ. Went to college. Got the liberal-arts degree. Maybe even a Masters.

>>16979330
as a midwit, i think the meme is more accurate because things are much more complicated now than 100 years ago, meaning you have to be much smarter to be averagly informed.

>>16979319
with any luck if you're here you never encounter any of the actual bottom 50% of the population so your impression of the middle is skewed and that's what the meme reflects.

File: midwit.png (287 KB, 1280x728)

287 KB PNG

Realistically, this is what people posting this shit really mean.

>>16978791
>eugenicist rubbish
Not an argument.
>No formulation of IQ has been able to find the quanta of intelligence
Irrelevant "criticism" that can be used on all fields that exist (e.g. "You haven't found the 'quanta' of athleticism reee!!!")
>all they can rely on is giving tests which require mastery of certain concepts, like any other skill
Like reacting fast? Elementary cognitive tasks have a g-loading of >.7 and have an extremely weak or nonexistent retest effect.

>>16979104
This is for American Whites. Can't you read a graph?

>>16979625
Reading is for low IQ nerds, imagine seeing funny little symbols on a screen and letting them think for you

Sth i notice abt midwits is that theyre very quick to dismiss feelings, or things that r hard to describe with languages. Perhaps this is why they lack so much in creativity. They love numbers n data n statistics n shit like that.
They also tend to readily believe whatevers written in books n such without question. Ive argued many times with these kind of ppl over sth that 4 me clearly makes little sense but they will not change their mind simply because the book says so.

>>16974845
It's over! He drew me as the modwit wojak, and him as the highest wojak

File: c8Kr4xSM.gif (20 KB, 470x470)

20 KB GIF

>>16975437
>This anon believes that thinking for yourself and not falling for groupthink is low IQ behavior.

>>16975484
>it's challenging you to explain what "judging individual ideas" has to do with running a society
That anon didn't make any claim about running a society; you are just arguing in bad faith.

>>16982215
i see it really mindbroke you. be sure to check in again in a week

>>16973407
Most of the people that create bell curve memes are on the left side, not the right. One of the shittiest forced memes to plague this site.

>>16982383
Troll trolling a troll

>>16982383
>Most of the people that create bell curve memes are on the left side, not the right
Maybe. But their central point is that you're in the middle and they're right about that.

>>16982213
Thinking "both sides are le bad," or at least treating that statement as anything more than a vapid truism, is low IQ behavior.
Thinking "vague alignment with a party" implies "complete partisan loyalty" is full-blown retard shit.

>>16982451
Both sides are le bad, though. It's not a vapid truism because it's possible for one or both sides to not be le bad, but all the empirical evidence suggests that both sides are le bad.

>16979397
>the schizo is now self-inserting as a giga chad iq
lmao

>>16982452
Well first off, there's no such thing as "empirical evidence" for a normative claim. That's just not how that works.
Apart from that, it is a truism in the sense that it's a banal cliche. Everyone who wants to sound smart has said something to the tune of "both sides are bad" before. It's such an oft-repeated mantra that it has become a manifestation of groupthink in its own right.

One of the two sides more closely corresponds to your values than the other. It is a statistical inevitability. Even if you think the parties are shit overall, the pragmatic thing to do is tentatively support the least bad one if it's something you claim to care about at all. Assignimg the best-fit label to yourself only means changing your opinions about any particular issue if you're retarded.

>>16982414
The "wise dimwit" may have existed historically but bnit anymore. In America dumb or poor people have terrible heuristics for determining how they should live their life. They're more likely to eat fast food, not exercise, watch TV or scroll on their phone all day, drink too much alcohol or do drugs, get involved with violent crime, get addicted to porn. You can tell these boards are filled with sheltered college kids because nobody has ever interacted with actual dumb people before. These people are not noble savages.

>>16982509
The point of the meme isn't that "dumb people are smart." Ofc the midwit is going to agree with the genius more often than the moron will.
The format is to point out specific cases where the convoluted answer the midwit would give ends up being less accurate than the simple answer an idiot could give. At least according to the poster.

>>16982462
>there's no such thing as "empirical evidence" for a normative claim.
Stopped reading because you're obviously a moron.

>>16982509
>They're more likely to eat fast food, not exercise, watch TV or scroll on their phone all day, drink too much alcohol or do drugs, get involved with violent crime, get addicted to porn.
Yeah, almost like there are downsides to acting instinctively and not only advantages. You live under a system that has a poison for everyone. For the midwit that poison is """public intellectualism""". For a fuckwit, it's Coca Cola and Facebook.

>>16982536
>the mental patient thinks "good" and "bad" are observable phenomena.

>>16982543
>let me tell you what imaginary characters in my head think
Guess there's something else wrong with you besides being a moron.

>>16982548
>astounded by the 100+ IQ ability to extrapolate and make 1:1 logical inferences

@16982585
>t. obviously psychotic retard

>>16982536
He's either trolling you or he's an actual retard trying to impersonate a midwit but pulling out the talking point out of context.

>absolutely mindbroken

>>16982462
>there's no such thing as "empirical evidence" for a normative claim.

Considering that you need some sense-data to use logic, if normative claims originate from logic, then normative claims require sense-data (i.e. they're empirically derived.)

File: brainlet04.jpg (45 KB, 800x450)

45 KB JPG

>>16983835
>requiring something means it's derived from that thing

>>16983835
>replying to mentally ill subwits unironically

Bump

File: image (21).jpg (152 KB, 880x1168)

152 KB JPG

>>16975437
Retarded takes, but I appreciate the form, 7/10

>>16987201
>Retarded takes
And yet you can't show anything wrong with them. Curious.

>>16987208
>don't = can't

>>16987213
Highly correlated with brainlets like (You). Just like you can't stop replying.

>>16979330
I'm a midwit with a PhD and I agree with this

>>16987214
I can, I just don't

File: midlands.png (141 KB, 512x381)

141 KB PNG

>>16979330
Illustrated for your comfort.

Intelligence creates suffering, depression, anxiety, angst, and thinking you're smarter than others. It leads to worrying about a future you can't predict, cringing about a past you can't change, while missing out on a present you can't get back. No thank you. I prefer to be dumb.

>>16988400
What a dumb thing to believe. Hope you're happy.

Being a tard is awesome bro, you should try it some time. No worries, no cares, just joy. Not having the mental machinery to make misery is marvelous. Try a DIY lobotomy today.

File: beer.png (424 KB, 640x426)

424 KB PNG

>>16973407
Its more like:
>a true retard is simply to stupid to dogmatically believe something unquestingly.
>lower midwit: will believe some religous dogma or new age crap unquestingly.
>higher midwit: will believe scientism or some philosophy unquestioningly.
>Genius: its too fucking smart and curious to ridgedly believe one narrative.

>>16988395
liberals arent midwits they are 50-60 FSIQ and cant comprehend actual data they are usually the white night anti racists that dont want anything to do with racism at all basically theyll have a savior complex kiss nigger feet and shieet

>>16988400
I feel the exact opposite of this. I'm smart enough to know that everything is fucked, so I'm entirely focused of enjoying what I can now and not worrying about shit I can no longer fix, instead of getting caught up in that shit.

>>16973407
Yes

>>16991303

Not everything is fucked in the universe, there are still some pristine things which are not tainted. For example, you probably don't get fucked very often.

>>16990487
>white night

>>16990487
this is the most ironic post i've ever read on 4chan. it'd be funny if it were active trolling, yet you were serious, albeit hyperbolic.

>>16991423
sybau nigga

>>16973407
i keep encountering it so yeah.

File: absurdism.jpg (160 KB, 1199x1124)

160 KB JPG

This is a reminder that there is an incredibly stupid person living in a gigantic mansion somewhere out there in the world right now, and you’re not. That’s just how the world works. There’s nothing you can do about it.
The sooner you realise this, the sooner you can see this Earth for what it is, a prison.

So everyone just reacting to comments and it has no path for conclusion. Now thats retarded or whatever you trendfags tend to sound like

File: culture war as a facade 1(...).png (1.04 MB, 800x2000)

1.04 MB PNG

>>16974074
your post reminded me of this

>>16993148
Let me guess, the reason that this image is wholly dedicated to the right-wing isn't that the image-maker's politics are anti-right-wing, it's because individuals on the right-wing are the only ones who engage in this behavior. Am I right?

>>16974074
>picrel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-391URcYL7s

Kinda. It's Geniuses and midwits see things pretty simply and sometimes come to the same conclusion. Where the people in the upper middle, IE = 4Chan assume they are on some god tier level and have to explain things using big words and stuff. You rarely hear a quote from a genius that isn't simple unless they are talking about their field of expertise.