|
||||||||
The 'Katie Hopkins is highly intelligent' myth |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,129
|
I am still amazed anyone thinks she sounds posh. She barely enunciates her words and her vocabulary is hilariously limited. Her stunning witicism to put put Price down during the letters task was 'she's thick'.
Right. Thanks for your contribution. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 389
|
She is educated, but not very bright. Her scheming is transparent.
I just wish her face was. |
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,623
|
Quote:
He wasn't. He was upset at Cami leaving (as he is every time someone is evicted) he's a old softie. He was upset at the fact that they immediately started speculating about the next eviction and what was going to happen etc. They didn't even give her a mention.
He walked away with tears in his eyes - when he returned they were 'finally' talking about Cami and denied that they'd talked of anything else. They are a fake self centred bunch - Keith is a genuine old softie. |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 23,617
|
If she is intelligent then all dictionaries need to be rewritten with some haste.......................
|
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 389
|
Quote:
He wasn't. He was upset at Cami leaving (as he is every time someone is evicted) he's a old softie. He was upset at the fact that they immediately started speculating about the next eviction and what was going to happen etc. They didn't even give her a mention.
He walked away with tears in his eyes - when he returned they were 'finally' talking about Cami and denied that they'd talked of anything else. They are a fake self centred bunch - Keith is a genuine old softie. |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 389
|
What makes me laugh is the density of her minions if they can't see through her manipulations. If Katie isn't as intelligent as she thinks, I dread to think what their IQ's are...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 85
|
Intelligent? Possibly in some ways. Highly intelligent? Not even close.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,714
|
Quote:
It would be interesting to know her education level and university. There seems to be the general myth she's smart when in fact they mean cunning. She's not evolved in anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,792
|
Katie H's education has taught her to feel confident, superior and authoritative. It seems to have also helped her to make money via doing nothing much at all. I'm amazed that she's not a politician yet, particularly a Tory one.
If she's convinced any of the public that she is, superior and should be listened to, I'm not surprised. They'd probably vote for her, as well. How intelligent or thick she actually is is perhaps irrelevant when there are people who respond to her accent, attitudes and behaviour in a servile way. It's a great trick, pretending to be that superior. People can feel inferior and even admiring. It's a bit masochistic to accept being a lowly peasant but that's what a lot of people do, unfortunately. Some celebrities have no talent but they cast an illusion of superiority, perhaps via looks, outrageous behaviour or just being in the media a lot. Katie Hopkins has a lot in common with that. It's all, an illusion, eg intelligence, importance, relevance and abilities. The public, not only allows it but pays for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,236
|
Quote:
She is educated, but not very bright. Her scheming is transparent.
I just wish her face was. That would be disgusting. And another Channel 5 programme entirely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 23,617
|
Quote:
She has a degree in Economics from Exeter University. Given her Sandhurst entry she must have got at least a 2:1. I dare say those who dislike her views will continue to assert she is 'thick' but by any objective standards she has performed in the top 2% academically (and I would venture to suggest better than many who are labelling her as stupid on here). She is quite clearly brighter than most of those in the House - whether she uses that IQ to good effect is another matter.
I would also contest that she is brightest in the house by most standards |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
|
Quote:
I have known people with masters degrees and probably some with P.H.D.'s that many would not really describe as intelligent by most parameters. Academia and intelligence are not necessarily synominous. To hold some of the views she does either means she actually is not the brightest of sparks and incapable of proper analysis or is pretending that that is the case. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your point of view all her time in the house leads me to believe that it is the former. She has yet not been able to reasonably qualify anything she has said.
I would also contest that she is brightest in the house by most standards |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 23,617
|
Quote:
She's certainly not unintelligent. However, she's not particularly quick-witted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
|
Quote:
If she's not unintelligent then how can she not analyse issues so as to defend her 'beliefs'
|
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 23,617
|
Quote:
She doesn't want to. She's arrogantly secure in her opinions so sees no reason to listen to (let alone dissect) opposing viewpoints. It's the stance of the tyrant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,236
|
Quote:
I have known people with masters degrees and probably some with P.H.D.'s that many would not really describe as intelligent by most parameters. Academia and intelligence are not necessarily synominous. To hold some of the views she does either means she actually is not the brightest of sparks and incapable of proper analysis or is pretending that that is the case. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your point of view all her time in the house leads me to believe that it is the former. She has yet not been able to reasonably qualify anything she has said.
I would also contest that she is brightest in the house by most standards Quote:
If she's not unintelligent then how can she not analyse issues so as to defend her 'beliefs'
|
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
|
Quote:
arrogantly secure doesn't sound like not unintelligent to me
![]() There have been plenty of people over the course of history that have imperiously proclaimed their opinions as fact and sought to shut down (rather than discuss) any opposing views. And most of them have been far more intelligent than the "not unintelligent" Katie Hopkins. Egotistical intransigence does not automatically mean unintelligence. |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 23,617
|
Quote:
Egotistical intransigence does not automatically mean unintelligence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
|
Quote:
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about what intelligence is then because egoistical intransigence is a sign of unintelligence to me. I can see that an ethically improper belief can be well thought through if unpalatable. I just don't get the sense that that's the case in her case
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,066
|
She told Keith that he wanted to 'own sadness'
. Whatever that means. I've never heard that one before
|
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
|
Quote:
She told Keith that he wanted to 'own sadness'
. Whatever that means. I've never heard that one before |
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,178
|
Quote:
She told Keith that he wanted to 'own sadness'
. Whatever that means. I've never heard that one beforeAll Keith was trying to say was that even though he nominated Cami he didnt like that she left without getting a proper eviction with the audience and everything else and he would have liked for her to have that. Hopkins isnt terribly bright or emotionally in tune with other people's feelings if she can't understand something so simple. |
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
I don't like her but I think she is intelligent. She comes out with absolute hogwash but the others are obviously not bright enough to beat her in an argument. Either that or they're frightened of her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
Why would she need to defend her beliefs? They're right.
There have been plenty of people over the course of history that have imperiously proclaimed their opinions as fact and sought to shut down (rather than discuss) any opposing views. And most of them have been far more intelligent than the "not unintelligent" Katie Hopkins. Egotistical intransigence does not automatically mean unintelligence. An intelligent person would have the type of thought process to fully understand their beliefs and occasionally re-examine them. You don't accept a belief and think "Right, I believe that now. No need to think about it again". if you believe in something you should be able to think about it now and again and revisit that belief. I think that when people accept their beliefs as fact and don't consider new information and reconsider their beliefs, it's a sign of a lack of intelligence. |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
|
Quote:
To blindly accept beliefs doesn't sound like a good sign of intelligence.
An intelligent person would have the type of thought process to fully understand their beliefs and occasionally re-examine them. You don't accept a belief and think "Right, I believe that now. No need to think about it again". if you believe in something you should be able to think about it now and again and revisit that belief. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:26.




That would be disgusting. And another Channel 5 programme entirely.
. Whatever that means. I've never heard that one before