Whoa, a post! Do we still do those around here?
Melon-backs have the highest general intelligence, as in g. They can be expected to perform better than other types at whatever task they set their minds to, with two notable exceptions: 1) creativity, and 2) detailed simulation. I mean proper creativity here, which encapsulates aesthetic modes like Lord of the Rings, as opposed to highly intellectualized creative endeavors like Elective Affinities. Melon-back intelligence is characterized by intentionality and conscientious pursuit.
When I say “game-like activity”, I mean a game according to game theory or some endeavor that is heavily influenced by factors that can be analyzed by game theory:
The games studied in game theory are well-defined mathematical objects. To be fully defined, a game must specify the following elements: the players of the game, the information and actions available to each player at each decision point, and the payoffs for each outcome.
Game theory
Wikipedia
That means economics, law, politics, algebraic mathematics, and some bits of psychology that are useful for manipulation and propaganda. Dynamic systems of rational give-and-take.
The M-back contribution to general intelligence is primarily due to discernment:
Discernment: Time rate of type creation from drawing similarities from many different memories.
Melon-backs can receive huge boosts to their intelligence through extensive reading, training in mathematics, and writing, because this forces them to practice formalizing and acknowledging the types that they naturally acquire rapidly.
The actual thought process is best described by an M-back here:
Thought is an instantaneous explosion of branching worldlines, and the non-viable ones are immediately apparent. It takes almost no effort to understand why a worldline fails, but it takes immense effort rigorously to explain that, even to myself.
Writing about anything that comes from that direction is difficult for me. Partly because those thoughts aren’t represented in words. Those thoughts use densely interconnected graphs of ideas, which may themselves be graphs. No idea what the primitive graph nodes are.
automatthew
Comment thread: The Excluded
Typically an M-back will create heuristics over time, which shortcuts this process. For instance, the best way to be in control of a group of more than 20 people is to be the biggest, the loudest, and slightly elevated over the crowd. These factors being generally the most important for crowd control, the M-back will seek to maximize them without bothering to run the game theory simulation engine (assuming that being in charge is their optimum outcome, of course).
“Life is a game”, said every sociopath, ever. This is true in an R-selected world full of people and resources. It is not true when it is 50 degrees below zero and you have exactly one minute to start a fire. Insofar as the M-back person can absorb the rules of the game, they can optimize their outcomes within it. This is the sole reason MCs and MMs tend to outperform MTs in the social arena: the MTs do not quickly absorb the rules that aren’t formally and explicitly stated. By extension, it would be no surprise if Game were the product of so many MTs.
Most geniuses are MTs, although many MTs are not geniuses. Almost all TTs above a certain IQ threshold will be geniuses. A genius is a curious monstrosity where an intellectual’s brain (M-back) is grafted into the endogeneous personality of an artist (T-front, where deepsock = endogeneous). Geniuses have high intelligence (centering around IQ 160), extremely high internal motivation, and a slightly wider associative horizon than average (a “tincture of madness”).
Aeoli Pera 
Great post. I haven’t known a lot of melon backs (they’re not common in the general population), but the ones with some M-back influence (namely my best friend), appear to think more like strategic reductionists than myself or most people I know.
Not sure if my friend would be receptive to Edenism. He’d be quite skeptical to begin with, and it would be difficult to explain the merits of it to him. He’s MC-ish.
If you could show him an application where it was useful, and he believed it would be easy to learn, then he’d probably start asking questions.
Thanks. I think this observation was floating around in everybody’s minds already
@Laz,
Melon back, no filter.
“If you could show him an application where it was useful, and he believed it would be easy to learn, then he’d probably start asking questions.”
You could fib some kind of science bit about how “there’s a bunch of studies now showing that people with deep eye sockets are teh smart, in fact I saw a TED talk about it the other day about how nerds are really neanderthals blah blah blah”.
Ie:
1) Make it a non-hypothetical by placing authority figure semantics into the communication (croms lack the interest and appreciation for that sort of things whereas Thals thrive on semi-fictional realities)
2) Use social proof (TED talk)
3) Make it really easy to apply, narrow it down to 1-2 concepts (deep sockets, neanderthals are nerds), don’t make it a labyrinthine structure that requires psychotic mental digestion and paradigm construction
@Nottuh
I couldn’t get anywhere explaining Edenism to my bestest of best friends, who is an MC. He was like, ‘OK. Cool. Next.’ It simply wouldn’t grab him. (He’s a highish-IQ ambivert with a high-flying job in finance, with quite a bit of psychopathy; really warm and caring to the people he likes, and rather sadistic towards those he doesn’t.)
Perhaps the M back under the influence of the crom front is mainly concerned with computing how the new information can be of direct benefit.
Whereas with an MT, the thal front would immediately click with the new information on an emotional level. This would then influence the M back to compute “an instantaneous explosion of branching worldlines” (to quote ‘automatthew’), with a particular interest on finding true belonging in both a genetic spiritual sense (Koanic’s ‘angelic consciousness’) and an idealistic sense (MT honor drive, Koanic’s ‘New Sparta’).
MTs are also instinctively drawn to this stuff because MTs are grimdark as fuck.
>Perhaps the M back under the influence of the crom front is mainly concerned with computing how the new information can be of direct benefit.
Cranium predicts desires (ends), face predicts tactics (means). Melon-back has two primary desires, in order of precedence: 1) reality management, and 2) family (as in selfish gene).
Crom front means normalfag strategy for obtaining those desires.
>MTs are also instinctively drawn to this stuff because MTs are grimdark as fuck.
Truth.
@Aeoli My friend definitely seems to have Melon desires and normalfag tactics with regard to getting through life. I would say reality management and family (including friends) are his greatest desires in life. Unfortunately, I’d say the Crom front has made him a bit blue-pilled in certain respects.
>Cranium predicts desires (ends), face predicts tactics (means). Melon-back has two primary desires, in order of precedence: 1) reality management, and 2) family (as in selfish gene).
>Crom front means normalfag strategy for obtaining those desires.
Hey, wow, this is very true.
W.r.t. #2, My friend has this weird love-hate relationship with his dad where he lovingly coaxed him into doing therapy and spiritual retreats (meditation and stuff) together, but still gets pissed at his dad easily when the old man busts his chops. Dude really dotes on his younger sister and mom too.
W.r.t. #1, he had a bookshelf full of books on philosophy, history, and economics when we were both high school seniors. And also that time he jumped waaay deep into a life-coaching thing that was based around process therapy with a Jungian focus on working with psychological trauma incurred early in life. He did that life-coaching gig alongside his full-time job for a few years. He was BIG on managing reality to get the best look at the Big Picture. Once when we were shooting some heavy shit over a couple of beers, he confided in me that his new mantra in life was ‘ashes to ashes’ — live fully, no regrets. Definitely something an M-back would say.
But as you said, his strategies were crom-like. As an MT I felt very impatient and quickly disillusioned with many of the things he encouraged me to try (e.g. the life coaching thing), like the vibe was off.
@j Yeah, my friend is high IQ (probably 130-145 [way higher than me for sure]), and he’s ambiverted or mildly introverted. He’s not very ambitious in terms of earning money or achieving high status, but he definitely is concerned with seeing of how information is of direct benefit to him, like your friend is.
He is somewhat of an intellectual, but Edenism might not hold his interest. I might bring it up around him some time. It might be hard to present Edenism to him without him taking an immediately prejudiced stance against it, or thinking I’m nuts (I am a little nuts, I guess).
Yup, there’s a lot of strangeness in the air right now. People are much more receptive to strange conspiracy theories right now than during the ’90s.
Discernment seems to be connected with “thinking on one’s feet” and doing the right thing quickly. Also, reaction speed. Melons would prefer a twitch shooter, whereas a Thal is into RPGs or turn based strategy.
Lately I’ve been able to do that kind of thinking, with interesting results. Pretty funny to be able to drive around in GTA V at full speed and shoot people, whereas before I was quite clumsy and crashed all the time.
Could be all that NAC, Curcumin, fish oil and PQQ I’ve been taking…
>Discernment seems to be connected with “thinking on one’s feet” and doing the right thing quickly. Also, reaction speed.
That’s a good point, and I’ve also previously noticed that melons have twitch reflexes comparable to blacks. I think thals have the best complex reflexes- reacting in complicated ways to complicated stimuli, and degenerate whites have the worst of all worlds in reaction speed.
Suspect this is an interaction fluency between fluid and crystallized intelligence.
Possibly related to parieto-frontal integration theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parieto-frontal_integration_theory
Having an emotional reaction to new information vs just thinking “how can I use this?” – that’s a good indicator of cognitive style!
(Sometimes the emotional reacting will just be “meh” for a deepsock, but that’s more of a “in my current paradigm, what you mentioned is just an accident and not essential” vs the crom “everything is meh” style).
I hear a lot of “that guy probably has 130-145 IQ” type things thrown around.
As I’ve said before, there ought to be some kind of table that lists what each increment of say 5 points can do, roughly. Ie “130 IQ unlocks the capacity for understanding functional programming”, stuff like that.
I’ve seen a couple of things like that floating around.
http://paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/extended_intelligence_scale.html
http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-7-tribes-of-intellect.html
They aren’t very fine-tuned, but I don’t think fine-tuning is a plausible goal either. Fact is, up to certain thresholds it’s only a matter of speed differences in learning the same things.
Interesting. Yeah, that’s exactly what I was talking about.
“Fact is, up to certain thresholds it’s only a matter of speed differences in learning the same things.”
So, you might say that a 130 IQ person learns FP in a matter of months whereas a 140 IQer does so in weeks and a 160 IQer groks it in a matter of days. A 180 IQer might invent it from first principles without encountering it in the literature.
I use Functional Programming as a benchmark because that’s something I’ve encountered in my own professional life and come to partially understand but not fully master yet. Monads are still a bit of a black box…
Btw, I’ve been reading quite a bit of Scientology lately. A lot of it is quite good, despite the obvious objections one might have to materials from that organization. One of the best parts is the description of the “1.1” on the Tone scale, what they refer to as a “Covertly Hostile” person. Strikes me as a really good description of Gammas.
http://www.whale.to/m/minshull.html#Chapter 9
Has anyone done any thinking about how this interacts with left/right personas?
Are we talking right/left brain dominance or something else?
Not dominance, different personas that interact. Julian Jaynes, early NLP (Bandler and Grinder).
Sometimes when I wake up in the morning, only one side is awake. Only one eye will open. Probably not relevant, but my eyes see color differently. One sees more yellowish, one sees more bluish tones.
I think the added juice to the MT genius that you forgot to mention is that MTs don’t have many other options in life other than being a genius. They don’t have the social finesse find comfort in the crowd and too much sensitive to just ‘go with the flow’ they are pretty much a pressure cooker of a personality type. If it’s not Steve Jobs, it’s Colonel Kurtz.
Having an existential crisis held to one’s throat 24 hours a day encourages something of a sense of martial rigour
“Having an existential crisis held to one’s throat 24 hours a day encourages something of a sense of martial rigour”
Why does the MT in particular suffer from this?
Is it the “you should be doing something!” drive of the M-back coupled with the cold, un-magical sense-processing of the T-front? That dynamic creates an “up or out” kind of tension.
Yes that too. You could probably tabulate a list of counter-balancing forces that create the circumstances for over-pressure and the types of motivational facts that lead to relief as either a safety valve, a BLEVE or a rocket thruster. You could think of an MT like an industrial chemical processing unit I guess.
>You could think of an MT like an industrial chemical processing unit I guess.
…said the chemical engineer :-P.
Reference 1.0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM0jtD_OWLU
One interesting observation is that Melons like to create Game-Theory type situations with a large but manageable set of input/output functions like some sort of systems engineer and then maybe Buckingham Pi theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckingham_π_theorem) that shit or something to jiggle the desired outcome from the available parameters.
I think this why they turn things into self-referential systems over and over again. I think start-up bootcamps accelerators are a good example. What’s meant to be about novel disruptive innovative turns into making the Twitter of Toast… everything becomes reference to something that came before. Everyone has to have a ‘pitch’. Thus the information machine cannot be ‘surprised’ by innovation. Innovation is actually the last thing it wants. Also jobs, companies, schools, even engineering today everything becomes about managing information asymmetry and imprisoning participants within a fixed set of parameters. Initially under the auspices of morality of course, but ultimately due to signalling and game theory the shit floats to the top.
All melon systems are cyclical and rather demonic because of this. I think this is why Thals, being more in tune with ‘nature’ are so innately irked by the whole thing. They have every right to be. Melon intelligence doesn’t really make sense unless there is a good deal of attrition and renewal. This is why MTs become rather Shivaite or ‘Grimdark’ or whatever.
Really cool observations. Do try and unpack them more so we can grok.
I like the observation about startups being melonfests. I always find myself longing for true, psychotic innovation, not just the next jostling-together of already established parameters.
Unpack? I thought I did unpack. There’s enough there to go on. Here’s reference 2.0 https://aeolipera.wordpress.com/2015/06/17/cro-magnon-origin-myth-eternal-high-school/
If you want to unpack you need to ask specific questions to which I might be able to offer specific answers. Otherwise I don’t really know what angle you’re coming from and you could probably write several volumes on those observations.
Reference 3.0: http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Social-Order-Underworld-American/dp/0199328501
Reference 4.0: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Codes-Underworld-How-Criminals-Communicate-ebook
You should be able to ‘get’ it from that
Fund my time machine startup.
Would Seth Godin be an example of what you refer to?
Thanks for turning me on to that guy I appreciate it greatly.
Seth Godin is why we converted the charts for Insufferable Jewishness to a logarithmic scale.
lol
“You should be able to ‘get’ it from that”
I’ll try, then. Thanks.
The difference between Melons who allow themselves to be ‘wrong’ for a time and trust in the resurrection and ones who don’t is like the difference between Jesus and Lucifer.
Explain.
Explain? Gosh you’re making me uncomfortable.
@JPC,
Actually yeah, that one is too dense for me also. The thing about setting up asymmetrical game theory systems, I grokked, but this one is pretty esoteric.
OK… Well… Dimensional analysis is based upon the study of closed systems. Now you can enclose the system for a long time by making it bigger, more elaborate, more all-encompassing, more, more, more like some Cosmic No Face. But ultimately this approach is Cartesian and dualistic so it will ultimately collapse. The collapse is a resurrection event being subsumed into God the Father or even a death, it requires humbleness, self-sacrifice, *real* piety, faith et cetera… where eternal life is achieve through the collapse of the ego and duality. But Lucifer’s temptation is the opposite of that: a promise of eternal egohood. Which is probably pretty cool for a time. Maybe even a long time. I dunno. Ask the Transdimensional Psychic Octopus. It’s probably having a whale of a time. Badumpa!
Earnest pursuit of perfection will drive an MT mad.
A well adjusted MT allows himself to fall sometimes and trusts that he’ll be able to get back up each time.
The MT who doesn’t is a high strung one indeed.
Wald
Hah. I got it immediately.
JPC, you should look up Don Colacho.
I guess I got hung up on the bit about “who allow themselves to be ‘wrong’ for a time”. I was thinking there was point about how good melons allow themselves to sin but ultimately keep righteousness on the map.
Re: Lucifer, this is how I understand it:
Right hand path: embrace the universe, be objective
Left hand path: create your own universe, your attention is the center of everything
Pingback: Why “What can’t continue, won’t”, but actually does continue for way longer than you’d think it ought to | Aeoli Pera
Pingback: More about Jews | Aeoli Pera
Pingback: Three high-IQ cognitive modes | Aeoli Pera
Pingback: Why do dreams get most interesting as wakefulness approaches? | Aeoli Pera
Pingback: On owl melons | Aeoli Pera
Pingback: Final Fantasy 3/6, part 2 | Aeoli Pera
>I mean proper creativity here, which encapsulates aesthetic modes like Lord of the Rings, as opposed to highly intellectualized creative endeavors like Elective Affinities.
>proper creativity
What would you call musical composition, fashion/graphic/etc design, architecture, poetry, playwriting, acting, directing, painting, sculpture, etc etc? “Fake” creativity?
Also, regarding the original point of this post, I would say that parietal contributes significantly to general intelligence, but that’s not really the whole story. For instance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parietal_lobe#Function
“Both the left and right parietal systems play a determining role in self transcendence, the personality trait measuring predisposition to spirituality.[18]”
^What kind of game is that?