IQ (moved subtopic)

Motte and bailey, I'm not even going to address this it's so obvious.

Mass deportations are a logistical nightmare and could potentially collapse the economy. It's surprisingly a non-conservative position because it is intending to do something we have pretty much never seen. Yes we removed about a million people during the Eisenhower administration, but the economy and the country are much different now.

No, legitimate public health concerns are not the same as regulating vice, stop being dumb. If I want to kill myself, that's my business; if I incidentally damage you in the process, then society has an interest in intervening. Whether you believe that passive smoking is a real problem or not, that's what this is about.

ye sure because killing yourself is not going to have consequences on others

passive smoke is uncontroversially not a problem in parks, yet democrats ban smoking in parks.

and vaping has no passive smoking effects yet they ban vaping as well.

Like I said, parks specifically (as opposed to indoor bans) are probably more about exposing children to it. You can **** at home but not at the park too. Or piss.

if you ban a behavior because it's bad if children see it and pick it up, that's literally about vice semantically.

and it's the basis of religious thinking and living.

men Americans are all puritans, democrats included.

Alright, let's get back to IQ. Has anyone seen this show yet? I have a few thoughts about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRBTt_B0...

Are bans against pissing in the park about "vice semantically" too?

My thoughts are that the Fox Broadcasting Company is not very high IQ.

Yes, Americans are puritans in the aggregate, no argument from me there, but to argue that democrats and republicans want to install theocracy in equal measure is asinine and quite obviously plucked straight from the "both sides same" school of "thought".

Lol ya. The anti smoking movement is sort of the gold standard of public health campaigns. They were able to convince people that smoking leads to health problems. The % of the population that smoked went way down. Then they started banning smoking in public places and it was popular because non smokers don't like the smell of smoking. That this was a vice or religious thing is a bizarre, clownish argument.

I'm against wide-reaching smoking bans, but pretending to not understand why they exist and are wildly popular is pretty dense

i'm anti-IQ-being-extrapolated-to-quantify-success-at-all-facets-of-life (data doesn't bear this out at average IQs and above) and particularly using SATs as proxy for IQ to argue certain ethnicities are inherently smarter and better suited for college placement, as luciom insinuates

i think IQ scores are decent proxies for people's ability to take tests and solve obscure logic puzzles. intelligence/smartness is a nebulous term dependent on eye of beholder. IQ:intelligence or IQ:"performance" is far more spurious relationship than height:NBA or ELO:chess. lucioms of this world talk like it is the same thing.

People's ability to solve obscure logic and language puzzles are the exact types of abilities required at high levels of engineering, math, technology, economics, technical history skills, physics, philosophy, chemistry, programming, etc...

It's like saying "hey this only predicts how good you will be at some of the most important intellectual pursuits of human flourishing" and then acting like you just said that IQ isn't that important.

Also being the minimum barrier for entry for many tasks is going to mean that having a lower IQ is going to be felt drastically more than the difference between having an average and above average IQ, yes. That again is not an argument for IQ being unimportant.

This.

by rickroll P

others were stating that your iq would determine which party you voted for

it's a statistical fact that certain ethnic groups and cultures perform better or worse on iq tests

for example, nearly all of asia regularly shares memes where they compare the iq of the phillipines to the rest of asia

you see various versions of this all over asian internet - usually not presented so professionally

but... it's kind of just sticking your head in the sa

Can you point me to the post where I refused to acknowledge something that you believe I should have acknowledged?

it's because of all the rape

various people posted stating low iq people would vote for republicans - speculation

luciom noted that the racial cohort with lowest iq in the us is heavily democrat - objective fact

you called him a racist

And there's a reason why they need to be somewhat obscure. If they were common, people that do those type of things regularly would have a big advantage. But even then I think you can get better at Raven matrices if you study certain types of math.

Sorry man, but this all just seems like a lot of mental gymnastics to avoid having to say that some people are smarter than others.

no worries bro, my point is "smart" is ill-defined and a bunch of nerds all agree IQ is the way to measure it but it's more complicated than that but then the nerds all conclude nah IQ is the way and they all nod in agreement and pat themselves on the back. it's for sure correlated with performance in hard sciences but is not a proper measure of aptitude in life, health, etc. that luciom (and apparently most here?) make it out to be.

Someone else said he insinuated that certain races are inherently smarter than others—He didn't.

The whole "aptitude in life, health etc." was mostly misdirection from you guys saying "LOL IQ, people with low IQs can be good at other stuff". Sure, they can. But intelligent people are more likely to be good at it.

Aren't gifted people highly likely to lack executive functioning skills?

Maybe at the edges. We're not talking about the people who are >3 standard deviations from the mean here.