According to economist article, Jews are genetically superior
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Hypocrism
Obviously he was a massively intelligent person and a knowledgeable physicist, but the point is that intelligence is not enough to discover the theory of relativity, but a knowledge of physics (and maths) up to that point is also obligatory.
Lots of people have knowledge of physics and maths but apart from Newton and perhaps Maxwell, Einstein towers above everyone else in his contribution to physics.
Original post by SmileAway
Why is everyone even discussing this? Why do we have to pigeon-hole people? I couldn't care less if you belonged to a racial group with a higher average IQ, all I care about is how you perform intellectually, on your OWN.
Yeah, that exactly what i think.
I alone am genetically superior.
Original post by SexyNerd
yeah, but if he was as smart as Einstein, it would have showed itself in the real world.. Einstein didn't need an IQ test..
yeah, but if he was as smart as Einstein, it would have showed itself in the real world.. Einstein didn't need an IQ test..
You say you're very intelligent, but your arguments seem to flop all over the place and lack logic. For example, I said that people might be more intelligent than they seem due to difficulties in expressing it. You then appear to think that a contradiction to that argument is that intelligence would get expressed. Wtf??? There might be all kinds of reasons why someone would struggle to express their intelligence. For example, they might have trauma. They could have a mild brain injury that does not lead to loss of intelligence but to difficulty in formulating speech. They might simply never have been exposed (through upbringing) to the sort of intelligent discussion that stimulates the expression of intelligence. They might express their intelligence in ways other people (such as super-intelligent you) do not regard as intelligent.
Really, stick to quadratics.
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
Lots of people have knowledge of physics and maths but apart from Newton and perhaps Maxwell, Einstein towers above everyone else in his contribution to physics.
A lot of discoveries are about being in the right place at the right time, or about just having a really creative idea. Thats why it's not very useful to look at extreme cases like Einstein; generally you find clearer statistical patterns when you look at the population as a whole. For example, childhood IQ strongly predicts how many years a person will spend in education (university + graduate degrees etc) even when you control for parents income and social background.
If youre interested in this, Steve Hsu's blog sometimes discusses how extreme percentile IQ affects scientific discovery and so on, and he does some research in this area: http://infoproc.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/horsepower-matters-psychometrics-works.html
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by poohat
Noone is claiming that a high IQ is sufficient (or necessary) for great discovery, however there is a strong correlation, if only because its unlikely you could even get a PhD in theoretical physics with an IQ below 120 or so.
A lot of discoveries are about being in the right place at the right time, or about just having a really creative idea. Thats why it's not very useful to look at extreme cases like Einstein; generally you find clearer statistical patterns when you look at the population as a whole. For example, childhood IQ strongly predicts how many years a person will spend in education (university + graduate degrees etc) even when you control for parents income and social background.
A lot of discoveries are about being in the right place at the right time, or about just having a really creative idea. Thats why it's not very useful to look at extreme cases like Einstein; generally you find clearer statistical patterns when you look at the population as a whole. For example, childhood IQ strongly predicts how many years a person will spend in education (university + graduate degrees etc) even when you control for parents income and social background.
Obviously not, I didn't bring Einstein into the discussion, just pointing out that the other poster was underplaying Einstein's role in physics.
Original post by Hypocrism
Thank you for suddenly agreeing with what I've been saying. It makes a change from previously arguing against it.
still don't agree IQ = intelligence.
Original post by SmileAway
Why is everyone even discussing this? Why do we have to pigeon-hole people? I couldn't care less if you belonged to a racial group with a higher average IQ, all I care about is how you perform intellectually, on your OWN.
Here, here.
Now ... pub?
Original post by SexyNerd
no, its not about gifted children, its about geniuses (very smart smart people), however IQ tests are so valid, they didn't want to over validate the show which was about intelligence, therefore they didn't even mention the most valid measurement of intelligence just incase the show exploded with over validity.
or they didn't want to bore people with a show about a number or recieve hate mail for acknowledging a standardised measure of intelligence which makes them "white supremacists" regardless of thier opinion on the origin of IQ.
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
Lots of people have knowledge of physics and maths but apart from Newton and perhaps Maxwell, Einstein towers above everyone else in his contribution to physics.
Rubbish.
Hawkings. Galieo. Various Curies. Gilbert. Pascal. Bernoulli. Euler. Watt. Ampere. Gauss. Faraday. Carnot. Kelvin. Gibbs. Planck. Bohr. Schrodinger. Hertz. Chadwick. de Broglie. Heisenberg. Geiger. Klein. Higgs.
Einstein did a huge amount for physics, but a lot of it as a continuation of others' work, just as many of the above. He's a popular figure who shouldn't be seen as intellectually unreachable due to his lucky timing. It's been theorized that had Einstein not developed the theory, it would have been perhaps another 5 years before the rest of the physicists got their act together to unite their theories, and general relativity would have followed.
Original post by Aeschylus
Of course Jews are smarter, do you think running political and media conspiracies is easy for us? 
LOL. Not to mention master-minding 9/11 and destroying the economy, all at the same time! You must be sooo clever.
I think we should give the Jews a break, I know some Jews and they are really nice people, quite good fun and a mixture of dazzlingly intelligent and not so smart, haha.
How did they work that 1 out
Original post by SoNottingH
You say you're very intelligent
when?
but your arguments seem to flop all over the place and lack logic.
really how, I've provided the evidence that shows IQ tests aren't good for measuring intelligence.
For example, I said that people might be more intelligent than they seem due to difficulties in expressing it. You then appear to think that a contradiction to that argument is that intelligence would get expressed. Wtf???
what, the only way to express something is through words?
There might be all kinds of reasons why someone would struggle to express their intelligence. For example, they might have trauma.
my friend has had no trauma, is that the reason why your super jewish brain hasn't revealed itself yet?
They could have a mild brain injury that does not lead to loss of intelligence but to difficulty in formulating speech.
nor does this apply to my friend?
They might simply never have been exposed (through upbringing) to the sort of intelligent discussion that stimulates the expression of intelligence.
maybe, but still doesn't mean his intelligence wouldn't get exposed in some other way.
They might express their intelligence in ways other people (such as super-intelligent you) do not regard as intelligent.
thats right, like what, behind a computer screen on a discredited test?
Really, stick to quadratics.
mathematical/logical intelligence.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Aeschylus
Haha. There are flipsides though. Try telling your mum that you're not going to be a lawyer and going to do English Literature at University. I still get sent links by her to law conversion courses pretty much daily.
(to be fair my mum doesn't practise any more, and my dad's catholic (relapsed) so I have had a very strange childhood
(to be fair my mum doesn't practise any more, and my dad's catholic (relapsed) so I have had a very strange childhood
Haha, is that true about your Mum still trying to get you to do Law? That's so much the stereotype.
Maybe all the stereotypes we have of what different people "should" be like, including Jews, make it difficult to think straight about complicated arguments about if IQ is hereditary in the case of Ashkenazi's, if black people are naturally better at athletics, etc.
Original post by TheHansa
or they didn't want to bore people with a show about a number or recieve hate mail for acknowledging a standardised measure of intelligence which makes them "white supremacists" regardless of thier opinion on the origin of IQ.
no, they covered all credible bases, obviously IQ tests were too credible, because everyone with a high IQ is a genius.
Original post by SoNottingH
Haha, is that true about your Mum still trying to get you to do Law? That's so much the stereotype.
Oh yes. Silk's on the TV again so I've had the 'are you sure you don't want to be a barrister you'd be good at it' phonecalls. Fantastic stuff.
Original post by Aeschylus
Oh yes. Silk's on the TV again so I've had the 'are you sure you don't want to be a barrister you'd be good at it' phonecalls. Fantastic stuff.
She's right! You should be a lawyer. They earn so much more and it's a job with a career. I know because my Mum's one and she isn't even Jewish!
Original post by TheHansa
I've read a great deal of studies supporting this I'll link what I can find
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20400-pesticide-exposure-in-the-womb-may-lower-iq.html
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/02/junk-food-diet-lowers-children.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18324572.600-music-studies-instrumental-in-raising-childrens-iq.html
^I'm such a populist
^
I'm sure you've heard of the Flynn effect (not tryina be patronising just cba to find a link) but what is most interesting about it is that the gains of this effect are in fact, not in the areas which can be learned or revised for but are the most g-loaded, the population has experienced a real increase in fluid (the sort which can be applied to any cognitively demanding task) intelligence, which has been too big in too short a time to be genetic in origin.
I wouldn't say it's a contradiction, favourable conditions for a person during the right time in that person's life can and does affect how able they are to pick up new and totally alien skills which require intelligence, in adulthood and exactly how intelligent that person has become by adulthood can be accurately measured using a professional quality IQ test. IQ is a valid measurement of this because of its correlation with the sorts of jobs you'd expect it to correlate with as well as how reliably it predicts success on achievement tests
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20400-pesticide-exposure-in-the-womb-may-lower-iq.html
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/02/junk-food-diet-lowers-children.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18324572.600-music-studies-instrumental-in-raising-childrens-iq.html
^I'm such a populist
^I'm sure you've heard of the Flynn effect (not tryina be patronising just cba to find a link) but what is most interesting about it is that the gains of this effect are in fact, not in the areas which can be learned or revised for but are the most g-loaded, the population has experienced a real increase in fluid (the sort which can be applied to any cognitively demanding task) intelligence, which has been too big in too short a time to be genetic in origin.
I wouldn't say it's a contradiction, favourable conditions for a person during the right time in that person's life can and does affect how able they are to pick up new and totally alien skills which require intelligence, in adulthood and exactly how intelligent that person has become by adulthood can be accurately measured using a professional quality IQ test. IQ is a valid measurement of this because of its correlation with the sorts of jobs you'd expect it to correlate with as well as how reliably it predicts success on achievement tests
Thank you for those - though the third one didn't work.
I think, as you say, it's especially significant that the highest gains appear to be in the most 'g-loaded' areas...Would you then argue that general 'intelligence' is rising, or that it's simply an increased aptitude for taking tests? Or would you say that, in this context, the two can be seen as largely synonymous?
Of course anyone with a basic knowledge of biology and/or psychology wouldn't ever claim that genetics doesn't have a role to play in intelligence - how could it not?
- but it's equally foolish to suggest that environmental factors aren't equally conducive to intelligence level.With regards to my suggestion that it could be interpreted as a contradiction, I suppose that's true - however, that means it's imperative that intelligence (and, hence, I.Q.) aren't seen as a fixed entity, but a 'fluid' one - that is to say, absolutist determinism is a rather silly position to take in light of this evidence.
I think that it's also worth noting, as you say, that there are a number of different I.Q. tests, many of which are a waste of time at best and fraudulent at worst
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
