Tag Archives: intelligence

Is this a good idea for a Fallout 3 character?

I was going to make three character builds (Good, Neutral, Evil) and I thought to myself, “Why not an assassin for the evil character?” This was gonna be the profile I had the most immediate fun with, not worrying about the long run. Now, since I could never find any good assassin weapons that don’t break down when you fire twenty shots (please don’t suggest weapons, I just want to know if my idea is fine or not), I decided to go with unarmed, figuring the sneak attack criticals from the stealth mode would balance out with the base damage loss. During the good old G.O.A.T I picked Unarmed, Sneak, and Lockpick for my tag skills, and I maxed my intelligence for the most possible skill points. If I got perks like Silent Running, Iron Fist, Ninja, basically everything for stealth and unarmed damage, as well as survival perks like Mister Sandman, Night Person and Cannibal, and finally some critical perks like Finesse, would this setup work if I got the highest possible Sneak and Unarmed skills? (For the record, I picked Lockpick for my third tag skill so that I could break into peoples’ houses at night and kill them with Mister Sandman >:) ) Some advice from more experienced players would help, too. I normally get the hang of RPG’s quite fast, but this one’s a little different…

Theists and atheists what about this?

What if God really did create Adam and Eve through genetic manipulation of the earth apes he had already created and they had several offspring and their children breed with each other. We all know that birth defects are common with inbreeding. At that time the only way for humans to reproduce was inbreeding. What if those defected off spring regressed in their evolutionary development because of the inbreeding and because of excessive and repetitive inbreeding of this sort they created different species of “ape men” such as the neanderthals and the other extinct hominids of the past. There is evidence that suggest modern man lived along side their less evolved relatives and may have existed prior to the neanderthals. Over time those less evolved hominids may have began to die off due to lack of intelligence and lack of survival skills and the coup de grace that wiped them out was the great flood. What if a select few had not regressed and became the modern humans we see today. could this explain evolution and creation. well it wouldn’t prove evolution because that’s more like devolution. just a theory I conjured up while smoking a blunt.

Atheists: Is man too smart for evolution?

In other words, is man’s intelligence too high to support the argument of evolution which purports necessary mutations will be adopted for survival of a species. If man became smart enough to fend off wild game, harness fire, build shelter and then plant crops, why did man’s mind continue to develop in intelligence to the point where we create the fine arts, symphonies, higher mathematics, etc.. We may have had free time, but that would have led to devolution, as the lack of needs would require fewer skills.

What pushed man to develop such high intelligence far beyond his need as a species? Doesn’t this conflict with evolution?
Why is this posted in the R&S section? – Please forgive me, but I get far more responses here than Biology and it is a cross-over topic.

Atheists: Is man too smart for evolution?

In other words, is man’s intelligence too high to support the argument of evolution which purports necessary mutations will be adopted for survival of a species. If man became smart enough to fend off wild game, harness fire, build shelter and then plant crops, why did man’s mind continue to develop in intelligence to the point where we create the fine arts, symphonies, higher mathematics, etc.. We may have had free time, but that would have led to devolution, as the lack of needs would require fewer skills.

What pushed man to develop such high intelligence far beyond his need as a species? Doesn’t this conflict with evolution?
Why is this posted in the R&S section? – Please forgive me, but I get far more responses here than Biology and it is a cross-over topic.

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Equality is the assertion that ‘all men are created equal’ and that consequently, we are entitled to the same ‘unalienable rights’. I contest the former point, as we are constituted of attributes such as, but not limited to, intelligence and physical prowess. In a competitive environment, as in nature, how well we fulfill these criterion will determine whether or not we survive; natural selection will take its pick based on the inherent inequality within us. Thus, when a persons is quantified based on the ‘net survival skill’ he/she has, and compared to that of an ‘inferior’ being, the relation would be p1>p2 instead of p1=p2. It would thus not be logical for the relatively inferior human to be deemed the equal of a being superior in all aspects of life (this will not be subjective if they are assessed by a rubric).

This inequality does not connote any thing in the field of politics. Whether morality and ethics are intrinsic or empirical, we have learned to embrace ‘inequality’, as the alternative would be mass genocide and forced sterilization, as witnessed by the Third Reich’s Holocaust. We have learned to empathize with and accept the flaws of one another, and have established laws because of this capability. Equality is thus nonexistent, but we must not discriminate because of this. //

What are the weak points? Any logical fallacies? Anything you agree/disagree with? Which points could I expand upon? Thanks in advance!
What do you mean?