Why are Thai people so against thinking?

[Brunolem]

9 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj6gL3vmuzdAhUZb30KHR8dBuwQFjACegQICRAL&url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.adioma.com%2F9-types-of-intelligence-infographic%2F&usg=AOvVaw0k1JH7bdtxFQTYcZj4UJKm

 

Just a very short reading.

There is no need to create so many sections (I noticed that one was represented by the picture of a Thai boxer...coincidence?).

 

Real intelligence is the capacity of making a good use of one's...intelligence!

 

It is called wisdom and it is sorely missing all over the world...

[jackspade]

17 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj6gL3vmuzdAhUZb30KHR8dBuwQFjACegQICRAL&url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.adioma.com%2F9-types-of-intelligence-infographic%2F&usg=AOvVaw0k1JH7bdtxFQTYcZj4UJKm

 

Just a very short reading.

 

There is insight to draw from models of intelligence such as this, but this is merely a single theory by one Howard Gardner.

 

Where's the peer-reviewed corroboration from the scientific community? At best, I believe that, along with the likes of the MBTI, models of intelligence and personality that lack true repeatable evidence are mere pseudoscience, though they may be pragmatically helpful in some cases.

 

IQ is the closest thing anybody has to a true validation of intelligence, albeit a narrowly-defined one.

Edited October 4, 2018 by jackspade

[Odysseus123]

I have just read that-bang on I would say..

 

A case in point Ludwig van Beethoven-poor in social skills but  sublime in terms of musical skills.

Therefore I think that Jaynes is correct in so far that Beethoven (and the Thai) rate higher in right brain skills but less so in left brain ones (logic,rationalty etc)

 

It is a pleasure talking to you..please spare a few  minutes of your time..

 

 

Edited October 4, 2018 by Odysseus123

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, jackspade said:

 

There is insight to draw from models of intelligence such as this, but where's the peer-reviewed corroboration from the scientific community? At best, I believe that, along with the likes of the MBTI, models of intelligence and personality that lack true repeatable evidence are mere pseudoscience, though they may be pragmatically helpful in some cases.

 

IQ is the closest thing anybody has to a true validation of intelligence, albeit a narrowly-defined one.

Really, some insight is all i am asking for, we could discuss it for aeons.

If you look at other sites about " different kinds of intelligence", the subject is very much debated in the scientific community, some say there are on 3 kinds, some say 7 and so on.

If you ask me ( i know you didn't ) goodness , compassion, unselfishness, are also kinds of intelligence.

[jackspade]

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Really, some insight is all i am asking for, we could discuss it for aeons.

If you look at other sites about " different kinds of intelligence", the subject is very much debated in the scientific community, some say there are on 3 kinds, some say 7 and so on.

If you ask me ( i know you didn't ) goodness , compassion, unselfishness, are also kinds of intelligence.

 

I wouldn't say compassion or goodness are forms of intelligence. I have a cousin with Down's Syndrome. He is extremely kind and compassionate, and would never think of doing anything for selfish reasons. But no one would say he is "intelligent".

 

However, you do have a point that traditional intelligence isn't all that matters in life—compassion and decency are equally (and perhaps more) important. So my cousin is a step above many.

Edited October 4, 2018 by jackspade

[Odysseus123]

2 minutes ago, jackspade said:

 

I wouldn't say compassion or goodness are forms of intelligence. I have a cousin with Down's Syndrome. He is extremely kind and compassionate, and would never think of doing anything for selfish reasons. But no one would say he is "intelligent".

 

However, you do have a point that traditional intelligence isn't all that matters in life—compassion and decency are equally (and perhaps more) important. So my cousin is a step above many.

Yes..he probably is.

 

After all does one really want to be like Gordon Gecko?

 

And really..they occupy-in the end about 6' X 4' -a fact actually noted by Harold Godwinsson at the battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066.

 

Harald Hardrada chose to disagree with him...hence no known grave.

Edited October 4, 2018 by Odysseus123

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, jackspade said:

 

I wouldn't say compassion or goodness are forms of intelligence. I have a cousin with Down's Syndrome. He is extremely kind and compassionate, and would never think of doing anything for selfish reasons. But no one would say he is "intelligent".

 

However, you do have a point that traditional intelligence isn't all that matters in life—compassion and decency are equally (and perhaps more) important. So my cousin is a step above many.

Of course you are right on the semantics, and i agree that your cousin is a big step above many.

I believe in the karmic law, so to use intelligence for bad purposes is actually not intelligent at all.

[Brunolem]

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

 

I believe in the karmic law, so to use intelligence for bad purposes is actually not intelligent at all.

Let's look at the issue from the opposite direction.

 

Nowadays, in our society which is not built on wisdom, people are considered intelligent when they fit certain criteria, such as:

- getting good marks at school

- being admitted into some selected colleges and universities

- getting a job in some selected corporations, or creating a new and successful one

- and above all making lots of money, the more the better...and the smarter you are considered

 

If you don't fit these criteria, you are at best ignored and at worst ridiculed, but no one will take you seriously.

 

In today's world, people like Da Vinci or Darwin would never be able to bring their thougts to fruition.

 

This probably explains why, despite our fixation on progress, we don't achieve any real progress, on the contrary...more and more are opening their eyes and talking about decline.

 

 

[OzMan]

On 9/27/2018 at 12:23 PM, afsheen said:

I noticed that even if you talk about the most simple thing, thai people will often say either "You think too much",  "Not think too much" or "stop think, make headache"

 

Why are Thai people so against thinking? Is it something to do with Buddhism?

What do you mean?

[Odysseus123]

4 hours ago, Brunolem said:

Let's look at the issue from the opposite direction.

 

Nowadays, in our society which is not built on wisdom, people are considered intelligent when they fit certain criteria, such as:

- getting good marks at school

- being admitted into some selected colleges and universities

- getting a job in some selected corporations, or creating a new and successful one

- and above all making lots of money, the more the better...and the smarter you are considered

 

If you don't fit these criteria, you are at best ignored and at worst ridiculed, but no one will take you seriously.

 

In today's world, people like Da Vinci or Darwin would never be able to bring their thougts to fruition.

 

This probably explains why, despite our fixation on progress, we don't achieve any real progress, on the contrary...more and more are opening their eyes and talking about decline.

 

 

Or course Darwin..Da Vinci et al..would be able to do so.

 

And their descendants are doing so too..

 

Oh wait..what do you mean by "our" society?

 

[bwpage3]

12 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Although my wife is quite intelligent, when she deals with a repairman or contractor or the like, I always encourage her to anticipate issues ahead of time, and ask two or three additional questions. Does it ever happen? Never. I ask her what time will they show up? I don't know. Will they call first to let us know they are coming? I did not ask. Will he bring spare parts with him? Did not ask. What are his rates? Did not ask. Does he have any experience with this brand? Etc, etc. 

 

Granted sometimes we over think things. But sometimes that can be helpful and there is nothing wrong with being armed with information. 

 

Alot comes down to culture and education. And fear. Alot simply will not ask the right questions. I do not necessarily think it is about a lack of intelligence. Maybe more about a lack of curiosity or sophistication? Or free thinking? An extraordinarily high number of Thai people live in very small boxes of convention. 

This reminds me of the many times the water would be off with no warning.

 

Make a trip to the water department.

 

Why is the water off? Don't know

 

When is the water coming back on? Don't know

 

Who can I speak with that knows when the water will come back on? Don't know

 

Then it usually ends with someone at the water department stating "The water will come back on sometime"

 

By the time you get home, the water might already be back on, or it may be off for a few days

 

Don't know

[marcusarelus]

34 minutes ago, bwpage3 said:

This reminds me of the many times the water would be off with no warning.

 

Make a trip to the water department.

 

Why is the water off? Don't know

 

When is the water coming back on? Don't know

 

Who can I speak with that knows when the water will come back on? Don't know

 

Then it usually ends with someone at the water department stating "The water will come back on sometime"

 

By the time you get home, the water might already be back on, or it may be off for a few days

 

Don't know

I grew up without electricity in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.  We went to the city and asked when the electric lines would come to our cabin a couple of times and they said, "don't know."  So we cut ice In the winter and put it in a sawdust lined underground storage area.  It kept food cold all summer.

 

My water went off a couple of times in Thailand and I bought a tank and pump with enough water for a week.  The tank and pump were cheap.  That's what thinking people do in Thailand.  People in Thailand think a lot just not the way you think. 

 

I adapted years ago and I'm happy.  You didn't and left and choose to keep coming on a Thai forum to let everyone know how unhappy you are.  Most Thais would look at your behavior and think a minute and then say him beating a dead buffalo.  Like who cares? 

 

100 years ago Thais didn't have a problem getting water.  They had the below jars in front of every house and little fish in to eat the mosquito larvae.

 

But your post is a good example of why you never fit in here.

 

 

 

Edited October 4, 2018 by marcusarelus

[Brunolem]

1 hour ago, Odysseus123 said:

Or course Darwin..Da Vinci et al..would be able to do so.

 

And their descendants are doing so too..

 

Oh wait..what do you mean by "our" society?

 

Who are their descendants?

[Odysseus123]

5 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Who are their descendants?

Come on now..

 

You know as well as I do that we are pushing the limits in in every scientific field every day-if,for no other reason,there is fierce competitiveness to do so..

 

By the way,,Charles Darwin was fiercely competitive(almost Adlerian) and walked off the HMS Beagle without even saying goodbye to Captain Robert FitzRoy..

 

FitzRoy never forgave him-and,strangely enough,was the better and far more humane man.

[A1Str8]

Because thats how they are conditioned. The method is simple. The less someone thinks, the more s/he can be controlled.

[marcusarelus]

18 minutes ago, A1Str8 said:

Because thats how they are conditioned. The method is simple. The less someone thinks, the more s/he can be controlled.

Most Thai people get up in the morning and go to a job other than agriculture (60%).  Lets say Ford because it employs many workers in Thailand and America.  What thinking does a Ford employee in America do that a Ford employee in Thailand does not do?  Gets up goes to work - works - comes home - drinks a beer watches football and goes to bed.   I've worked for Ford in Thailand and America and I don't see any difference.  Do you?

Edited October 4, 2018 by marcusarelus

[Brunolem]

1 minute ago, Odysseus123 said:

Come on now..

 

You know as well as I do that we are pushing the limits in in every scientific field every day-if,for no other reason,there is fierce competitiveness to do so..

 

By the way,,Charles Darwin was fiercely competitive(

Competitive I don't know, but Darwin sat on his theory of evolution for about 20 years, and was only motivated to publish because Wallace was about to publish his own similar theory.

 

Not much in a hurry for a competitive guy...

 

Curiously, Newton had done the same with his Principia which he kept as if it was of no importance.

 

Nowadays, it is rather the opposite...sell first and think later!

 

Science today is about improving on older discoveries: faster, smaller, more powerful and so on.

 

Da Vinci and Darwin came with radically new ideas and concepts.

 

Closer to us, the scientists who met in Solvay in the 1920s, a dream team without any equivalent in history, were developing entirely new theories: relativity and quantum, with which scientists work today.

 

In medicine, vaccines and antibiotics were also new when they were discovered long ago.

 

Today, medical advances are mostly the result of new machines, themselves derived from quantum theory.

 

Meanwhile, no real progress is made in understanding gravity, for example...physicists instead waste their time on the ridiculous string theory without having been able to show one bit of experimental evidence after decades of brainstorming.

 

Medicine which is more and more becoming an extension of the pharma industry has its own discoveries, such as Viagra and Botox...not exactly new vaccines but certainly good money makers...

 

Finally, if I remember, men were walking on the Moon every six months in the early 70s...today the US has to pay Russia to bring its astronauts 300 km up to the space station, on an outdated Soyuz capsule!

 

 

 

 

[Odysseus123]

16 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Competitive I don't know, but Darwin sat on his theory of evolution for about 20 years, and was only motivated to publish because Wallace was about to publish his own similar theory.

 

Not much in a hurry for a competitive guy...

 

Curiously, Newton had done the same with his Principia which he kept as if it was of no importance.

 

Nowadays, it is rather the opposite...sell first and think later!

 

Science today is about improving on older discoveries: faster, smaller, more powerful and so on.

 

Da Vinci and Darwin came with radically new ideas and concepts.

 

Closer to us, the scientists who met in Solvay in the 1920s, a dream team without any equivalent in history, were developing entirely new theories: relativity and quantum, with which scientists work today.

 

In medicine, vaccines and antibiotics were also new when they were discovered long ago.

 

Today, medical advances are mostly the result of new machines, themselves derived from quantum theory.

 

Meanwhile, no real progress is made in understanding gravity, for example...physicists instead waste their time on the ridiculous string theory without having been able to show one bit of experimental evidence after decades of brainstorming.

 

Medicine which is more and more becoming an extension of the pharma industry has its own discoveries, such as Viagra and Botox...not exactly new vaccines but certainly good money makers...

 

Finally, if I remember, men were walking on the Moon every six months in the early 70s...today the US has to pay Russia to bring its astronauts 300 km up to the space station, on an outdated Soyuz capsule!

 

 

 

 

In think you paint a grey picture..

 

Newton broke out into a muck sweat when he thought that Liebniz was a challenge..

Darwin ditto with Wallace..

 

The funny thing about Darwin was that Robert Chambers had stolen his thunder and that most Victorians thought that it was rather a damp squib..

 

Don't be fooled by the internet..if ever there was a 'Narranschiff'* the internet is it.

 

Many exciting things out there.

*Narranschiff-loosely tanslated by me as 'Ship of Fools'

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Chambers_(publisher,_born_1802)

 

Edited October 4, 2018 by Odysseus123

[Brunolem]

9 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

 

Don't be fooled by the internet..if ever there was a 'Narranschiff'* the internet is it.

 

I get very little scientific information from internet...I prefer books.

I have all the Jared Diamond books that you were quoting above, including "why sex is fun", also those of James Lovelock, some of Paul Davies, Brian Greene and quite a few about Einstein.

 

For scientific history, I like Bill Bryson, notably "a short history of nearly everything".

 

Television has some good shows like "Cosmos a space time odyssey" with Neil de Grasse Tyson.

 

Science today is hampered by quite a few things, the first being money of course.

 

There are no Medici family who pay independent scientists like Da Vinci only to think, most scientists are employed and need to produce results that can bring profits...botox anyone?

 

Another obstacle is maths and computers.

 

Many scientists have become obsessed with maths and computers which are merely number crunchers and not thinkers...hence the string theory with its 11 dimensions and its crazy maths.

 

Einstein and his pairs were dealing with ideas first and the maths came later to formalize things...now the maths come first!

 

The latest fantasy is aritificial intelligence, or AI, with people believing that it will be the solution to almost everything.

 

The problem is that intelligence is not about crunching numbers at high speed and beating the chess player champion.

 

Try to seat a computer with 3 poker players and see how it goes...

 

Deprived, among other things, of our 5 senses, a computer will never go very far in terms of intelligence...a computer cannot observe something and come up with questions, the great talent of Da Vinci.

 

Computers, AI and all the other gadgets such as self driving cars, will only accelerate our decline, making us even more lazy and reliant on stupid metal boxes...

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by Brunolem

[marcusarelus]

1 hour ago, Brunolem said:

I get very little scientific information from internet...I prefer books.

I have all the Jared Diamond books that you were quoting above, including "why sex is fun", also those of James Lovelock, some of Paul Davies, Brian Greene and quite a few about Einstein.

 

For scientific history, I like Bill Bryson, notably "a short history of nearly everything".

 

Television has some good shows like "Cosmos a space time odyssey" with Neil de Grasse Tyson.

 

Science today is hampered by quite a few things, the first being money of course.

 

There are no Medici family who pay independent scientists like Da Vinci only to think, most scientists are employed and need to produce results that can bring profits...botox anyone?

 

Another obstacle is maths and computers.

 

Many scientists have become obsessed with maths and computers which are merely number crunchers and not thinkers...hence the string theory with its 11 dimensions and its crazy maths.

 

Einstein and his pairs were dealing with ideas first and the maths came later to formalize things...now the maths come first!

 

The latest fantasy is aritificial intelligence, or AI, with people believing that it will be the solution to almost everything.

 

The problem is that intelligence is not about crunching numbers at high speed and beating the chess player champion.

 

Try to seat a computer with 3 poker players and see how it goes...

 

Deprived, among other things, of our 5 senses, a computer will never go very far in terms of intelligence...a computer cannot observe something and come up with questions, the great talent of Da Vinci.

 

Computers, AI and all the other gadgets such as self driving cars, will only accelerate our decline, making us even more lazy and reliant on stupid metal boxes...

 

Sandholm, a computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon University, along with doctorate student Noam Brown, developed AI software capable of doing just that. The program, called Libratus, successfully defeated four professional poker players in a 20-day competition that ended on Jan. 30. After playing 120,000 hands of heads-up, no-limit Texas Hold’em, Libratus was ahead of its human challengers by more than $1.7 million in chips.

 

http://time.com/4656011/artificial-intelligence-ai-poker-tournament-libratus-cmu/

 

[Neeranam]

Yes,  Buddhism does teach to stop wasteful thoughts. 

Monkeys are all very happy.

[Neeranam]

27 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

Sandholm, a computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon University, along with doctorate student Noam Brown, developed AI software capable of doing just that. The program, called Libratus, successfully defeated four professional poker players in a 20-day competition that ended on Jan. 30. After playing 120,000 hands of heads-up, no-limit Texas Hold’em, Libratus was ahead of its human challengers by more than $1.7 million in chips.

 

http://time.com/4656011/artificial-intelligence-ai-poker-tournament-libratus-cmu/

 

Damn that's why I can't win anymore. I used to be a professional.

[Damrongsak]

On 9/26/2018 at 10:46 PM, nikmar said:

I think Buddhist beliefs contribute to it, as in, dont concentrate on the past as it is gone and cant be changed. Dont concentrate on  the future as it is yet to come, just do the best you can at present with what you have.  ...

Which is good for us farangs.  Blow by a police checkpoint without stopping and don't get chased. Plow into a roadblock and the cops don't even jump out of the way. Vitamin B deficiency, though I don't know if the "B" means brains or brakes.

 

I don't think Buddhist beliefs have much to do with it, other than perhaps an attitude of "whatever" developed over time. Maybe they just smoked too much weed, or ate the green chicken soup.

[Brunolem]

3 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

Sandholm, a computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon University, along with doctorate student Noam Brown, developed AI software capable of doing just that. The program, called Libratus, successfully defeated four professional poker players in a 20-day competition that ended on Jan. 30. After playing 120,000 hands of heads-up, no-limit Texas Hold’em, Libratus was ahead of its human challengers by more than $1.7 million in chips.

 

http://time.com/4656011/artificial-intelligence-ai-poker-tournament-libratus-cmu/

 

Interesting...I hadn't heard about that.

A nice performance, but what's the point?

There are too any humans and not enough jobs, at least decent jobs.

Why spend so much time and money in trying to replace humans with machines when there is so much else to deal with with much more urgency?

[marcusarelus]

30 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Interesting...I hadn't heard about that.

A nice performance, but what's the point?

There are too any humans and not enough jobs, at least decent jobs.

Why spend so much time and money in trying to replace humans with machines when there is so much else to deal with with much more urgency?

The point is you wrote, "The problem is that intelligence is not about crunching numbers at high speed and beating the chess player champion.  Try to seat a computer with 3 poker players and see how it goes..."

 

You are against thinking.  AI is making great strides in assisting people to think more and better.  You don't know enough about it to comment as you demonstrated with your poker example. 

 

Perhaps you should investigate Thailand's plan to use Artificial Intelligence to improve Thailand’s English proficiency.  

 

First, though you should find out what AI is.  You sound like a grandpa saying AI is trying to replace humans with machines.  Get hip man.  Get with the program.  Get some education and start thinking. 

 

[Brunolem]

14 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

The point is you wrote, "The problem is that intelligence is not about crunching numbers at high speed and beating the chess player champion.  Try to seat a computer with 3 poker players and see how it goes..."

 

You are against thinking.  AI is making great strides in assisting people to think more and better.  You don't know enough about it to comment as you demonstrated with your poker example. 

 

Perhaps you should investigate Thailand's plan to use Artificial Intelligence to improve Thailand’s English proficiency.  

 

First, though you should find out what AI is.  You sound like a grandpa saying AI is trying to replace humans with machines.  Get hip man.  Get with the program.  Get some education and start thinking. 

 

For someone who regularly medidates in a forest temple, you seem to confuse equanimity with animosity...a translation error maybe?

[marcusarelus]

6 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

For someone who regularly medidates in a forest temple, you seem to confuse equanimity with animosity...a translation error maybe?

You wrote that AI couldn't play poker.  It can and beats human beings with ease.  You have demonstrated a lack of understanding about what AI is and how Thailand is using to better education.  Thais are using AI to think more and better.  Why not get on topic?  Topic is not me or what Wat I go to. 

[RickBradford]

56 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

You wrote that AI couldn't play poker.  It can and beats human beings with ease.  You have demonstrated a lack of understanding about what AI is and how Thailand is using to better education.  Thais are using AI to think more and better.  Why not get on topic?  Topic is not me or what Wat I go to. 

AI can do only a certain amount if the will is not there.
 

I don't doubt that AI could help with formal education, that is, well-defined domains such as languages, IT or mathematics, but actual critical thinking skills, problem solving, prioritizing, that's a whole different story, more of a cultural barrier than anything else.

 

The numerous Thais I have met seem to operate on the basis that being required to think about things is a violation of their right to go about in a fog the entire time.

 

They are the least observant and least aware people I have encountered,  the educated and uneducated ones alike. This ties in well with "mai bpen rai" culture, which is code for "I won't criticize you if you don't criticize me."

 

Proverbs about leading a horse to water spring to mind, or as a would-be Nigerian scammer informed me on one occasion: "You can only bring a hose to the stream but you can force him or her to drink water."

 

AI would be great in the classroom -- as would be anything that shifts the burden of education away from those employees disguised as teachers in the nation's schools.

 

But it would take a cultural upheaval to effect a genuine change in Thais' thinking skills.

 

[CharlieH]

Off topic removed.

[marcusarelus]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

AI can do only a certain amount if the will is not there.
 

I don't doubt that AI could help with formal education, that is, well-defined domains such as languages, IT or mathematics, but actual critical thinking skills, problem solving, prioritizing, that's a whole different story, more of a cultural barrier than anything else.

 

The numerous Thais I have met seem to operate on the basis that being required to think about things is a violation of their right to go about in a fog the entire time.

 

They are the least observant and least aware people I have encountered,  the educated and uneducated ones alike. This ties in well with "mai bpen rai" culture, which is code for "I won't criticize you if you don't criticize me."

 

Proverbs about leading a horse to water spring to mind, or as a would-be Nigerian scammer informed me on one occasion: "You can only bring a hose to the stream but you can force him or her to drink water."

 

AI would be great in the classroom -- as would be anything that shifts the burden of education away from those employees disguised as teachers in the nation's schools.

 

But it would take a cultural upheaval to effect a genuine change in Thais' thinking skills.

 

What critical thinking skills are necessary in education before the PhD level? I was told what to think and what conclusions to draw and what were priority items until I got to graduate school.  Seems to me like rote memory skills until one gets into a PhD program.  From what I've seen a robot teach the first 16 years.  In some cases like religious schools it might be better as robots don't want to abuse children.