HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: Doubters Of Astrology
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:43:19 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Oct5.115014.779@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>vance@cco.caltech.edu (Vance R. Haemmerle) writes:
>>>So what is Occam's Razor, again?
>>>-ecsd
>>  Why... it's what he uses to shave in the morning of course! :-)
>>. <= microdot sig
>
>Oh. And I was under the impression that we were NOT going to be splitting
>hares here. :)


No, bunnies are generally discrete units.

GMS
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas)
Subject: Re: t// t// Re: REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 11:12:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.020532.17792@ncsu.edu> tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai) writes:
>
>mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas) writes:
>|> In article <1992Sep29.221718.10324@ncsu.edu> tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai) writes:
>|> OH REALLY???  Come visit my home town.  :)
>
>Hey, I don't even know where Purdue is!  
>But if you really want me to come visit... :)

I said my *home* town.  :)

>[ObTai: The majority of gifted children in recent generations have 
> come from working-class, not middle-class, families.  A larger 
> percentage of middle-class children are gifted, but the working 
> and lower classes produce gifted children in larger numbers.  How 
> many more disadvantaged children would have been bright if they had 
> had middle-class gestation and rearing conditions?]

The key word is "majority".  You are very good at generalization, aren't you?

-- 
John Mechalas                                          "I'm not an actor, but
mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu                                 I play one on TV."
Aero Engineering, Purdue University                     #include disclaimer.h
From: rad@railnet.nshore.ORG (Rick DeMattia)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: Getting involved
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 20:19:25 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Railnet BBS +1 216 786 0476

mci41087@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Occaisionally) writes:

> ....  Does anyone know what kind of test I  
> can I take one?  Just curious, because I'd like to get involved.

You could write to American Mensa Ltd. 2626 E. 14 St. Brooklyn
NY 11235-3992 and ask for the self-test - it's a free pamphlet.
Or you could call 1(800)66MENSA, which is the phone number for
prospective new members.

--
UUCP: {uunet|backbone}!railnet!rad   rad@railnet.nshore.org
CompuServe: 72517.666@compuserve.COM
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Subject: t-- Re: t// Re: REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY
Originator: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Organization: NCSU Artificial Intelligence Systems Laboratory
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 23:13:54 GMT


quam@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (David Quam) writes:

|> I disagree totally.  All people in MENSA have IQ's (whatever that means,
|> and it doesn't matter anyway) at or above the 98th percentile.  

Wrongo, "Quam".  You lose big.

Some qualifying practices condoned by Mensa defeat the 2% limit.
In an attempt to rebut my points I was told, through postings by
MENSA members, that it is well-known that the 2% limit is quite 
blurry; estimates go as high as 20% as to what percent actually 
manages to qualify.

|> Don't you remember what your college classmates did on their spare time?  
|> That's right -- drink, party, have sex, watch TV.  

And what were you doing?  (Obviously not having any fun :)

--
Scott Tai -- tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
NCSU Artificial Intelligence Lab
Centennial Campus
From: psyline@psyline.nl (Theo Bogels)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: t-- Re: t// t// REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY - 09/28/92
Date: 1 Oct 92 07:32:58 GMT
Organization: PsyLine * Nijmegen * The Netherlands.

tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai) writes:

> 
> Wrong.  I do not hold any ill-feelings toward the MENSA organization itself, 
> or any of its members.  My "fight," for lack of a better word, is against 
> the practice of intelligence testing and the artificial hierarchies it create
> 
Scott,
What kind of hierarchies do you prefer?

Some colleagues of mine and myself were in serious doubt, the last few 
days. We couldn't decide to whom we would give the "Narcist of the Week"  
award. To you? To MS? We decided to keep it ourselves ;-)

Anyway: go on. We consider (analysis of) the "inter"action around here 
very interesting.

--
psyline@psyline.nl (Theo Bogels)
PsyLine * Nijmegen * The Netherlands
From: mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: Meaning of Intelligence
Date: 2 Oct 92 23:50:38 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.001731.19087@ncsu.edu>, mai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Mai Tai) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> Mensa's entrance qualifications depend directly on your scores from IQ
> tests.  *Someone* in Mensa must have the idea that intelligence and
> scores on standardized tests are somehow highly correlated.  If you
> only had that piece of information about a person, how could you say
> with any assurance that he or she could *act* like an "intelligent
> person"?  (You can't.)
> 
> Part of intelligence is the ability to interact with other human beings
> in a composed and relaxed manner.  I've often found this ability lacking
> in Mensa members. 

That's interesting, considering that you have previously said that you
have never met any Mensa members.  You have shown a decided lack of
ability to interact with other human beings on this forum in a composed
and relaxed manner.  Therefore, by your own criteria, you lack intelligence.


 The only real way to find intelligent people is to
> search for them, because intelligence has different meanings to different
> people.
> 
> rec.org.mensa may be the place for you to search, but only if you believe
> that intelligence can be defined by one's syllogism-forming and
> pattern-matching ability on a multiple-choice IQ test.
> 
> All the Mensa people I've known have been hopeless socially and stuffed
> to the gills with ego.  I've often thought of membership in Mensa as a
> convenient method of separating the people I don't want to deal with,
> much the way I view fraternities and sororities.

As I wrote above, you have previously said that you have never met any
Mensa people.  It is quite funny that you should accuse anyone of being
hopeless socially and stuffed to the gills with ego, considering that 
that is a perfect description of yourself.
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: rec.org.high-iq.misc?
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 06:43:50 GMT

gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
>ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>>cjdcosta@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER J DCOSTA) writes:
>>
>>>side and operates in Brute Force mode. Check out talk.abortion, where 
>>>one of the sides is outnumbered 10-1 in terms of volume of posters, and 
>>>the majority merely shouts down the minority opinion. Maybe rationale 
>>>and reasoning will count with at least some people here (!)
>>
>>Well, so far as abortion is concerned I hope it's 10:1 in favor of
>>the right to have one. Because I'm not interested in seeing it get
>>discussed as an abstract idea, when women are suffering . . .
>>in this case, count me as a partisan, DEADLY.
>
>This, like many issues in society that are hotly debated, is not
>nearly so simple as you've implied here.  There are assumptions
>that are made by both sides that are not only very significant,
>but currently impossible to prove, and must be taken on faith.
>Given the veracity of these assumptions, either side could be
>right.

Yes, either side could be right. So an abstract discussion can take as long
as it likes in someone's drawing room. Meanwhile, I've already made up my
mind which of two worlds I'd rather live in. *Especially* if I am female,
I'd rather live in the world where I can do what *I* want to do, in the
matter of my own body and the integrity of my own being, without consulting
self-refreshing stale debates and laws I did not write. That world permits
my opponents to enact their own system of beliefs within their *own* sphere
also. All it does not permit, is for others to define reality *for* me
against my will. So I have no shame in considering the abortion debate closed.
                                                       ^^^^^^^^
As a practical matter, I have better things to do than go out and rescue women
from hysterical people who unilaterally impose upon other people that the issue
requires everyone's attention - evidently until the hysterics get their way.
I'd rather spend a semester in a college class on ethics and social philosophy,
finish the course, make my decision, and have done with it. And I have.
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Doubters Of Astrology
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Distribution: "world"
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 17:24:54 GMT

motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net writes:
>
>The way I see it, its the supporters of astrology who must prove that
>it works, its not up to the skeptics to disprove it.

I don't have to prove a damned thing. I could have left it this way:
"I use astrology because I have personal experience that it works."
And that's all.

>Just because I'm a skeptic doesn't mean that I have to use up all my time
>disproving every crack-pot claim someone makes.

Nor, by the same token, do I have to take any of my precious time to defend it.

>When you make an extraordinary claim (such as that astrology works) its
>up to you to prove it. Until you do I have no obligation to believe you.

I didn't say it'd work for *you*; I said it works for *me*. I have already
proved this to *myself*, or why else would I use it? And it certainly cannot
work, for someone who doesn't use it!

>I have never heard of any serious study which supported the claims
>of astrology. If you know of any please let us know.

You mean - apart from the ones the astrologers use? See, you don't know
what the claims of astrology *are*, so I'd say you're on pretty shaky ground.

:), and I mean it.
-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS)
Subject: Magik
Originator: bkdavis@c00100-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:18:38 GMT


I am curious as to what the people of Mensa think about witchcraft, magick and shamanism.
Do you believe that such forces are possible in this world ?
Have you expericened any of these things first hand ?


Brian

aka

Tetsu Yama 
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: alt.progressive perhaps?
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 11:57:41 GMT

not@ailab.ncsu.edu (N O Tai) writes:
>
>From the keyboard of ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic):
>: not@ailab.ncsu.edu (N O Tai) writes:
>: >From the keyboard of ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic):
>: >: The guy who does *not* intend to take a shit, does not see himself 
>: >: at that moment of wondering why he has to sit on old dried urine at 
>: >: other times.  Half a brain says lift the seat, but nooooooooooo he 
>: >: can't bother with that.  Real bad for *scared to death of infection 
>: >: and yukkies* like I was and still am somewhat.
>
>: >I haven't seen much hostility towards Eric -- at least not nearly as
>: >much as Scott Tai used to generate with his posts.  If Eric doesn't 
>:                    ^^^^^^^
>: >want to hear lovingly sarcastic opinions about his posts then he 
>: >should keep them out of rec.org.mensa.
>
>: Well, one is entitled to express one's self, isn't one?
>: Dr. Tai, if you'd like to share yourself in the the way that I am doing,
>: then please feel free. I'm sorry that so much of what I write is self-
>: referential, but that's how I am at the moment.
>
>Well... in the first commune I helped to start we had rented a store 
>front as a living quarters in a small town. We had no table to eat on, the 
>seven of us. I took the door off the bathroom and we propped it on saw 
>horses and prepared and had supper. Afterwards, people wanted to use the 
>john, which was right behind the bathroom door. People said, just go ahead 
>and go, some others said they were embarrassed. One woman had a near 
>nervous breakdown about it, but finally did use the john. The table became 
>a permanent fixture. The next day when I came home from work, I found that 
>same woman taking a shit while talking to four other people who were 
>laying butt down in the dry old fashioned bathtub with feet. She wasn't 
>embarrassed at all. So much for phobias.
>
>Eric, if your reaction to toilet seats is conditioned and could as 
>easily be de-conditioned, then you are simply expressing an irrational 
>fear. Now what that fear is I cannot say.
>
>Dr N.O. Tai

The notion of discharging natural bodily functions without shame was first
put in practice in any public, exploratory way at the Esalen Institute,
as I recall, in the 70's. It appears the above-described woman internalized
the learning around the doing of this. Very Good. I have reached this same
point of view after a long process of introspection.
Thanks for sharing the info, Dr. Tai.
-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Subject: t-- Re: t// t// REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY - 09/28/92
Originator: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Organization: NCSU Artificial Intelligence Systems Laboratory
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 23:04:30 GMT


mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:

|> > Bullshit.  You criticize anyone who questions any aspect of MENSA.
|> 
|> That is a lie; what is more, you know that it is a lie.

You're doing it again! :)

|> > Methinks you're the insecure one.  Where specifically did I initiate
|> > these "flames and attacks"?  
|> 
|> In your very first messages--and in the vast majority of your continued messages,
|> when you flamed Mensa and Mensans.  You continued lies, your continued hiding
|> behind numerous false identities, and your continued flames all invited flames
|> in return.

Wrong.  I do not hold any ill-feelings toward the MENSA organization itself, 
or any of its members.  My "fight," for lack of a better word, is against 
the practice of intelligence testing and the artificial hierarchies it creates.

|> > Let me guess:  you don't like Ben Franklin, Samuel Clemens, or Stephen King,
|> > do you?
|> 
|> The didn't hide their names, and they didn't lie about it.  You, on the other
|> hand, are a coward and a liar.

They DID write under pseudonyms.  But that's not the issue at all, and
you know it.

|> Well, for one thing, perhaps I'd like to send you email.  For another, if you
|> can't even take the responsibility for your own messages, that invalidates
|> their content.

No it doesn't.  Why can't you judge an article by its content, rather than
its author?   

--
Scott Tai -- tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
NCSU Artificial Intelligence Lab
Centennial Campus
From: jswthomp@milton.u.washington.edu (James Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: "wrong" answers on IQ tests
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:27:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Sep28.172757.19812
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <66679@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>Example:  Which of the five designs is least like the other four?
>
>	The five designs are capital letters: N A V H and F.
>
>There answer is that V is least like the others because it is drawn with
>two lines, while the others are drawn with three.  My answer is that A is
>the least like th others because it divides the plane into two regions
>while the others do not.
>
>Clearly, my difference is more significant than their difference.
>
>I realize that such a test has very little validity, but I still would like
>to know how to score it.  Should I simply count it as if I got these questions
>right?  Should I remove these questions from the test, and scale everything
>else up to get back to the range of their scoring table?

Since your answer is clearly more betterer than theirs, you should give
yourself double credit for it.  Also, if there are any questions that you
missed for "dumb" reasons, like not reading the question right, or any
questions to which you said, "Oh! Of course!" when you saw the answers, then
those questions obviously didn't accurately test your abilities, and they
should not be scored.

You, too, can have an IQ of 270!

Jim
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Subject: t// Re: Meaning of Intelligence
Originator: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Organization: NCSU Artificial Intelligence Systems Laboratory
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 03:24:15 GMT


gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
|> Now, if someone is a legitimate moron, clinically speaking, 
|> they can't help it.

Yeah.  So get off Mike Steiner's back :)

--
Scott Tai -- tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: rec.org.high-iq.misc?
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 10:39:09 GMT

>>against my will. So I have no shame in considering the abortion debate closed.
>>                                                       ^^^^^^^^

>>finish the course, make my decision, and have done with it. And I have.

gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
>Well, that sounds very nice.  But please don't shut out information.
>You might find yourself changing your mind.  Keep in mind that those
>hysterical people have shut out information, and that's probably why
>they're irrational and hysterical.
>
>GMS

I *am* irrational and hysterical; I finally decided that since I can't change
that, I might as well understand it and put it to good use.

I only have 24 hrs/day and est. max 60 years to go. I'd rather be out
convincing people to pursue their lust, than arguing about abortion.

Really. "Gee, hon, there's a debate tonight at U.C. about abortion - wanna
go?" -- "No, sweets, I'd rather do more practice on Tantric Sex Rituals."

:) ecsd (:
From: mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: t// REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY - 09/28/92
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:10:39 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.171705.28536@cbnewse.cb.att.com>, gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Sep30.085211.11800@syacus.acus.oz.au> ron@syacus.acus.oz.au (Ron Williams) writes:

> >Take a course in NLP.
> 
> NLP?

Neuro-linguistic programming.
From: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: t// t// Re: REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY
Date: 30 Sep 92 01:58:36 GMT
Reply-To: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai)
Organization: NCSU Artificial Intelligence Systems Laboratory
Originator: tai@ailab.ncsu.edu


mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep29.222847.11002@ncsu.edu> tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai) writes:
|> >
|> >"Eric":
|> >
|> >You're not more intelligent; you simply scored higher on a test
|> >whose validity is questionable.
|> 
|> Just because he scored high on a test, that doesn't mean he *isn't* more
|> intelligent.

"John":

True.  However, it is important to note that high IQ is a 
necessary but *not sufficient* condition for high achievement, 
while low IQ virtually assures failure at high academic and 
occupational levels.

--
Scott Tai -- tai@ailab.ncsu.edu
NCSU Artificial Intelligence Lab
Centennial Campus
From: mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: t// REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY - 09/28/92
Date: 1 Oct 92 20:21:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: claris.15242

In article <1992Oct1.160346.3851@cbnewse.cb.att.com>, gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
> 
> In article <15239@claris.com> mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:
> >In article <1992Sep30.171705.28536@cbnewse.cb.att.com>, gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
> >> 
> >> In article <1992Sep30.085211.11800@syacus.acus.oz.au> ron@syacus.acus.oz.au (Ron Williams) writes:
> >
> >> >Take a course in NLP.
> >> 
> >> NLP?
> >
> >Neuro-linguistic programming.
> 
> 
> Tell me more!  I assume it's programming in "net"-style for linguistic
> comprehension?  Or what?  Sounds interesting.

See Eric C. S. Dynamic's reply; what he wrote is more than I had known 
about it.
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Doubters Of Astrology
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:07:25 GMT

crawdad@fncent (Matt Crawford) writes:
>A motcid!wiegand recounts his own experience as part of a group that
>received identical purported horoscopic readings and generally rated
>those readings as "very good."  This, and many similar studies, shows
>that letting the recipient of a reading rate its accuracy cannot give
>any support to the hypothesis that astrology is valid.
>
>Suppose recipients of astrological readings were presented with a
>number of readings derived from different brithdates, and were not
>told from what birthdate each was derived.  Ask each to choose which
>reading most accurately describes him or her.  Then if the number of
>recipients who select as "most accurate" the reading derived from
>their own birthdate is significantly greater than the number of
>correct selections which would be expected from chance, *that* would
>be support for claims such as ECSD's.
>
>If ECSD finds this test unacceptable, then I will believe (but not
>claim to have proven) that either he is hostile to scientific inquiry
>or has no faith in astrology.

Unfortunately, Crawdad, you were scooped on this point, as - uh - I
hope you will recall in private mail. I proposed this very thing many
hours ago - shall I post my incoming/outgoing mail?
But I no longer care about this sort of test either. I have just read
the hell out of Dave Casper, and await his response. I don't recall was
yours amongst the info I have received; for if not, no time like now
to be discouraged or encouraged around astrology. I have strong things
to say about the remaining parties . . . including you, when I have your
chart.

{signed - Lamont Cranston.}
-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: T% Thought for the Day
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 26 Sep 92 15:21:04 CST
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Sep23.230030.15918@ncsu.edu>, tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott Tai) writes:
> "'Standardized tests' are the greatest single barrier to
> equal opportunity for disadvantaged groups, at least in
> the sphere of education.  Minorities who get into higher
> education generally do so despite tests, not because of
> them..."  

Hey sure, these tests can tend to suck in real life, but without them,
how could you get into Mensa?

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Subject: Re: t// t// Re: REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 16:28:07 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.020532.17792@ncsu.edu> tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai) writes:
>
>[ObTai: The majority of gifted children in recent generations have 
> come from working-class, not middle-class, families.  A larger 
> percentage of middle-class children are gifted, but the working 
> and lower classes produce gifted children in larger numbers.  How 
> many more disadvantaged children would have been bright if they had 
> had middle-class gestation and rearing conditions?]
>
If the tests they used to determine which of these kids are bright
are defective as you claim, then there's no reason to suspect that
any of them are in need of changing their gestation and rearing
conditions.  So who cares?  Besides, this post-addition of yours
agrees with the older post you made which included the articles
about the origins of intelligence testing, and which disagrees with
many of your later posts.  So, given the lack of a conclusion,
I guess I don't care about what appears to be a non-problem.

GMS