>>12712866>This is not what oversocialized means. No one here uses it that way. Maybe you will understand the term "hyper-domesticated".I don't recall ever reading anyone on /sci/ use the term oversocialized, I can't find a dictionary that uses it so I just used the first wikitionary result.
I don't think hyper-domesticated applies to me either, but you avoided defining yet another term. A google search returned a /r9k/ thread where they discuss autism, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. They say autism is "undomesticated" whereas schizophrenia is "hyperdomesticated". If that's what you meant, then you would expect academics to be more autistic and so relatively undomesticated.
But I don't think that's what you meant, and you didn't bother to define your term. I think you meant that I'm too adapted to society, meaning I'd be underdeveloped for a less technological society; your posting of kaczynski would support this idea.
If that's what you mean, you'd be incorrect about putting me in that category, though I would agree that a lot of academics would fall into that category.
I've personally given a lot of sincere thought towards becoming a farmer, living a monastic life style, joining the military, becoming an athlete, becoming a surgeon, and so on. I have an interest in being a generalist but I believe academia, finance, and exercise to be the best uses of my time. So I study and I trade on the stock market, I'm up about 7.6% these last two weeks, but the market has been relatively bullish so I doubt I can maintain that ROI long term.
But anyway, like I said, if you want to label me some way or another so as to ease your cognitive dissonance then feel free to do so. It honestly doesn't make a difference to me :)
