Dumb niggers
(media.scored.co)
Can't even picture a red apple
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
9 comments:
I can imagine the wire-frame of buildings or the setup of villages, cities and forests, from any perspective within seconds. I can also picture fictional superstructures, atmospheres, designs. But color doesn't work well... a red apple? Barely. But red apples hanging in a lush, dark-green, dimly lit area where all walls are covered with leaves, yes. I could draw that.
yeah, seems to be levels to this stuff even among clever people. myself i can picture things with about as much detail as you'd get in just straight up a film. i consider it a great boon, and i wonder if it's part of what makes some people naturally artistically talented and some not, even when it comes to non-visual mediums like writing.
there is a liberal idea that anyone can achieve any amount of artistic skill by just working at it, but when some people literally cannot perform the act of imagining, i have trouble believing that.
there is a liberal idea that anyone can achieve any amount of artistic skill by just working at it, but when some people literally cannot perform the act of imagining, i have trouble believing that.
> myself i can picture things with about as much detail as you'd get in just straight up a film
That's a high level of detail. For me it's rather vague, something like a "big picture" mode.
> there is a liberal idea that anyone can achieve any amount of artistic skill by just working at it
Yeah, but that's not reality. Let's assume every person has the ability to put in time and effort to improve their skills. And let's assume an attribute system to abstract that. You start at 5/10 strength (average), so with effort you can go up to 8/10 (quite fit and buff). But there are people who are naturally at 7/10 by birth (aka talent). If they put in the same amount of effort, they go up to 10/10. Which also implies there are people who'd have to invest time and effort only to get from bad/average to good, whereas some people go from good to very good.
So purely logically it's something people are not incentivized to do.
Also there is a genetic component to all of it. So just having the willpower and dedication is not enough. Niggers will always have nigger intelligence for example. That limits a whole lot of potential skills (all). Liberals deny that reality.
Art is also a lot about the craft itself, not just imagination. Ideally you have both, and if you have one, it's beneficial to have the other too.
That's a high level of detail. For me it's rather vague, something like a "big picture" mode.
> there is a liberal idea that anyone can achieve any amount of artistic skill by just working at it
Yeah, but that's not reality. Let's assume every person has the ability to put in time and effort to improve their skills. And let's assume an attribute system to abstract that. You start at 5/10 strength (average), so with effort you can go up to 8/10 (quite fit and buff). But there are people who are naturally at 7/10 by birth (aka talent). If they put in the same amount of effort, they go up to 10/10. Which also implies there are people who'd have to invest time and effort only to get from bad/average to good, whereas some people go from good to very good.
So purely logically it's something people are not incentivized to do.
Also there is a genetic component to all of it. So just having the willpower and dedication is not enough. Niggers will always have nigger intelligence for example. That limits a whole lot of potential skills (all). Liberals deny that reality.
Art is also a lot about the craft itself, not just imagination. Ideally you have both, and if you have one, it's beneficial to have the other too.
Apples are Caucasian, literally from the Caucuses.
Toast message
Buh i dontz hab uhn abble