'High IQ's...'

Howard Stern had a world famous actress on his program very recently, and he asked her to confirm the story about her very high IQ. And she did and the whole thing got a lot of wider coverage in the general media then.

In the same interview, however, she recounted several incidents involving Harvey Weinstein - and one in particular in which he basically prevailed upon her and her co-star John Cusack in the movie 'Serendipity,' to go on a promotional tour and 'walk red carpet premiers' as the movie was released in key cinemas around America... ...the week after 9/11.

Big new 'Expo Center' in Monaco.

What eventuated was that the agents were told to all shut their mouths and simply just have the stars do as they were told by Harvey. And certainly in very large part because he wielded so much financial influence over everyone involved, things happened as Harvey wanted.

High IQ, in this case, as in so many others, is absolutely no guarantee at all of even being able to communicate successfully with people, or have them alter their errant actions, or change their minds.

This whole question, of what kind of metric 'IQ' even is, has been done to death by so many others and I'm not intending to go back over all that here.

People in those 'elevated' levels of position of someone like Harvey Weinstein at the time, are not using 'intelligent agreement,' to get what they want - they are using force.

And simple force, 'can' overpower many narrow definitions of human 'intelligence' in many situations.

Firstly though, Harvey Weinstein is a crazy person. He's crazy because he is unbalanced in his range of available tools that he particularly relies on, must rely on -, to get what he wants.

But then what does that mean for broader human society - if he got to so high a level and remained there until he was an old man?

Hyderabad Place. Has cannon! 
...I love cannon. Boom!
You like cannon?

Well it means human society is also unbalanced...

This is an inevitable conclusion, and not one we should shy away from seeing in front of our own eyes.

...Those who are currently reading the 'Electron Spintronics' material will get glimpses though, of just how hugely 'component dense,' and complex any genuine idea of 'human intellectual balance' actually is.

People virtually everywhere with an interest in the subject, continually insist on posing the questions 'Where are these so-called ET Aliens? And why don't they simply just appear to us obviously and evidently?'

The answer is, that unlike Kate Beckinsale, who has an IQ of 152 (which is very high), their 'intellectual being' and individual personalities are so far off that kind of nominal scale, that, faced with a stupid man, trying to use force to get his way for the major reason that he has no other tools and no point that he is justified in making - they would have the tools to kill you on the spot; as well as anything in between along the way to that extreme outcome.

The reality about human society is, if someone uses force only and not reason, they have so little respect for you, that they have abandoned the option of using their forms of reason and intelligent communication with you because they do not think that you have the intellectual means to appreciate those things. In their assessment, you are not capable of using their forms of reasoning easily. 

So in this respect they also, by the same token, must have zero faith in their own abilities to 'persuade' you with logic and reasoning and communication alone.

The 'Grey Ghost' of the Himalayas.
The snow leopard.

Which means that all governments on the planet right now, are like that... They have no faith in their own innate abilities and therefore employ armed forces, both against external opposition and against their own 'subjects' whom they stand over.

And so the chance of a truly super advanced intelligent species, engaging fulsomely with any human government/s - is 'nil.' ...Because they will recognize them as being unbalanced.

And this is actually a problem too, because it means they can, might, would if they have a cause to, wipe you out totally and with absolutely no respect at all either, potentially - especially if you are standing in the way of something they happen to really want. Which should they 'respect' you?

However, things might not be so dire. Superficially at least, it looks like humans anyway, have a moral concept that says we don't go about wiping out entire species just because we wish to build condos on their habit... Well, that kind of thing is done - Indonesia almost wiped out entire forestry regions inclusive of subspecies of certain trees, Brazil has done it too for oil and mining and other things; but we claim we don't want to do it and that it is immoral.

So we should imagine a really super advanced intelligent species, which is a moral one, will not wipe us out so callously either.

But in fact humans themselves are so intellectually unbalanced and yet so able to wield material force, that they often politically weaponize 'moral cause,' and use sophistry to push something so far to the edges that it literally becomes the opposite thing to what was at first being avoided.

For example: it is winter and the atmosphere is cold, and so you start a fire. Then, you make it a raging flame, and stick a person's arm into it. Greta Thunberg is this kind of thing.

...Man-made industry causes pollution, which harms people's lives in the end whilst bringing some immediate perceived benefits - so, let's just remove 'people' from the whole equation altogether; because 'you' are bad. 'You' are changing the climate... Not, 'industrial pollution is harming the environment.' It's 'you.' You, your thinking, your desires (especially those), your lifestyle -, all are the villain. You, should therefore do as you're told -, do according to what I am screaming at you as orders (same way Harvey Weinstein screamed at Kate Beckinsale), and you'd better get used to following the instructions and orders I am giving to you, and that way, you won't protest when I march you off to the gas chambers.

Also grey - bloody noisy though!

Every single time that force becomes the first basis of the power behind the argument - the explicit threat, either in word, or text, or speech - it means that person does not respect you enough to grant you the capacity to agree on your own by weight of the logic of the argument.

But then, you see, the argument also need not have had any objective moral 'logic.' They want something, and they don't give a damn about 'logic' or moral reasoning. 

These kinds of ideologies are usually one-way streets that are designed to benefit just the one person, or one side with some sole individual on top. That is the definition, too, for a cult mindset. And it will make you, force you, to bow to it without sufficient reasoning. You are nothing at all, but a slave to the edict.

You might think though - and you are entitled to think this: but then how do we get around some person using overwhelming material force against us, just even against our thoughts, so that we are not even being allowed to present them for honest assessment?

How do you prevent a wild animal from striking in the moment? You draw a gun and shoot it.

In the case of 'wild animals' you shouldn't have been there, but in the case of being among human beings, theoretically, they are supposed to have overcome their 'wild animal' natures...

That's when it becomes open season, though.

'Mr. Bester.' Babylon 5, you remember.

'Material force' is about the time coding inside of which 'things' happen and certainly appear to the basic senses, to happen. Human beings tend to shift their focus selectively onto things they 'like to see,' and they can block out entirely, those things they don't like to see.

And some people remind their inner minds that there is something wrong with them! So they block those people out of their view entirely, and shift their attention off them. These tend to be the people they use material force against - because they of course, cannot use (their) 'reasoning' against them; because the 'reasons' they have, are unsustainable.

Weinstein did use material force against Beckinsale in that he never employed her again and appeared to have her blocked from a lot of A-lister movie roles.

But she is not a really super advanced intelligent being - she is a person with a 'high IQ.'

You would be a person with a really super advanced intelligence at least by some way through the 'Electron Spintronics' program. And then you could call 'open season' on whoever you wanted. I supposed that's the danger with this stuff. And which is why we stick a small pay wall there along with lots of questions. You can make preliminary inquiries via here: interdeq@iinet.net.au