The Student Room Group

Why is it okay to discriminate on the basis of intelligence?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Original post by Annoying-Mouse
Should the driving age be abolished then?


I don't believe the anti age discrimination laws apply at the bottom end of the spectrum. Clearly an 8 year old isn't sufficiently physically, mentally and emotionally developed enough to safely drive a car.
Original post by py0alb
I don't believe the anti age discrimination laws apply at the bottom end of the spectrum. Clearly an 8 year old isn't sufficiently physically, mentally and emotionally developed enough to safely drive a car.


Only based on statistical association. Are you saying that it's impossible for a 8 year old to become physically and mentally and emotionally developed enough to safely drive a car? I mean, wouldn't prohibiting driving without a license be enough to stop most 8 year olds from driving and it would still allow room for early growers to not be treated as collective but rather individuals.
Reply 42
Original post by Annoying-Mouse
Only based on statistical association. Are you saying that it's impossible for a 8 year old to become physically and mentally and emotionally developed enough to safely drive a car? I mean, wouldn't prohibiting driving without a license be enough to stop most 8 year olds from driving and it would still allow room for early growers to not be treated as collective but rather individuals.


Yes, I think it probably is impossible. Driving a real car on a real road is not a task to be taken likely: it requires a degree of maturity and self-discipline that most 15 year olds would struggle with, never mind an 8 year old.


An element of common sense must be used here. Beyond some points a statistical correlation becomes a direct and obvious causation. There are lots of things that visually impaired people should be fully at liberty to do for example, but driving a car unaided is not one of them. That is not merely a correlation.
Reply 43
Original post by py0alb
Discrimination on age is against the law.
Differentiation based on driving experience is not.

The arguments are subtle and there is always a bit of a grey area, but the principles generally hold up to closer inspection.


I was under the impression that it was done on age, but I've not bothered with learning to drive yet, so I'm not sure how they work it out.

Another question, how do the government justify their tiered minimum wage if discrimination based on age is illegal? I actually want to hear an answer to this one, I'm not trying to be argumentative.

More on topic, as others have said intelligence is rather important as to how well you can do many jobs and even if it's not, succeeding academically (which we can all agree is associated and often classed the same as intelligence) is linked to hard work and so on in employers minds. Even if it's not required for the jobs, I can imagine that many employers would want to hire someone who performs well in school as the high achievers tend to not be the kind of people who'll slack off so much.

I apologize for the generalisations, I'm just pointing out how in the head of a potential employer certain things may indicate other things.
Reply 44
Original post by thomaskurian89
Apparently, discrimination on the basis of physical features like skin colour, height and attractiveness is frowned upon but it is okay to discriminate on the basis of intelligence. Why is that, given that physical features and intelligence are both genetically predetermined?


Epic fail
Reply 45
Original post by dgeorge
Epic fail


Care to elaborate?
Original post by A.J10
I was under the impression that it was done on age, but I've not bothered with learning to drive yet, so I'm not sure how they work it out.

Another question, how do the government justify their tiered minimum wage if discrimination based on age is illegal? I actually want to hear an answer to this one, I'm not trying to be argumentative.


The driving this is a bit silly because we all do tests anyway. But, when I turned 17, I had to be 21 to ride a motorbike 1000cc or larger but I could drive a car, even if I won the lottery and bought myself a Ferrari with a 5200cc engine. But I could not ride a Honda Goldwing, for example.

I've never seen the justification for the tiered minimum wages though and I wouldn't mind knowing why it's allowed. You could cite other privileges granted by the Law based on age criteria, such as the right to vote.

One thing I have noticed though while I was on JSA are employers asking applicants to have a car when it's not required in the job. I'm sure this is used to weed out any potential "problematic" people who may have disabilities.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 47
Original post by thomaskurian89
Care to elaborate?


Intelligence is not genetically predetermined.

INFLUENCED yes, predetermined no
Reply 48
Heritability of crystallized-type intelligence and fluid-type intelligence is thought to range from 69%-86%. Some studies have shown the environment contributes towards intelligence by as much as 40-50%. Intelligence is definitely not predetermined but contributes towards a large proportion of the variance...
Reply 49
It may seem a little unfair if someone is deemed 'unintelligent' despite it not being their fault. But the fact is, society depends on the existance of intelligent people much more than the existence of black people, dwarves, lesbians or any other minority.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Reply 50
Original post by thomaskurian89
Apparently, discrimination on the basis of physical features like skin colour, height and attractiveness is frowned upon but it is okay to discriminate on the basis of intelligence. Why is that, given that physical features and intelligence are both genetically predetermined?


no one is more or less intelligent than any other person. Everyone has the same potential to be an egghead in one way or another (there are hundreds of ways to be considered intelligent, and very few of them involve reading a lot of books).
Original post by dem503
no one is more or less intelligent than any other person. Everyone has the same potential to be an egghead in one way or another (there are hundreds of ways to be considered intelligent, and very few of them involve reading a lot of books).


We all have the same intelligence? Bull****.
Reply 52
Original post by im so academic
We all have the same intelligence? Bull****.


The sentiment that every 18 year old has.

You might be able to get 89/100 on an exam about something you read about, but it might take you hours to learn how to put an engine together. Or vice versa. If you can do both, I highly doubt you can paint a beautiful picture, or spot when a friend is in emotional distress when they are trying to cover it up, or reproduce a piece of music just by listening to it, or have a long conversation about the origin of all things (without simply saying 'I have it all figured out'), or quickly articulate to someone else how to do a task they have never done before (without resorting to doing it for them).

There are many ways to be intelligent. The more enlightened you are to one way of thinking, the more ignorant you will be to other ways. It takes a life time to discover them all.
Original post by dem503
The sentiment that every 18 year old has.

You might be able to get 89/100 on an exam about something you read about, but it might take you hours to learn how to put an engine together. Or vice versa. If you can do both, I highly doubt you can paint a beautiful picture, or spot when a friend is in emotional distress when they are trying to cover it up, or reproduce a piece of music just by listening to it, or have a long conversation about the origin of all things (without simply saying 'I have it all figured out'), or quickly articulate to someone else how to do a task they have never done before (without resorting to doing it for them).

There are many ways to be intelligent. The more enlightened you are to one way of thinking, the more ignorant you will be to other ways. It takes a life time to discover them all.


We may be intelligent in different ways, but we don't all have the same intelligence.
Reply 54
Original post by im so academic
We may be intelligent in different ways, but we don't all have the same intelligence.


Anything to back that up? Can you really say the Mona Lisa took more intelligence to create than solving the Taniyama–Shimura conjecture for example?

The mindset many people have of intelligence is the QI style- knowing a long list of facts. Knowing the facts is not intelligence; a parrot can repeat something it has heard, doesn't mean it can build bridges.
Original post by dem503
Anything to back that up? Can you really say the Mona Lisa took more intelligence to create than solving the Taniyama–Shimura conjecture for example?

The mindset many people have of intelligence is the QI style- knowing a long list of facts. Knowing the facts is not intelligence; a parrot can repeat something it has heard, doesn't mean it can build bridges.


They're both intelligent. You're saying that EVERYONE has the same intelligence.

Has the average person on the Jeremy Kyle show got the same intelligence as a top surgeon?
Reply 56
Original post by im so academic
They're both intelligent. You're saying that EVERYONE has the same intelligence.

Has the average person on the Jeremy Kyle show got the same intelligence as a top surgeon?


The difference between those two is not intelligence; it is environment. To become a surgeon, like with any job, it is not so much about intelligence as it is the drive to do all the hard work necessary, and have the opportunity to do so. How many people on JK do you think grew up near a school where academia is encouraged?

Also you know nothing about either of these (albeit hypothetical) people. The guy on Jeremy Kyle who got his neighbour's wife pregnant could be a natural with a wrench; can fix anything with moving parts, be able to do life like drawings and never been in any sort of financial woe. The surgeon could be a massive tool-go to work, do surgery, go home. Put the wrench in the hand of the surgeon he wont be able to do anything, give the JK guy an open wound and you get a corpse.
sounds to me as tho intellect and intelligence are being muddled up.
intelligence is required for competency in some jobs

you could not hire someone who couldnt do basic alegbra ie x-4=10, what is x?

because compentency is needed

same reason why army doesnt hire paralysed people
Original post by dem503
The difference between those two is not intelligence; it is environment. To become a surgeon, like with any job, it is not so much about intelligence as it is the drive to do all the hard work necessary, and have the opportunity to do so. How many people on JK do you think grew up near a school where academia is encouraged?

Also you know nothing about either of these (albeit hypothetical) people. The guy on Jeremy Kyle who got his neighbour's wife pregnant could be a natural with a wrench; can fix anything with moving parts, be able to do life like drawings and never been in any sort of financial woe. The surgeon could be a massive tool-go to work, do surgery, go home. Put the wrench in the hand of the surgeon he wont be able to do anything, give the JK guy an open wound and you get a corpse.


Meh. If you can't show your intelligence, what's the point?

Quick Reply

Latest