Study Findings

[NotBlinded]

Mind you, they are correlating IQ with preferences. That hardly is a definitive value for "smartness".

Right, and those preferences correlate with the ideals of who is doing the study I would imagine and then saying what is the "right" preference based on those ideals.

 

They did say this:

 

"The theory suggests that more intelligent people are more likely than less intelligent people to adopt evolutionarily novel preferences and values, but intelligence does not correlate with preferences and values that are old enough to have been shaped by evolution over millions of years."

 

That is a little vague to me. So, if you go with the flow of evolution, you aren't as smart as the ones that step outside of these "norms" whether they be physiological or societal? Okay, I can understand that complacency leads to brain rot, but I think they are being a little too narrow with their variables. Not everyone is complacent at everything and not everyone goes outside the boundries all the time. Is that even possible?

[The-Captain]

Mind you, they are correlating IQ with preferences. That hardly is a definitive value for "smartness".

Right, and those preferences correlate with the ideals of who is doing the study I would imagine and then saying what is the "right" preference based on those ideals.

 

Quite so. Though I think there is some truth that they are hitting on here. I would think that in any given society or even within a subculture the more intelligent members will adopt the more novel positions. This isn't to say that atheism or religion, or conservatism or liberalism are more intellectual than each other, but that the intelligent will gravitate towards the intellectual variety of the respective ideology.

[NotBlinded]

Quite so. Though I think there is some truth that they are hitting on here. I would think that in any given society or even within a subculture the more intelligent members will adopt the more novel positions. This isn't to say that atheism or religion, or conservatism or liberalism are more intellectual than each other, but that the intelligent will gravitate towards the intellectual variety of the respective ideology.

Yes, I do too. I just don't like the way they are putting it. I would think that at one time being conservative in sex was the novel idea, not the norm during our evolution. They could have stated it like you did here and avoided all the battles that will ensue from their lack of concisness. The "boxes" that people think outside of change over time and that includes the ideals of conservatives and liberals. Even that evolves.

[Antlerman]

BTW, is it just me that questions whether 106 is considered high as an IQ? What about those with IQ's in the over 130 ranges? Maybe neither atheism nor theism cut it for them? Where that study? Maybe they're even more novel than the 106 crowd, and even double-more novel than the 98 crowd. Yes, that study can offer proof that if you have an IQ below a certain number, you'll be an atheist, for example.

 

In some regards this kind of reminds me of that Bell Curve study that concludes Blacks were less intelligent than Whites. But, what do you with those armed with "science"?

[The-Captain]

BTW, is it just me that questions whether 106 is considered high as an IQ? What about those with IQ's in the over 130 ranges? Maybe neither atheism nor theism cut it for them? Where that study? Maybe they're even more novel than the 106 crowd, and even double-more novel than the 98 crowd.

 

Ha, I didn't notice that about the IQ level! I know you're joking but I'll bet you'd be right about that progression.

 

Those smarties are just a bunch of contrarians!

[NotBlinded]

BTW, is it just me that questions whether 106 is considered high as an IQ? What about those with IQ's in the over 130 ranges? Maybe neither atheism nor theism cut it for them? Where that study? Maybe they're even more novel than the 106 crowd, and even double-more novel than the 98 crowd. Yes, that study can offer proof that if you have an IQ below a certain number, you'll be an atheist, for example.

 

In some regards this kind of reminds me of that Bell Curve study that concludes Blacks were less intelligent than Whites. But, what do you with those armed with "science"?

Damn it AM, you have given away the secrets of the "society".

 

Now, you must die.

 

 

 

 

[NotBlinded]

BTW, is it just me that questions whether 106 is considered high as an IQ? What about those with IQ's in the over 130 ranges? Maybe neither atheism nor theism cut it for them? Where that study? Maybe they're even more novel than the 106 crowd, and even double-more novel than the 98 crowd.

 

Ha, I didn't notice that about the IQ level! I know you're joking but I'll bet you'd be right about that progression.

 

Those smarties are just a bunch of contrarians!

That's why insane institutions are filled with geniuses.

[Antlerman]

BTW, is it just me that questions whether 106 is considered high as an IQ? What about those with IQ's in the over 130 ranges? Maybe neither atheism nor theism cut it for them? Where that study? Maybe they're even more novel than the 106 crowd, and even double-more novel than the 98 crowd.

 

Ha, I didn't notice that about the IQ level! I know you're joking but I'll bet you'd be right about that progression.

 

Those smarties are just a bunch of contrarians!

What's that old saying? The more you know, the more you know you don't know? Is greater certainty then, a sign of greater ignorance?

[The-Captain]

Is greater certainty then, a sign of greater ignorance?

 

I've always suspected as much, but these may be the rationalizations of a human waffle.

[NotBlinded]

Is greater certainty then, a sign of greater ignorance?

 

I've always suspected as much, but these may be the rationalizations of a human waffle.

I'll have mine with bananas and whipped cream please.

[The-Captain]

Is greater certainty then, a sign of greater ignorance?

 

I've always suspected as much, but these may be the rationalizations of a human waffle.

I'll have mine with bananas and whipped cream please.

 

I find myself liking the way your thoughts run more and more.

[NotBlinded]

I find myself liking the way your thoughts run more and more.

Thank you...you too.

[Neon Genesis]

 

That is a little vague to me. So, if you go with the flow of evolution, you aren't as smart as the ones that step outside of these "norms" whether they be physiological or societal? Okay, I can understand that complacency leads to brain rot, but I think they are being a little too narrow with their variables. Not everyone is complacent at everything and not everyone goes outside the boundries all the time. Is that even possible?

So, if it's less about atheism and more about people with higher IQs are being more likely to think outside the box, then if we were surveying a society where most people were atheists like in Sweden or some where like that, would people with higher IQs in a mostly atheist society be more likely to be theist and people with lower IQs be more likely to be atheist? I think they should have done a study where they compared the intelligence and political/religious beliefs of a mostly secular society like Sweden with the intelligence level and political/religious beliefs of atheists in a mostly religious society to see if the results would be the opposite for theists in a secular society. Like what I mean would be if you lived in a society that was mostly of atheists, would people with higher IQs be more likely to think outside the box and be theist in that society if I'm making any sense here?

[NotBlinded]

 

That is a little vague to me. So, if you go with the flow of evolution, you aren't as smart as the ones that step outside of these "norms" whether they be physiological or societal? Okay, I can understand that complacency leads to brain rot, but I think they are being a little too narrow with their variables. Not everyone is complacent at everything and not everyone goes outside the boundries all the time. Is that even possible?

So, if it's less about atheism and more about people with higher IQs are being more likely to think outside the box, then if we were surveying a society where most people were atheists like in Sweden or some where like that, would people with higher IQs in a mostly atheist society be more likely to be theist and people with lower IQs be more likely to be atheist? I think they should have done a study where they compared the intelligence and political/religious beliefs of a mostly secular society like Sweden with the intelligence level and political/religious beliefs of atheists in a mostly religious society to see if the results would be the opposite for theists in a secular society. Like what I mean would be if you lived in a society that was mostly of atheists, would people with higher IQs be more likely to think outside the box and be theist in that society if I'm making any sense here?

Yes, that makes sense and that's a good example. I was trying to come up with a good one and couldn't. I would like to see a study like that.

 

It looks like they are taking what the majority view is and then applying that to an evolutionary trait, based on preferences, which change with time. Maybe those atheistic societies will soon become an evolutionary trait to survive mentally. Which way will people step out of that so-called box? I don't know, I just don't think that study was done well enough.

[★ Citsonga ★]

...and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.

 

I just thought of something. If this study would happen to be accurate, then the so-called "wise" King Solomon had to have been one stupid, dumb-ass, idiotic mother fucker to have a harem of 1,000 women!

 

[Franko47]

I'm not even going to take the time to criticize this bit of "science".

Kind of hard to do without access to the full journal.

It wouldn't matter to me even if I did have access to the full journal. I have had long abiding misgivings about psychology's claim to science anyway. And this is ironic to me because I also have an abiding interest in the mind. The fact that many psychological models are statistical is very indicative to me. Perhaps some day psychology will mature. I hope so.

 

 

 

It's Tom Cruise, everybody. Run for it !!!!

 

(This is a joke because Scientologists are always criticizing psychiatry)

 

 

 

I think that there are lot of liberals and leftists who are dummies; nor do they really understand their own rhetoric. Same goes for conservatives. Also, intellectuals tend to be liberals or leftists. And often atheists. Many conservatives who are brilliant will often appear as though they are a bit traditional or status quo; but I've seen some pretty good debates between the camps.

 

As well, I've met a lot of brilliant thinkers in my time who were dangerously "naive". Sometimes there is a disconnect with brilliant thinkers with the realities of human nature and the way the world works.

[Vigile]

Mind you, they are correlating IQ with preferences. That hardly is a definitive value for "smartness".

Right, and those preferences correlate with the ideals of who is doing the study I would imagine and then saying what is the "right" preference based on those ideals.

 

Quite so. Though I think there is some truth that they are hitting on here. I would think that in any given society or even within a subculture the more intelligent members will adopt the more novel positions. This isn't to say that atheism or religion, or conservatism or liberalism are more intellectual than each other, but that the intelligent will gravitate towards the intellectual variety of the respective ideology.

 

There's more complexity to the liberal position. Hard right relies on jingoism, common sense and such.

 

I'm purposely ignoring fiscal conservativism here, which I think has a great deal of complexity involved.

[Vigile]

BTW, is it just me that questions whether 106 is considered high as an IQ?

 

It's not high, but the numbers are going to even out when you take from any large sampling group. If the sample is a typical 1024 (IIRC) then those with 130 and above are going to be scrubbed as a handful of outliers. The last time I took the test it said I scored in the top 1%, which would mean only 11 in the sampling would have emerged.

 

In some regards this kind of reminds me of that Bell Curve study that concludes Blacks were less intelligent than Whites

 

Current IQ testing is highly correlated with education, which explains this anomaly on the bell curve.

[Vigile]

Many conservatives who are brilliant will often appear as though they are a bit traditional or status quo; but I've seen some pretty good debates between the camps.

 

I'd like to see them run a similar study that tests for emotional intelligence. My experience is that many conservatives appear to have higher levels in this area than liberals. It's also reflected in the GOP vs the dem party's campaign tactics. The GOP clearly has an edge here.

[OpheliaGinger]

...and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.

 

I just thought of something. If this study would happen to be accurate, then the so-called "wise" King Solomon had to have been one stupid, dumb-ass, idiotic mother fucker to have a harem of 1,000 women!

 

 

He was borderline insanely retarded.

[nightflight]

Satoshi Kanazawa, a psychologist quoted in the study, has stated in the past that Africa's woes are due to low i.q. levels.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/05/highereducation.research

[The-Captain]

Satoshi Kanazawa, a psychologist quoted in the study, has stated in the past that Africa's woes are due to low i.q. levels.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/05/highereducation.research

 

This is more or less my opinion on all this. From the article.

 

However, she said the research contained some interesting ideas and merited serious consideration, and stressed that academics such as Kanazawa should not be deterred from exploring controversial subjects.

 

The reaction to Kanazawa's paper will reopen the simmering debate about whether academics are entitled to express opinions that many people may find offensive.

 

However I think Kanazawa is imparting too much significance to IQ.

[Ramen666]

The correlation does make since though, realistically more "educated" people do tend to vote more liberal than conservative.

 

I think we openly know this, the less educated, the more likely you will vote conservative. I mean look at the tea parties...come on. There is proof right there for you.

[nightflight]

I guess this study means that we are stupid; after all we here were once religious.

[Antlerman]

I guess this study means that we are stupid; after all we here were once religious.

Very good point! Yes, we all used to have IQ's below 100, then... a miracle! Our IQ's, contrary to everything we know about IQ's, jumped up well above the normal deviations of a few IQ points, to factors of 10, 20, 30, 40, and up, causing us to become Atheists!! Of course, since this violates what we know of natural laws about brain functions, demonstrates a genuine miracle, thus proving God does exists, thus showing that once you get a miracle IQ, you will become a neo-theist!