So, is it an IQ test? The things we do to prove our worth, yet do tehse things prove our value to ourselves? Do they cause us to find relief, or do they fuel the desire to seek unattainable fulfillment (and why would that be a bad thing)?

In youth, we wanted nothing more from our elders tahn to be regarded as an equal, who can be left to pursue the world as we please, but this is only possible, or only appears to be possible, when we approach the world with the steps they would have us take. So do we take them? Well, no - not exactly.

We can never produce the precise replica of their own visual representation of the form, structure, and transformations which they conceived of -> not unless we become their teacher and can take the reigns of their emotion -> instead, we produce what might seem flawed, but we dress it up and posture it as though it might be something even greater than anyone could have hoped for, and then spend an eternity following the path of that strange and folley-filled sputter of missteps that we hoped might get mistaken for genius.

Then where lies the genius? In the folley? In the process of ridding ourselves of the erroneous desires? In our deception of ourselves?

It may very well seem to be intelligent, but it can't be because it does not serve our fellow man. It doesn't serve humanity even in a superficially declarative way. It does not provide a great potential for verifiability. We might hope that this is possible in ways that are obvious to see, but the only means of seeking, that is, to look beneath the layers and contemplate how deep it goes - that is infinite, and the mind will always be ready to travel deeper and faster than the lips or fingers might be able to convey.

It is easy to be fooled any which way, as there are both lazy and demanding approaches towards reaching and maintaining generally opposing positions. With one, we might say that it is easy to trust the experts that are most readily presented and say: "They can't possibly be that wrong, as too many high-profile and highly visible platforms are lending credence to these experts and their generally compatible viewpoints. This leads to some questions:

1. Must they be committed in such a way that they can't recover from gracefully (if they turn out to be incorrect)
2. Might it be a special circumstance whereby too many require the machine to continue chugging along, leading many to avoid presenting negative perspectives?