I think there’s often a problem with quite a few high IQ people being so brain-skewed that they have no empathy and think of everything in terms of “perfect” systems. I’m thinking of a couple of people I’ve worked with who were libertarian types you often find in IT departments.
A little further down the range where the IQ test bias towards logic is less pronounced is where I think more liberal minded people sit, including arts/humanities grads, and there are clearly more of them.
Are they smart-smart or really-good-at-one-thing-smart?
Mostly PhD biologists and chemists as well as a bunch of engineers with MS degrees. Not sure that they’re very well rounded necessarily, but IQ doesn’t measure that, does it?
This can probably be excised into its own thread because it’s an interesting topic, but my thinking was always that a very intelligent person would be so shocked and insulted by trump’s idiocy and would also not want to be lumped in with the majority sub-100 IQ of his supporters.
Plus, racism and xenophobia are not logical ideals. But I guess a smart person could conjure up very convincing (to themselves) rational reasons to be racist or any other kind of “ist.”
It’s a very sincere long-held belief of mine that there are none or very few truly intelligent trump supporters. But I guess you don’t have to be a trump supporter to be deplorable, either.
Hm. I’m always reminded of when Google Memo Guy made the google memo and people were like “Well just because he’s smart doesn’t mean…” But I was like “Why are you conceding the premise he’s smart? Anybody can get good at one thing but the google memo was the actual pop quiz hotshot intelligence test!”
If you define “smart” in part as “not believing batshit insane horseshit” this problem goes away.
Google Memo Guy made a footnote for a fucking op-ed of Kyle Smith from the NY Post in his little memo like “I believe, sir, that is chess and mate” and I’ll probably still think about that on my deathbed.
Yeah we’re stumbling around definitions of intelligence again, which I think there are several types of. GMG definitely wasn’t in full possession of a rounded intelligence, same as the libertarian engineer/IT types I described who typically do very well in IQ tests.
BUT HE KNOWS CALCULUS HOW CAN THIS BE
Being intelligent does not necessarily mean you are capable of utilizing critical thought - that is a skill that must be learned. A lot of deplorables display an astounding lack of it.
Ahahahahahaha. God do I hate Mensa people. As though they don’t realize that means they should probably grade their life achievements on a curve, but instead use it as the foundation of their sense of self worth. David Sklansky is like the alpha version of these people.
This is especially true of politics, where a ton of misinformation is by design constructed to appeal to emotions not reason. If you make an emotional appeal to a person with a high IQ but very little skill at identifying, processing, and managing emotions then you are highly likely to succeed.
Yea that’s the winner here. I probably no true scotsman’d myself into believing all deplorables are stupid.
I think intelligence should be well rounded though. If you’re not capable of identifying appeals to emotion, and frequently fall prey to them and end up believing absurd things, are you really that smart?
As you acknowledge, this is probably a matter of definition. However, they’re certainly not all stupid - some of them are genuinely evil - the Bannon/Miller types.
lol, Bannon and Miller are morons.
Back to definitions again.
That’s exactly the issue. “Smart” is more ambiguous than lots of people want to admit. A person with an IQ of 180 chooses to do drugs, becomes addicted, loses job and wife etc. Smart or stupid? There’s a ton a results oriented thinking and narrative building that goes into defining “smart” in the first place. Behavioral competencies often our perform raw analytic problem solving skill. Sales skills add more value to most organizations than depth of technical knowledge. Etc etc etc. It makes way more sense to evaluate people by strengths across a variety of competencies than it does to try to order people on a smart/stupid line.
The biggest problem w/ this is that if you granted smart people special power they would abuse it to enrich themselves rather than making fundamentally sound decisions for the benefit of all people.
It’s why dumb people are correct to hate the “establishment,” even if the dumb people are unsurprisingly dumb in expressing why they hate the “establishment” and/or in choosing a conman like Donald as their savior.
Yea bannon and miller are bad examples but it’s a good point. I probably put zuck in this category. Deplorable not because of ideal, but because it is advantageous for him.
