That guy is really well-spoken. But in the end what he said doesn't really interact with what I think-- that success in life depends greatly on the work you put in.
Now if he suggests that higher IQ people are predisposed to putting in that work, then maybe Peterson and I are in agreement. Although I don't see how having drive and ambition could be connected to IQ, specifically because the way IQ is measured doesn't have any reference to work ethic, and psychometricians have taken great care to try and isolate their number to just natural cognitive ability.
But if we make the reasonable conclusion that IQ is independent of work ethic, the question becomes does work ethic matter at all? I'd say yes. Those who study hard in university to develop practical skills that they can apply to better society I deem successful, irrespective of what metrics about jobs or grades Peterson uses. That's sidestepping the fact that there are many definitions of success. The link between work ethic and success is much more clear than the correlations between IQ and success shown in longitudinal studies, which have many problems of their own.
Moreover, his whole talk controls for agreeableness, sociability, and many other factors which can contribute to success. While this is great for isolated studies about soundness of IQ, this is not great for studies about prediction of success of individuals. I think its dangerous to reduce people's ability to succeed to IQ studies, and ignore other factors. Let's not doom lower IQ people to "manual labor" over their IQ; I think we will agree it's an oversimplification.
Thanks for the link, pede. Writing this out has helped me organize my $0.02 on the subject.
Sure, intelligence is genetic. but the type of intelligence measured by IQ is not predictive of success in society. Those who study and work hard will progress humanity more than those born to high IQ parents who don't. So in a sense, "culture" is the primary driver of success. Not sure where this idea that people's impact on society are decided by their DNA comes from. This goes against the conservative tenet of self-efficacy-- that you can better yourself and your situation with hard work.
Forgot to color Florida red there, pal
Fuck the polls, even if they turn in our favor once in a while. Do you really think disapproval is <40% ?
Yep this is the move. 9 times out of 10 they'll side with you.
what practical purpose does lipstick serve on the battlefield. tactical lip gloss jfc
Twitter is a fucking disgrace
Neither does anyone else. 1/2 of all impeachments in HISTORY happened in the last 4 years; thats enough to tell you its lost its meaning.
one that shows causation instead of correlation. id be hard pressed to believe the reason people in zimbabwe have 10 kids is because their "lower iq" forbids them from having foresight, and not because of higher child mortality, need for agrarian labor, lack of education, or some other environmental factor. don't you think connecting iq to race, which measures general intelligence (and is pretty vague in doing so at that), is a pretty big logical leap when there are a host of simpler explanations available?
please explain
wtf? i know intelligence can be influenced by genetic factors, but those factors are not as broad as "race"
bill nye memes are facebook energy
Race isn't tied to IQ, having kids isn't tied of IQ, IQ isn't related to any of this at all
for me it sometimes feels the other way around... you won't believe the reality my classmates live in. I think I'm literally the only conservative on campus.
doesn't hurt to support another run. we can walk and chew gum at the same time.
compression after many rounds of sharing will do that to it. thats why when you look at the colors closely there's weird yellows and greens where there should be whites.
damn he just rolled with it
It's not so simple there are many unseen forces at play
fox called it yesterday
the suitcases of views are on the way
same thing happened to bernie. he had a young, high-energy movement, and their online enthusiasm led to jack shit. still, dont let your resolve crack so easily, this train is only picking up momentum if the events of this month are anything to go by
before the censorship he said he has big plans... im hoping for a trump news or social network, there is so much potential energy here
If I wasn't open to changing my mind, I wouldn't be so deep in this thread, and I would have never joined this forum or this movement in the first place. Calling me a headstrong leftist with a fragile psyche out of touch with reality won't change my mind or help me understand, but I suppose that's par for the course on the internet. Now brace for the wall of text.
The idea that no academic journal can prove causation is just untrue. Papers which assert causality can be challenged and their conclusions disputed, but you will not find an IQ paper who would suggest causation at all, because it is an oversimplification. There is no such standard in psychology that correlation is good enough to assert causality.
Now I've taken more than 10 minutes to look at your links here, and none of them seem to address what I mentioned before. I haven't had time to look at each paper individually, but even so there are a number of problems.
Ok, I'll buy it. I guess it's an interesting correlation.
Ok. ADHD is due to low intelligence? Not sure, but I'll bite.
More stuff about ADHD
Ah, that guy. If we're to talk about academic rigor here, you should take this source out of your repertoire. His methodologies are pretty deeply flawed, going as far as writing a different IQ test just for Africans, and choosing sample groups irresponsibly. There's more to discuss here if you want, because I think this is the crux of your belief.
This is true but misleading. IQ research struggles because it is nearly impossible to control for all the variables necessary to draw causal conclusions, and the correlations it draws are well explained by causal links elsewhere. If we are going to discuss why Africa has low financial and human development, this is a whole 'nother discussion which I'm happy to discuss. But yes, IQ correlates to financial development.
Besides that, there are unsound links in your argument. Let me map it out: you say (ADHD = low iq) + (Africans = low iq) --> Africans = ADHD --> Africans cant stop fucking each other. You won't find any paper that will put these points together; the closest there is is a bunch of discrete papers that don't have anything to do with each other. This is because there are way too many logical leaps to accept this theory for overpopulation, while the much simpler ones I mentioned earlier remain unaddressed and are the widely accepted consensus.