Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
(Serving suggestion.)

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                                                                         

Dingaling Quotient

Just like an Intelligence Quotient, on a different scale.
  (+3, -11)(+3, -11)
(+3, -11)
  [vote for,
against]

Whilst the IQ is an imperfect measure of intelligence, it's still a moderately useful tool for discriminating a level of granularity of cognitive capability.

There's also DSM IV, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (ed. 4), used to establish the level of disorder of a person's mind, according to comparison against the standards for a range of known disorders.

However, there is a system of measurement that has not yet been applied to people, to establish just how "Loopy" they really are, in their everyday dealings with the world, other people and reality.

The DQ (Yes, I know, it's an abbreviation for Disqualified) takes into account the observable level of religious fervo(u)r and conviction; number of tattoos vs number of teeth; level of education; affiliation with patriotic and gun ownership clubs; number of vehicles (Working vs non- working, front yard vs back); number of children birthed/sired (before and after the age of 16) and the average of the last 5 years' income from legal sources.

At the end of the process you get a number that you can use to reasonably reliably estimate the likelihood of getting any common sense out of the test subject.

UnaBubba, Jun 01 2012

[link]






       Observable Religious Fervor and Conviction: other than proudly declaring myself a Heathen, I keep it to myself.   

       Tattoos: none   

       Teeth: all save for one   

       Level of (formal) Education: technical college   

       Patriotism: extreme, in my own way; no organized affiliation   

       Gun Ownership Club Membership: I'm not much of a joiner   

       Vehicles: four working, three non-working (all in back yard)   

       Children: none   

       Average of Last Five Years' Legal Income: $2.13   

       How do I score, Bubba?
Alterother, Jun 01 2012
  

       Better than most.   

       We have a "family" (Not sure how they're all related) in our neighbourhood (10 acres blocks, well out of town) with 8 kids; 6 dogs; 5 horses; 15- 20 goats; upwards of 20 cars and 60-70 tattoos and about 30 teeth between them.   

       There are signs on their front fence exhorting passers-by to turn to their god (who's obviously saving up all of their allotment of riches, milk and honey for them after they have succumbed to tuberculosis or sexually transmissible, incest-borne disease) and they send the kids out, pamphletting the entire area every Saturday.   

       I suspect they're also the source of the volleys of gunshots loosed in the area, late on Friday and Saturday nights.   

       They're a source of inspiration.
UnaBubba, Jun 01 2012
  

       I remember having a conversation with someone who I thought was quite articulate and intelligent and then realising from something she said that she believed, quite seriously, in astrology. Funny how something like that can immediately change your view of someone.
hippo, Jun 01 2012
  

       Yep. That's the sort of thing I mean. You get under the exterior and they turn into monster, raving loonies.
UnaBubba, Jun 01 2012
  

       I am confused, did her belief in astrology make her any less articulate or intelligent [hippo]?   

       //who I thought was quite ... intelligent//   

       He stated his perceptions. And yes, a firm belief in astrology would have a significant impact on my opinion of somone's intelligence.
MechE, Jun 01 2012
  

       I have a very stong spiritual side to me (strong enough to tell me that astrology is bunk), yet I've never had trouble letting it stand in the way of reason or scientific unterstanding. It always seems to just 'fit in' with what I'm learning. There appear to be others whose spirituality functions in the same way; is it a measure of intelligence or our capacity for understanding? Or is it something else... The religion of Science, perhaps?
Alterother, Jun 01 2012
  

       A spirtual side or religous belief that doesn't preclude rational thought otherwise should not significantly increase an individual's DQ. However, I would put out there that a belief in astrology, in specific, is a pretty strong indicator of a lack of rational thought, since it requires the spiritual acting in the visible world in a way that is contradictory to our understanding of the universe.   

       It's not having a belief, it's maintaining that said belief justifies not accepting the observable facts of the universe.
MechE, Jun 01 2012
  

       Bingo. To me, the observable facts of the universe influence and inform my spirituality. My beliefs are a constantly evolving and growing model of the ineffable aspects of reality. There's a lot more to it than this, but I can give a reduced example by stating that I consider what I call 'spirit' (for lack of a better term) to be a third state of existence, alongside matter and energy. Thus:   

       Matter = Body   

       Energy = Mind   

       Spirit = Soul   

       Establishing the correlation between the External Universe, which is all around us, and the Internal Universe, which is within each of us.   

       Which probably means I'm a total kook.
Alterother, Jun 01 2012
  

       Humorous judgemental bigotry passed off as an idea.
RayfordSteele, Jun 01 2012
  

       This doesn't factor in the various types of intelligence and therefore I'd have to disagree with it. Plus, I like nonconformists and I have met enough eccentrics to have learned that they often have more perception than standard.
Phrontistery, Jun 01 2012
  

       // The religion of Science //   

       Tautology.   

       Religion requires Belief in that which is unprovable.   

       Science requires that assertions are amenable to proof, repeatable and consistent.   

       No-one denigrates Newton because he didn't think up Relativity; and Einstein repeatedly referred to his concepts as "a step forward" and "nothing more than an improved model" which he expected to be superseded.   

       Religion is about dogma; Science is about questioning.
8th of 7, Jun 01 2012
  

       You raise a valid argument. Perhaps 'religion' was the wrong word, especially as I, a very spiritual person, do not consider myself to be religious. My beliefs are as far from dogmatic as it is possible to be.   

       I was proposing a spiritual leaning that is questioning, dynamic, open to suggestion and even skepticism, and adamantly opposed to the rejection of science. I endeavor to observe the unobservable through feeling and intuition, but not to present it as fact. There is no proof (nor is it sought), there is only perception and consideration of that which is felt in the soul.   

       And yes, I know that drives my DQ through the roof.
Alterother, Jun 01 2012
  

       I know next to nothing of astrology, certainly not enough to believe in it, but I find it... ironic, (I think that's the right word) that a large portion of the first sciences were discovered by those who did believe in it, or at least in devining knowlege from the movements of the stars.   

       No, I don't have any specifics.   

       That sounds about right. Some of the first calendars and number systems are linked to astrological systems.   

       It's one of those external locus of control things they talk about in psychology. This idea is not a new one in psychology which of course as a psuedo-science is all abot evaluating and measuring. There are all sorts of metrics in all sorts of areas related to personality and abnormal psychology.
rcarty, Jun 02 2012
  

       It's salutary that every culture and every time made up its own constellations, from the same stars. The idea that some imaginary shape denoted by the current (they are all moving relative to each other) star positions and obviously invented by a stargazer with an overactive imagination could somehow influence the course of your life is simply risible.
UnaBubba, Jun 02 2012
  

       Given a few centuries, stargazing and campfire stories became extremely influential mythologies. That's how we got half-crocodile/half -hippopotami that devour the hearts of the unworthy and one-eyed god-kings that ponder the secrets of the universe whilst hanging by one foot from a tree the size of the world.
Alterother, Jun 02 2012
  

       //Your perception is all wrong.//   

       Now there's an understatement...
From what I've seen, peoples' beliefs are, for the most part, ingrained in them as children and they aren't able to easilly cast them aside without guilt or feeling that they are betraying their elders. Having grown up without a belief system I think that blind faith in anything is completely whacked and yet I am not an athiest.
  

       It's all very confusing.   

       I think maybe my open-minded approach to spirituality was ingrained in me as a child, since my parents are neither religious nor concerned with religion and spiritualism, and have always encouraged me to examine the world around me and make my own choices.   

       I think religion is something that should be objectively presented to children as a viable option, making it clear that there are many to choose from (or not).
Alterother, Jun 02 2012
  

       // // The religion of Science //

Tautology.
//

- did you mean "Oxymoron"?
hippo, Jun 02 2012
  

       I thought religion was about comfort. Under a sky filled with stars, or when the thunder rolls and lightning cracks across the sky, I can see an early human trying to make sense of that in order to feel somehow safe in the world. What has happened to that feeling since is a very different matter but taking comfort away from anyone?... not really in me to agree with that. Rational thought doesn't have all the answers and I see nothing wrong with a compromise that cuts some slack both ways.
Phrontistery, Jun 02 2012
  

       // -did you mean "Oxymoron" ?//   

       No. But it is also an oxymoron.   

       We quote one of the several definitions of 'Tautology' : "A series of self-reinforcing statements that cannot be disproved because they depend on the assumption that they are already correct".   

       Sounds pretty much like religion to us …
8th of 7, Jun 02 2012
  

       That also describes a skill employed by talented fiction writers... hmm...
Alterother, Jun 02 2012
  

       You're safe, then ...
8th of 7, Jun 02 2012
  

       // shear force of will //   

       Clearly you feel somewhat cut up about this …
8th of 7, Jun 03 2012
  

       Yes, he's obviously torn...
Alterother, Jun 03 2012
  

       //forced to go to sunday school, watching the new pope burn toast on tv etc.//   

       Naw, that's not what I mean.
(crap I don't know what I mean)
I saw evil at a young age. I saw good at a young age.
The evil I saw followed the laws of physics. Some of the good I saw/see didn't/doesn't.
  

       Go figure.   

       // insufferable git. //   

       Thank you! I think very highly of you as well, [bigs].
Alterother, Jun 03 2012
  

       Don't know about the American dream, just the Canadian dream of peace prosperity and politeness in pleasing proportions.
Anarchy isn't the answer of course but minarchy might be...
The physics defying things I've seen have almost never been self-serving. That's kind of what puts them in the 'good' category.
  

       This isn't really helping my DQ much is it?   

       This isn't a slight against anyone here, but I'm not sure if most people understand what anarchy really is. I'm absolutely positive that self-professed 'anarchists' do not.
Alterother, Jun 03 2012
  

       Don't feel bad, [Alter]. I'm pretty sure most of the users here don't understand the meaning of liberal, democracy, communism or socialism, from what I've seen.
UnaBubba, Jun 03 2012
  

       That's okay; neither do most liberals, democratists, communists, and socialists.   

       I don't know whether it's funny or sad that so many people fail to actually learn the textbook definitions of the social/political philosophies they claim to identify with. For that matter, the same extends to religion. I've seen an awful lot of christians do some very un-Christian things, and I'm reasonably certain there's nothing in the Qu'ran (sp.?) about killing yourself and a whole crowd of innocent people around you to try and prove some vaguely defined political point. All of the Jews I've ever known were well- educated in their religion, but fewer than a dozen individuals does not an accurate demographic make.   

       I, on the other hand, am a Heathen, and I know exactly what that means.
Alterother, Jun 03 2012
  

       It's just another term with multiple meanings so what does it mean when you use it?
Phrontistery, Jun 03 2012
  

       The original, most literal meaning: one who dwells on the heath; figuratively, one who lives outside of societal boundaries. I also use it for the Pagan connotation, because I am one, though my spiritual paradigm bears little resemblance to those of the pre-Viking Teutono-Nordic tribes who were first collectively known as Heathens.
Alterother, Jun 03 2012
  

       Why do people feel they need to define themselves in terms of what they do or don't believe?   

       Isn't there already enough to do in life without that?
UnaBubba, Jun 04 2012
  

       Hah!
UnaBubba, Jun 04 2012
  

       Credo ut intelligam.
Phrontistery, Jun 04 2012
  

       I suspect "Panem et circenses" is closer to the money.
UnaBubba, Jun 04 2012
  

       That claim makes no sense; where's the frivolity in this discussion?
Phrontistery, Jun 04 2012
  

       I was suggesting religion is just another form of "Bread and circuses", [Phront]... a means by which the populace's examination of real problems is diverted by bullshit answers.   

       You want frivolity? The circus is two doors down.
UnaBubba, Jun 04 2012
  

       If religion is a 'bullshit answer', there are still a great many asking the question.
Phrontistery, Jun 04 2012
  

       Then there are a lot of credulous people, following previous generations' mistakes because "that's how we do things".   

       Religion is at best self-delusion; at worst it's wholesale scamming of the population. More damage and crime has been done in the names of god/s than any other cause in history.
UnaBubba, Jun 04 2012
  

       What people do in the name of anything is the real issue; politics, science et al are just as easy a bandwagon to get on. Fanatics and sheep seize on whatever suits their personal agendas; it seems illogical to blame any god for the evils people quite capably cook up all by themselves.
Phrontistery, Jun 04 2012
  

       I agree. However, religion is the most common justification for bad acts.
UnaBubba, Jun 04 2012
  

       *Common Sense* and *Intelligence* are really two entirely different concepts. Whilst your painted image of your //loopy// neighbors is just plain stereotyping, have you ever had a conversation with any of them? I tend not to judge people by any of those things, though not to say that some of the stereotypes don't fit-- oh, some of them do, but yet it's our responsibility as the more intelligent ones (?) to give each individual a chance to prove their common sense or intelligence by means other than the external situations they represent.
xandram, Jun 06 2012
  

       With respect, [xandram], I spent 5 years of my life as a repossession agent in amongst a total of 23 years spent directly involved in credit management and debt recovery. I have reached into my pocket and given some thousands of dollars to people who were genuinely suffering hardship and trying to get back to a level footing in the world. There are, however, some people who try and some who don't. I've been in the game long enough to be able to judge reasonably quickly which is which, not just by their external behaviours but also the evidence of belief systems and values they exhibit. "You can tell a lot about a man from the cut of his clothes" is an aphorism we have begun to ignore, in modern times.   

       In any case, this idea isn't about that aspect of human behaviour... it's about a perceived need for a system of measurement of the characteristics of behaviours that mark people out as eccentric, non-conformist and downright confrontational in relation to the rest of society, in a fashion that doesn't concentrate so much on the known mental illnesses and disturbances as it does on quirky and individualistic behaviours.   

       I'm not particularly surprised that it attracted a lot of fishbones here. Most people are comfortable in their assessment of the rest of their sphere of influence being roughly the same as they perceive themselves to be, to the extent they will even vote on ideas in conformist fashion, almost every time the voting starts on an idea.
UnaBubba, Jun 06 2012
  

       With respect to you also, //some who try and some who don't// would have made a better platform for this idea than pointing out how many tatoos someone has. Personally, I don't have any tatoos, but that doesn't mean I'm not crazy!!
xandram, Jun 06 2012
  

       // I thought "I was just following orders" was the most common justification for bad acts //   

       That's actually #2, just behind "The Voices told me to do it …"
8th of 7, Jun 06 2012
  

       //this idea isn't about that aspect of human behaviour... it's about a perceived need for a system of measurement of the characteristics of behaviours that mark people out as eccentric, non-conformist and downright confrontational in relation to the rest of society, in a fashion that doesn't concentrate so much on the known mental illnesses and disturbances as it does on quirky and individualistic behaviours.//   

       To what end?
I've known complete whack-jobs most people look down on that I would trust with my life and men in three piece suits I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw... and vice versa.
  

       Like [xandram] I'm not into body modification, but I've got some kick-ass toys in the 'ol attic.
My perception of reality differs from most, how could my sense be common? This seems to be more about conformity than commonality.
Perhaps what is needed is an inverse IQ scale.
  

       See, nobody thinks about negative zero.   

       (love ya [2fries]) !!! xoxo
xandram, Jun 07 2012
  

       I can't say exactly why, but this makes me think of Lewis Black's routine where he describes overhearing someone say something that drove him nuts, and that is:   

       "If it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college"
EdwinBakery, Jun 07 2012
  

       Right back atcha [xan]   
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle