|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 12, 2019 19:40:09 GMT -5
I was born in 1947. Two years later, my father died from war connected medical problems. From what I've heard, he was a lot more like me than my stepfather was. Though a nice man, we had nothing in common and there was long-term alienation. I didn't want to become a Mama's Boy, so I always took my own course without parental guidance.
Bringing this in line with the rest of this blog, I'll stick to my mental development. My parents felt that learning and school were strictly to get a job. They both achieved Masters Degrees, but had no intellectual interests.
In grade school, I sensed without consciously planning about it, that to get the highest grades would get me treated like a freak by my classmates. That's why I didn't stand out until I was in 7th Grade. Like my parents, I never read a book. There was one girl, Nancy Lenehan, who was openly outstanding. Following the social code of my working-class neighborhood, I thought she was a weirdo, because that was what we were supposed to think. For example, if she had been a guy, I jumped to the conclusion that she wouldn't have been interested in sports or any other normal stuff. One time, when she only got one question wrong on a test, she ran home crying. But, in actuality, she was mostly normal except for her devotion to her teachers, which was no different from a normal guy's devotion to his football coach.
My parents wouldn't let me play football until I was in 8th Grade, where everybody I knew had been getting serious playing time since 5th Grade. This protectiveness made me correctly associate college education as being for teenagers who are afraid to grow up. Insulting to any graduates who read this, but logically you don't have a right to your jobs if you cheated the rest of us by submitting to that class-biased indentured servitude.
Getting back to sports, I was inhibited from using my intelligence even in the Little League. A fast runner but weak hitter, I legged out all my hits. If the anti-brain attitude in my neighborhood hadn't inhibited me, I would have adapted by batting left-handed, which would have added to my leg hits because the batter starts out closer to first base. There was a player who did use his brains by bunting for hits a lot. To show how much the working-class attitude ruins the opportunities of the mentally talented, I felt I'd be mocked for doing something like that, though my suppressed proud self thought it was pretty cool. I also could have benefited from reading books on how to play these sports, but I was afraid of looking like a weirdo. If I had dared to follow that rational urge, I would have hid the book behind a comic book, just the opposite of someone who hides a copy of Playboy behind the textbook he pretends to read. The reason people have some justification for saying that High IQs have no common sense is that the intelligent are duped into believing that their brains shouldn't be wasted on anything other than "meaningful" subjects. The fact is, it would have been socially acceptable to use my intelligence to do practical things like memorize the streets in my neighborhood, or popular things like memorizing the pros' batting averages or later, the lyrics to rock-and-roll favorites.
I'll be comparing a lot of this to the early life of John Nash; don't you worry.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 13, 2019 16:31:23 GMT -5
In seventh grade, I was stuck with a teacher who, out of snobbery or stubborn ignorance about what smartkids had to suffer, made me her model student. She'd ask general questions that weren't in the subject matter and, like a fool, I answered them. I had thought it was some game, like on a TV quiz show. I immediately became a pariah and target of mockery. The slur word was "brain"; nerd hadn't been coined yet.
Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, lived in the same type of nerd-bashing neighborhood, at the same time, a few miles away. It only drove him deeper into mental masturbation, leading to his self-hating insanity, lashing out at the greatest achievements of human minds. But I didn't blame the mockers; I blamed the society that pushed me into academic achievement and then left me hanging on the cross. I refused to answer any more trivia question. I even purposely got mediocre scores on tests, hoping that such normality would convince my fellow students that I was one of the guys. It didn't work; from then on, every time I was introduced to someone new, such as someone's cousin, it would be, "This is Ryan; he's a real brain." That established my permanent weirdness and low place on the totem pole. The point is, I had the insight to realize that my teachers, my parents, and the ruling class who mandated this kind of isolation were the enemy; the other kids had been helplessly brainwashed. It took a long time for me to realize that the educational scam was set up to make High IQs have an inferior complex and gladly welcome the slavish college education because at least we weren't being bullied by our fellow ambitious college students there. That too was a set-up: after four or more years of working without pay in college, we'd accept far less reward than our creative production deserved, because at least we were finally getting paid something for the work of our minds. This was also stated in the movie "Twenty-One," when the MIT student defined beating the casino as his first taste of material reward.
I became a regular "greaser," like John Travolta in the movie. My demon teacher and I had many pointless after-school discussions. Her ignorance of the problem was far from unusual; I have yet to see it identified in books and movies. My parents were no help, either. They'd point out the cruel truism that "ten years from now, I'll be rich and all the people who mocked me will be stuck working boring, low-paying jobs." Even if true, why should I have to put up with a decade of being a loser? That causes permanent damage, no matter how much the conformist nerds deny it. The reward is no way worth the sacrifice.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 15, 2019 16:47:55 GMT -5
Deeply following my instincts would have made me realize that school-related learning is only practical for the children of the rich. Early in childhood, I should have used my brains solely to make money by cutting grass, shoveling snow, picking up discarded bottles for the deposit, and much more I could have done if I had put my mind to that instead of being embarrassed to use my mind for any thoughts uniquely my own. As for using it in school, study just to pass. Thinking about it, I might have found English useful for communication and math for learning procedures. Knowing anything about all the other subjects would have just made me seem creepy. Because the people in power imposed a social penalty for getting good grades, I would have purposely missed a few questions on tests so I wouldn't stand out.
In high school, I should have gotten an after-school job as soon as possible. Because of later difficulties with the opposite sex, I should also have made it a priority to get a girlfriend, which also would have made me continue my physical fitness program.
What I actually did in high school is what makes me do everything I can to get even with those who misled me with their unnatural educational "opportunities." Ironically, it was not an escape from being a "brain" loser, such as what doomed the Unabomber and John Nash, et al.; it was after I had finally achieved social prominence and dumped it all to prepare for prominence by class-climbing instead. Since JFK was President, my goal was to be accepted at Harvard and wind up like him.
Before that, seventh grade was pure misery. It's not like I had gone around correcting people's grammar; no one had any reason to think I was weird except for my teacher singling me out as her pet pupil. I couldn't put up with the shock of it, as if all of a sudden I was told I had cancer and would die before 8th Grade.
In 8th Grade itself, I tried to pander to the popular guys. I was allowed to join their group, but only as low man on the totem pole. I became the class clown; my sense of humor made me even more tolerable, but never in the sense of being someone to look up to.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 17, 2019 19:02:57 GMT -5
Since I was inhibited from having any intellectual interests, the reason I was able to do so well on my teacher's questions can be traced to the "Weekly Reader" we were assigned for purely reading comprehension, not to learn content. Most things I read stuck with me, call it an eidetic memory. It wasn't intentional; I knew what acting intellectual would bring onto me socially.
More proof that my pariah-state had nothing to do with my personality was that, on vacation, I met a beautiful girl who thought I was cool. I didn't act any differently with her; the only difference was that she didn't know I was "a brain." That snapped me out of self-doubt. I went back to my neighborhood with confidence. I was very aggressive with neighborhood girls who had gone to public school instead of my Catholic one. They didn't know about the prejudice against me, so I was successful in making out with them.
My parents then sent me to a high school 13 miles away. Its tuition is now $18,000 a year, but at the time, it was not like a prep school. At this Jesuit school, there wasn't a prejudice against smart kids; everybody there either had a father who had gotten rich through education or parents who wanted their sons to. The sons also felt ambitious, or they would have dropped out. For the first time, I quit think of my intelligence as an embarrassing personal defect I needed to hide.
But I got too ambitious; I couldn't maintain my finally rewarding social life and get the highest grades I was capable of. I could have maintained better than average grades, but that wouldn't get me into Harvard and the life of the rich and famous I felt I belonged in, now that I had finally started to get enthusiastic about learning. So in April of my freshman year, I dumped my girlfriend and all other social life. I studied obsessively, both for school and on my own. I had no free time, even during summer vacation. But I didn't later quit that because I burned out; that's a facile answer that maintains the rulers' lie about the merit of the educational way to get ahead.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 20, 2019 16:30:51 GMT -5
Since I was inhibited from having any intellectual interests, the reason I was able to do so well on my teacher's questions can be traced to the "Weekly Reader" we were assigned for purely reading comprehension, not to learn content. Most things I read stuck with me, call it an eidetic memory. It wasn't intentional; I knew what acting intellectual would bring onto me socially. More proof that my pariah-state had nothing to do with my personality was that, on vacation, I met a beautiful girl who thought I was cool. I didn't act any differently with her; the only difference was that she didn't know I was "a brain." That snapped me out of self-doubt. I went back to my neighborhood with confidence. I was very aggressive with neighborhood girls who had gone to public school instead of my Catholic one. They didn't know about the prejudice against me, so I was successful in making out with them. My parents then sent me to a high school 13 miles away. Its tuition is now $18,000 a year, but at the time, it was not like a prep school. At this Jesuit school, there wasn't a prejudice against smart kids; everybody there either had a father who had gotten rich through education or parents who wanted their sons to. The sons also felt ambitious, or they would have dropped out. For the first time, I quit think of my intelligence as an embarrassing personal defect I needed to hide. But I got too ambitious; I couldn't maintain my finally rewarding social life and get the highest grades I was capable of. I could have maintained better than average grades, but that wouldn't get me into Harvard and the life of the rich and famous I felt I belonged in, now that I had finally started to get enthusiastic about learning. So in April of my freshman year, I dumped my girlfriend and all other social life. I studied obsessively, both for school and on my own. I had no free time, even during summer vacation. But I didn't later quit that because I burned out; that's a facile answer that maintains the rulers' lie about the merit of the educational way to get ahead. John Nash suppressed his natural human desires so well that he didn't feel any desire pulling him into becoming popular with the other students. This self-limiting for the sake of escapist learning was what led to his later insanity. The moral of his life story is that A-students better become Alpha Males, even at the expense of lowering their grades to focus on manning themselves up. When he lucked out into marrying a stunningly beautiful woman, he was not only unprepared for such a high experience, he realize that he should have been rewarded in high school as much for his superior mind as superior athletes were. I love the action of the main character in John O'Hara's From the Terrace in purposely making a beeline for the most beautiful girl at a dance; that's the kind of guy for us to imitate, not fumbling inepts like Einstein or Big Bang's Raj.The Unabomber, too, foolishly convinced himself he was indifferent to social reward, then proved otherwise by an Environmentalist hatred of the achievements of industrial technology that has been produced by creative geniuses. This was self-hatred, because his own superior mind had cost him a normal and necessary social and sexual life. The Psychoses of a Theoretical Mathematician.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 24, 2019 19:37:51 GMT -5
Since I was inhibited from having any intellectual interests, the reason I was able to do so well on my teacher's questions can be traced to the "Weekly Reader" we were assigned for purely reading comprehension, not to learn content. Most things I read stuck with me, call it an eidetic memory. It wasn't intentional; I knew what acting intellectual would bring onto me socially. More proof that my pariah-state had nothing to do with my personality was that, on vacation, I met a beautiful girl who thought I was cool. I didn't act any differently with her; the only difference was that she didn't know I was "a brain." That snapped me out of self-doubt. I went back to my neighborhood with confidence. I was very aggressive with neighborhood girls who had gone to public school instead of my Catholic one. They didn't know about the prejudice against me, so I was successful in making out with them. My parents then sent me to a high school 13 miles away. Its tuition is now $18,000 a year, but at the time, it was not like a prep school. At this Jesuit school, there wasn't a prejudice against smart kids; everybody there either had a father who had gotten rich through education or parents who wanted their sons to. The sons also felt ambitious, or they would have dropped out. For the first time, I quit think of my intelligence as an embarrassing personal defect I needed to hide. But I got too ambitious; I couldn't maintain my finally rewarding social life and get the highest grades I was capable of. I could have maintained better than average grades, but that wouldn't get me into Harvard and the life of the rich and famous I felt I belonged in, now that I had finally started to get enthusiastic about learning. So in April of my freshman year, I dumped my girlfriend and all other social life. I studied obsessively, both for school and on my own. I had no free time, even during summer vacation. But I didn't later quit that because I burned out; that's a facile answer that maintains the rulers' lie about the merit of the educational way to get ahead. John Nash suppressed his natural human desires so well that he didn't feel any desire pulling him into becoming popular with the other students. This self-limiting for the sake of escapist learning was what led to his later insanity. The moral of his life story is that A-students better become Alpha Males, even at the expense of lowering their grades to focus on manning themselves up. When he lucked out into marrying a stunningly beautiful woman, he was not only unprepared for such a high experience, he realize that he should have been rewarded in high school as much for his superior mind as superior athletes were. I love the action of the main character in John O'Hara's From the Terrace in purposely making a beeline for the most beautiful girl at a dance; that's the kind of guy for us to imitate, not fumbling inepts like Einstein or Big Bang's Raj.The Unabomber, too, foolishly convinced himself he was indifferent to social reward, then proved otherwise by an Environmentalist hatred of the achievements of industrial technology that has been produced by creative geniuses. This was self-hatred, because his own superior mind had cost him a normal and necessary social and sexual life. The Psychoses of a Theoretical Mathematician. One book that set me off-course was "Martin Eden," Jack London's autobiographical novel. I saw myself as someone from the uneducated working class improving himself so he could marry someone from the elegant and comfortable upper class. I wanted to rise into that well-publicized world so much that I ignored the downer ending of the book. I'll try to avoid going off-topic, but I had an insight that it didn't have to be that way in the book. Martin Eden meets one of his former loves from the working class, and she says she'd do anything for him. Why did that have to exclude her educating herself like he did? I guess it is relevant, because after I rejected academia, I had the fantasy of doing that with one of the women I was again stuck with. But, except for those who got suckered into the intellectualism trap, all those I met had the anti-learning attitude that such study-for-its-own-sake was for weirdos.
Since I still retained a leftover feeling that at least science was for "weirdos," I concentrated on Liberal Arts subjects, especially Latin, Greek, and Russian. This was only because the sadistic Jesuits gave us courses in all three, but, on my own, I became fascinated with languages and the connected Indo-European etymologies. So, even though I started as strictly ambitious for materialistic success and escaping from the socio-economic class I was born in, I was becoming more and more addicted to mind-candy. That is by design from the ruling class; they want you to become a pushover bookworm. However, I wasn't escaping because I was miserable; I had become a winner and wanted more. Besides, I got a feeling of pride in rejecting success once I got it the summer before high school, because it had been so irrational to deprive me of it in grade school.
I rejected the idea of finding college-bound female grinds. It would still take up too much of my time. Being so young, I had the foolish idea that every minute counts. Warren Buffett was the same way; I'm sure I'm the only one to make that comparison (as also comparing a High IQ today with Achilles). Even though in high school he made as much money as his teachers, he spent none of it on a social life. His reasoning was that if he spends $10 on that today, instead of investing it, he'd be missing a $100 return on it later. Same with me, even money-wise. Every little bit I studied at 15 might be just enough to get me the highest grades and pay off with a $100 an hour job at 25.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Sept 30, 2019 19:37:04 GMT -5
John Nash suppressed his natural human desires so well that he didn't feel any desire pulling him into becoming popular with the other students. This self-limiting for the sake of escapist learning was what led to his later insanity. The moral of his life story is that A-students better become Alpha Males, even at the expense of lowering their grades to focus on manning themselves up. When he lucked out into marrying a stunningly beautiful woman, he was not only unprepared for such a high experience, he realize that he should have been rewarded in high school as much for his superior mind as superior athletes were. I love the action of the main character in John O'Hara's From the Terrace in purposely making a beeline for the most beautiful girl at a dance; that's the kind of guy for us to imitate, not fumbling inepts like Einstein or Big Bang's Raj.The Unabomber, too, foolishly convinced himself he was indifferent to social reward, then proved otherwise by an Environmentalist hatred of the achievements of industrial technology that has been produced by creative geniuses. This was self-hatred, because his own superior mind had cost him a normal and necessary social and sexual life. The Psychoses of a Theoretical Mathematician. One book that set me off-course was "Martin Eden," Jack London's autobiographical novel. I saw myself as someone from the uneducated working class improving himself so he could marry someone from the elegant and comfortable upper class. I wanted to rise into that well-publicized world so much that I ignored the downer ending of the book. I'll try to avoid going off-topic, but I had an insight that it didn't have to be that way in the book. Martin Eden meets one of his former loves from the working class, and she says she'd do anything for him. Why did that have to exclude her educating herself like he did? I guess it is relevant, because after I rejected academia, I had the fantasy of doing that with one of the women I was again stuck with. But, except for those who got suckered into the intellectualism trap, all those I met had the anti-learning attitude that such study-for-its-own-sake was for weirdos.
Since I still retained a leftover feeling that at least science was for "weirdos," I concentrated on Liberal Arts subjects, especially Latin, Greek, and Russian. This was only because the sadistic Jesuits gave us courses in all three, but, on my own, I became fascinated with languages and the connected Indo-European etymologies. So, even though I started as strictly ambitious for materialistic success and escaping from the socio-economic class I was born in, I was becoming more and more addicted to mind-candy. That is by design from the ruling class; they want you to become a pushover bookworm. However, I wasn't escaping because I was miserable; I had become a winner and wanted more. Besides, I got a feeling of pride in rejecting success once I got it the summer before high school, because it had been so irrational to deprive me of it in grade school.
I rejected the idea of finding college-bound female grinds. It would still take up too much of my time. Being so young, I had the foolish idea that every minute counts. Warren Buffett was the same way; I'm sure I'm the only one to make that comparison (as also comparing a High IQ today with Achilles). Even though in high school he made as much money as his teachers, he spent none of it on a social life. His reasoning was that if he spends $10 on that today, instead of investing it, he'd be missing a $100 return on it later. Same with me, even money-wise. Every little bit I studied at 15 might be just enough to get me the highest grades and pay off with a $100 an hour job at 25. In high school, I In high school, I should purposely gotten low enough grades to get out of the grind of Honors Class. Actually I started out almost right there, going out for football and track and having an active dating life. I also should have gotten an afternoon job, replacing sports with bodybuilding or whatever regimen I had time for. But the 26 miles I had to travel back and forth to school each day also squeezed me into giving up all that and pushed me into the self-destructive opportunity of "education."
In junior year, I thought I could normalize my hermit existence by writing letters to that girl I met on summer vacation before freshman year. She blew it in her first letter with the crushing phrase, "You sound like you're pretty smart, so I don't think we'll get along." Although our correspondence was getting more and more friendly, especially from her side, I was haunted by her initial irrational reaction and finally had to drop her. She wrote back, "Please write. Please."
During our correspondence, JFK was assassinated. Like a fool, I had been sucked in by his richkid glitter. He was my role model, which only would have been realistic if my Daddy, too, had been a billionaire. In fact, Bill Gates had a safety net for his pseudo-daring activities because his Daddy was the second richest lawyer in Seattle. Warren Buffett only was inspired to start his own businesses as a teenager because his Daddy was a big shot, a U.S. Congressmen. Like myself, many other kids could have and should have done the same thing, but we were brought up to think of ourselves as future employees, not employers. We should have realized that college is designed for richkids living off an adult allowance. Knowing your class-biased limitations can be fruitful instead of depressing. Play all the angles on that; they sucker you into following their lead without having their Daddy's money and connections. College for anyone but them is for teenagers who are afraid to grow up.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Oct 3, 2019 19:23:49 GMT -5
One book that set me off-course was "Martin Eden," Jack London's autobiographical novel. I saw myself as someone from the uneducated working class improving himself so he could marry someone from the elegant and comfortable upper class. I wanted to rise into that well-publicized world so much that I ignored the downer ending of the book. I'll try to avoid going off-topic, but I had an insight that it didn't have to be that way in the book. Martin Eden meets one of his former loves from the working class, and she says she'd do anything for him. Why did that have to exclude her educating herself like he did? I guess it is relevant, because after I rejected academia, I had the fantasy of doing that with one of the women I was again stuck with. But, except for those who got suckered into the intellectualism trap, all those I met had the anti-learning attitude that such study-for-its-own-sake was for weirdos.
Since I still retained a leftover feeling that at least science was for "weirdos," I concentrated on Liberal Arts subjects, especially Latin, Greek, and Russian. This was only because the sadistic Jesuits gave us courses in all three, but, on my own, I became fascinated with languages and the connected Indo-European etymologies. So, even though I started as strictly ambitious for materialistic success and escaping from the socio-economic class I was born in, I was becoming more and more addicted to mind-candy. That is by design from the ruling class; they want you to become a pushover bookworm. However, I wasn't escaping because I was miserable; I had become a winner and wanted more. Besides, I got a feeling of pride in rejecting success once I got it the summer before high school, because it had been so irrational to deprive me of it in grade school.
I rejected the idea of finding college-bound female grinds. It would still take up too much of my time. Being so young, I had the foolish idea that every minute counts. Warren Buffett was the same way; I'm sure I'm the only one to make that comparison (as also comparing a High IQ today with Achilles). Even though in high school he made as much money as his teachers, he spent none of it on a social life. His reasoning was that if he spends $10 on that today, instead of investing it, he'd be missing a $100 return on it later. Same with me, even money-wise. Every little bit I studied at 15 might be just enough to get me the highest grades and pay off with a $100 an hour job at 25. In high school, I In high school, I should purposely gotten low enough grades to get out of the grind of Honors Class. Actually I started out almost right there, going out for football and track and having an active dating life. I also should have gotten an afternoon job, replacing sports with bodybuilding or whatever regimen I had time for. But the 26 miles I had to travel back and forth to school each day also squeezed me into giving up all that and pushed me into the self-destructive opportunity of "education."
In junior year, I thought I could normalize my hermit existence by writing letters to that girl I met on summer vacation before freshman year. She blew it in her first letter with the crushing phrase, "You sound like you're pretty smart, so I don't think we'll get along." Although our correspondence was getting more and more friendly, especially from her side, I was haunted by her initial irrational reaction and finally had to drop her. She wrote back, "Please write. Please."
During our correspondence, JFK was assassinated. Like a fool, I had been sucked in by his richkid glitter. He was my role model, which only would have been realistic if my Daddy, too, had been a billionaire. In fact, Bill Gates had a safety net for his pseudo-daring activities because his Daddy was the second richest lawyer in Seattle. Warren Buffett only was inspired to start his own businesses as a teenager because his Daddy was a big shot, a U.S. Congressmen. Like myself, many other kids could have and should have done the same thing, but we were brought up to think of ourselves as future employees, not employers. We should have realized that college is designed for richkids living off an adult allowance. Knowing your class-biased limitations can be fruitful instead of depressing. Play all the angles on that; they sucker you into following their lead without having their Daddy's money and connections. College for anyone but them is for teenagers who are afraid to grow up. When I read that John Nash was never even tempted to become "one of the guys," I envied his aloofness. But that's what drove him insane, suppressing his natural instincts, diving so deeply into his mind that it was too far for him ever to come up for air. So he made a personal mistake in order to rise high in the stratosphere of science. But you can't breathe there, either.
Linus Pauling's childhood was outside any social environment I've ever experienced. Normal kids thought he was cool with all his chemistry experiments. But the starving artist in a garret experience of being a college student made him desperately fall in love with the first girl he ever had the money to date, a beautiful Communist nutcase, which destroyed his ideological abilities. The point is the scientist is far more important than his science, so we should abandon this secular religion of human sacrifice. It crushes our manhood so we'll become pushovers as inventor-employees.
The crushed nerds who hide away in academia and its theoretical mumbo-jumbo benefit the corporate dumb jock bullies by teaching future corporate patsies. Or at least by not standing up to the way the plutocratic parasites enslave geniuses. We created all the world's weapons and can easily, through hacking, confiscate all the loot taken from our predecessors. They are aware of that, so they benefit by pacifying us just as much as they benefit by stealing our work through corporate patents. Until we take it all away, they will gain it all.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Ryan on Oct 7, 2019 19:38:43 GMT -5
In high school, I should purposely gotten low enough grades to get out of the grind of Honors Class. Actually I started out almost right there, going out for football and track and having an active dating life. I also should have gotten an afternoon job, replacing sports with bodybuilding or whatever regimen I had time for. But the 26 miles I had to travel back and forth to school each day also squeezed me into giving up all that and pushed me into the self-destructive opportunity of "education."
In junior year, I thought I could normalize my hermit existence by writing letters to that girl I met on summer vacation before freshman year. She blew it in her first letter with the crushing phrase, "You sound like you're pretty smart, so I don't think we'll get along." Although our correspondence was getting more and more friendly, especially from her side, I was haunted by her initial irrational reaction and finally had to drop her. She wrote back, "Please write. Please."
During our correspondence, JFK was assassinated. Like a fool, I had been sucked in by his richkid glitter. He was my role model, which only would have been realistic if my Daddy, too, had been a billionaire. In fact, Bill Gates had a safety net for his pseudo-daring activities because his Daddy was the second richest lawyer in Seattle. Warren Buffett only was inspired to start his own businesses as a teenager because his Daddy was a big shot, a U.S. Congressmen. Like myself, many other kids could have and should have done the same thing, but we were brought up to think of ourselves as future employees, not employers. We should have realized that college is designed for richkids living off an adult allowance. Knowing your class-biased limitations can be fruitful instead of depressing. Play all the angles on that; they sucker you into following their lead without having their Daddy's money and connections. College for anyone but them is for teenagers who are afraid to grow up. When I read that John Nash was never even tempted to become "one of the guys," I envied his aloofness. But that's what drove him insane, suppressing his natural instincts, diving so deeply into his mind that it was too far for him ever to come up for air. So he made a personal mistake in order to rise high in the stratosphere of science. But you can't breathe there, either.
Linus Pauling's childhood was outside any social environment I've ever experienced. Normal kids thought he was cool with all his chemistry experiments. But the starving artist in a garret experience of being a college student made him desperately fall in love with the first girl he ever had the money to date, a beautiful Communist nutcase, which destroyed his ideological abilities. The point is the scientist is far more important than his science, so we should abandon this secular religion of human sacrifice. It crushes our manhood so we'll become pushovers as inventor-employees.
The crushed nerds who hide away in academia and its theoretical mumbo-jumbo benefit the corporate dumb jock bullies by teaching future corporate patsies. Or at least by not standing up to the way the plutocratic parasites enslave geniuses. We created all the world's weapons and can easily, through hacking, confiscate all the loot taken from our predecessors. They are aware of that, so they benefit by pacifying us just as much as they benefit by stealing our work through corporate patents. Until we take it all away, they will gain it all. Wow—somehow I lost a couple of paragraphs. First, I want to get it in that before I dumped my social life, "I couldn't get every girl I wanted, but I could always get some girl I wanted." When I re-entered it after being away for two and a half critical years, I had lost my nerve and couldn't even get a girl nobody wanted. Anyway, ambition was my fault; I should have realized the complicated situation I had to balance for psychological health and not dropped out from life to get some superior position as a reward for that. Could I have made such a radical change as taking normal courses by transferring to the local public high school. Why not, when the course I did take was so unique? Before I found out that education was a self-destructive way, I could have studied a little in the hours I had met all my needs in other areas.
|
|