[theunify]

Recent studys cited from http://www.digg.com reveal that genius is a trait present in humans which leads to general disorder in a large percentage.

'see' http://www.quantumaetherdynamics.com/press.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/5numbers.shtml
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=678
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/20/nhawking20.xml
Hawkings second divorce.

[dleviwing]

Then why aren’t there more geniuses? I think you’re quoting twisted statistics.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by dleviwing Then why aren’t there more geniuses? I think you’re quoting twisted statistics.

Maybe there is just you and me then Dave?


regards michael.

[Elizabeth]

Statwistics is a politician's favorite hobby, so says twice half the people who answered as such.

[mkirkpatrick]

I tend to think he has a great mind,that is trapped in a withered body,he is I feel a brave
soul.



regards michael.

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick I tend to think he has a great mind,that is trapped in a withered body,he is I feel a brave soul. regards michael.

Quadriplegics (in general) are notoriously bossy - to the point it is mentioned in handouts given to family members of new quadriplegics before they leave the hospitals. Intellectual super-achievers tend to behave in an arrogant fashion (and if you think deeply about it, it is understandable why). People at the top tend to start feeling entitled to have the world revolve around them. It is appropriate to recognize where he is coming from psychologically and honor those challenges, but I can also see where it would be hell to live with him, and working for him probably isn't any piece of cake, either. yeah, he's probably unbearable - and that's no surprise.

I can see how his first wife married him for the right reasons, but I have to wonder about the motives of his second wife. It's possible that he took a shine to her and made her feel special enough to marry him for honorable reasons, and then things went south after he got used to her enough that he started treating her like he treated his first wife, but just the statement that her first husband was the inventor of his voice synthesizer raised one flag, and the marriage between anyone famous and some nobody always raises a flag on its own. It may not even have been a concious thing on her part, and just because he's a brilliant physicist does not mean he knows anything about psychology, and even if everyone else could see that coming, because of his power, position, and personality, I can see where no one would have wanted to bring that to his attention before he married her.

So was his second marriage/divorce just a predictable tragedy, or just deserts for the way he treats people? One could look at it through causality and realize that everyone was blameless, but that events are understandably caused does not release anyone from responsibility for their actions. Guys are especially unwilling to admit to being beat up by their wives. Females don't tend to want to admit abuse from their husbands either, but on the whole are more likely to be willing to admit it, then want to go back anyway because they still love him - all the while recognizing how stupid they sound. Guys are less willing to sound stupid (and how could "the smartest man in the world" admit to a stupidity of wanting to go back to an abusive wife?), so they are more likely to just deny the whole thing.

For the sake of getting to the truth of whether or not this was "just desserts" - meaning an appropriate outcome of causality, for a moment set aside any preconceived notions about the fact that no one deserves to be abused - because to allow that into the argument, we would first have to define abuse.

One of my classmates in grade school who used to beat me up all the time, and who my mother absolutly adored, became the example I saw to cause me the question of whether or not sometimes "abuse" is justified. When we got older, she got a boyfriend, and suddenly became non-abusive to me. I thought that she just outgrew the punching, kicking, clawing, ripping my clothes off in front of others, and toned down her verbal outbursts. As children, she would do all this just for the fun of it, without provokation, and follow it up with maniacal laughter, but older, even just the verbal outbursts were just a result of a lost temper, often hormonally induced (to the point that I marked on the calendar which week of the month to not call her or go over to her house). At one point when I was visiting her and her boyfriend, her boyfriend started beating the dog and making that same maniacal laugh she used to have. I made him stop beating the dog, and really made him mad, to the point that he chased me through the house until he caught me, kneeled on top of me, and punched the crud out of me until I yelled loud enough for her to come get him to stop (strangely, his parents ignored the whole incident even though they were home). So, years later after she broke up with him, I was not surprised when she mentioned that he used to beat her.

We discussed it, and she admitted that it wasn't until he started beating her that she realized "geting beaten up isn't too cool" and that was why she stopped torturing me. Within a few months of their break-up, she started acting like she did as a little kid again - but by then I was old enough to not have to be friends with someone just because my mother insisted.

Do some people need to be beaten? Is it really abuse if it is something they need?

It seems to me that undue force is abuse - so for example if a child is so sensitive that all you have to do is tell her "you're being bad" and she feels awful and will try really hard to not do that again, a spanking would be abuse, but another child who does not understand that a parent is being serious unless "no" is accompanied by a spanking, non-injurious spanking that child would not be abuse.

Opinions?

[mkirkpatrick]

Thanks Elizabeth,in my opinion,nobody deserves to be beaten,in myexperience I have met many woman who have been battered and beaten by men,many of the men were
gutless cowards if challenged by someone their own size.There was a "womans refuge"
nearby where I used to work,all the woman and children in there were seeking sanctuary
from their violent and abusive husbands and partners.Many would leave to go back home,
only to return a few days later with a black eye!These woman would often defend their
abusive partners,not reporting them to the police etc,Men were not allowed into the refuge
however I ran a barbecue in the hostel that I ran,andinvited all the women and their kids
to come along,it was Nov5th and firework night,we ran a raffle,which some of the ladies
won,thosewhocould not collect their prizes that night,I decided to take to the refuge the
following day,when i knocked on the door,a staff member opened it and asked me whati wanted!i said that I had some prizes.and could I leave them inside,she was very reluctant
to let me do this,I did however manage to enter and leave the prizes,i looked around
the room to see frightened mothers holding their children,scared of thisman in the house!!


regards michael.

[Elizabeth]

And that would be evidence of undeniable abuse, which is not what I was talking about. I have PTSD from how I grew up, I had to have a restraining order against my ex, and ... well, you don't need all the details, but know that I do understand about real abuse, and in turn I acknowledge that some of my experiences may have desensitized me to the subject.

What you brought up was undeniable abuse - but what of my friend who displayed improved behavior when she was in that relationship? His claim was that he only hit her back when she hit him, but of course his "reason" for beating me was that a woman should never get between a man and his dog. Then again, he did mellow out once he hit 30, so all I can really know is before dating him, she would beat me, while dating him, she got nice, and a couple months after breaking up with him, she got mean again. I can see a correlation, but I can't have enough access to what really hapopened to draw a full conclusion. Was he beating her, or was he taking self-defense to the point of retaliation? Was it appropriate punishment as evidenced by it being effective? She did not develop a fear of men - in fact she was dating again within a couple of months.

[Elizabeth]

It is often said that women who are raised in an abusive household usually grow up to marry abusive men, and boys who grow up in an abusive household usually grow up to abuse their wives. The friends boyfriend grew up in an abusive household, but the abuse stopped when he got big enough to hit his father back, and beat the crud out of him one day when he was a teenager. I expect the physical difference may lead to some of the difference in why girls grow to be beaten again, where boys grow to beat - as girls never get strong enough to physically stop the abuse themselves. Boys learn subconciously that hitting makes the pain stop, but girls subconciously learn that there is nothing they can do about it anyway.

Michael, I wonder if those men who you spoke of, had their punishment been to be beaten every time they beat their wives, I wonder if they would have figured out - like my friend who was being hit back - that "it isnt too cool to get hit" and stopped. In some countries, caning is an acceptable form of punishment for adults. Not everyone is psychologically the same - so just like spanking a child who only needs to be told that what they are doing is bad would be abuse, but spanking one that only "gets it" with a spanking is not abuse - I wonder if caning adult abusers would be an effective teaching tool on people with that psychology?

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth It is often said that women who are raised in an abusive household usually grow up to marry abusive men, and boys who grow up in an abusive household usually grow up to abuse their wives. The friends boyfriend grew up in an abusive household, but the abuse stopped when he got big enough to hit his father back, and beat the crud out of him one day when he was a teenager. I expect the physical difference may lead to some of the difference in why girls grow to be beaten again, where boys grow to beat - as girls never get strong enough to physically stop the abuse themselves. Boys learn subconciously that hitting makes the pain stop, but girls subconciously learn that there is nothing they can do about it anyway. Michael, I wonder if those men who you spoke of, had their punishment been to be beaten every time they beat their wives, I wonder if they would have figured out - like my friend who was being hit back - that "it isnt too cool to get hit" and stopped. In some countries, caning is an acceptable form of punishment for adults. Not everyone is psychologically the same - so just like spanking a child who only needs to be told that what they are doing is bad would be abuse, but spanking one that only "gets it" with a spanking is not abuse - I wonder if caning adult abusers would be an effective teaching tool on people with that psychology?

Elizabeth,Prehaps these men would have "refrained" from their batterings if every time they did it,they got the crap beaten out of them by another man!I know that some had to go for therapy and counselling,and some likeyou said Elizabeth,were beaten as children
and continued this into adult life!Some responded well to treatment,others failed miserably.

regards michael.