Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Forum rules, usability, changing titles, moving threads, etc.

PreviousPage 5 of 5

I feel that you mostly disagree.
However, my intuition may be wrong, and you genuinely agree.
But we can definitely move on.

I wanted to have a discussion where we could potentially understand each other even if we disagree on a lot of things.
I think we managed to achieve that to a certain extent.
I also certainly learned a lot from your feedback.
So I thank you for your time.

Summary of My Thoughts

I think it would be useful to summarise my thoughts as well.

I understand your point of view that you want to focus on power dynamics and practical strategies.
After all, this is the vision and mission of this website.

That is applied research, and usually a wider audience appreciates its results & outcomes.
Arguably, that, in itself, means it has more value.
It also has more immediate applications and practical value.
Also, it heavily overlaps with entrepreneurship, so I'm very keen on applied research.

I am also interested in basic research because I'm biased and have done that kind of research before.
It builds upon principles that may have trouble being proven, applicable in the moment.
It may not even be true entirely like Einstein's general theory of relativity.
But fast forward to today, it's used to calculate GPS coordinates whenever you use Google Maps.

So this forum is the place for applied research for people strategies.

Quick Clarifications

I didn't do a good job of putting "basic research" and "higher abstractions" into a context where people can understand that it's beneficial for the long term.
Or even some points which I felt that it can be practical.

how is Mach correlated with IQ

I believe this was one of the most theoretical points of our discussion, and it's not in the original thread.
That being said, I think this can help with hiring.
If Mach is uncorrelated with IQ, this means looking out for high IQ, low Mach can be a good idea for entry-level positions.
Even better are people with high IQ and good planning but low Mach.

A more practical point of discussion that involved general psychology was

And someone with better emotional stability should be able to strategise better too.
If someone shows a lot of frustration about missing billiard shots for example, then he probably may not keep a level-head in planning in chaotic situations.

Probably, if someone gets overly upset about missing billiard shots, maybe you don't want to get him involved in important decisions in your life.
Also, the fact that he keeps missing means he's probably not very Machiavellian.

What I Can Do Better?

I agree that for discussions not immediately obvious in terms of benefits, I have to be clearer in how I state my points.

And if I want to give several different directions to explore, I should state that more explicitly and maybe in point forms.

For example,

Since the thread is about identifying whether a person is a Machiavelli, we can explore other factors to help identify a Machiavelli too.
Several possible directions to go into from this discussion:

  • Is the person good at planning & strategising but overall not really Machiavellian?
  • What other characteristics can we look out for outside the game of billiards that may characterise Machiavellianism?
    Is his behaviour in billiards really different from how he acts in day-to-day life?
  • How much do you know about this person's background and upbringing?
    It may influence a person's disposition towards using manipulation and deception


On this thread, the title was "power dynamics".

"Power dynamics" is a whole discipline, it says nothing of the content inside and/or what you need or want to say.

Check the guidelines in my signature (and seek to follow them both for yourself, and for all of us in the community as it makes for a better place for all).
We want to use specific titles for a number of reasons (and for proper communication in general, that also applies to when you send emails).

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?


On this thread, if it's a new situation, feel free to open a new thread for it (you may quote my answer in that thread if it's relevant as a bridge and to provide the reference).

Bel has reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
PreviousPage 5 of 5