Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ

JBroll said:
I'm reminded of the 'Too Stupid To Be An Atheist' video...

Jeff
Click to expand...

link plz? haha.


yeah liberal is a squirmy word these days... after years of being a pretentious bush hating teenager, i've grown up a tad and learned that leaning left on social issues but observing neutrality on things that matter (or open-mindedness to either side, atleast) is the only way to consider yourself a rational human being.
 
JeffTD said:
It's worth noting with this study that correlation does NOT necessarily equal causation; just because people with higher IQ's are liberal, atheist, and monogamist does not mean that being liberal, atheist, and monogamist makes you smarter, or that being smarter makes you more liberal, atheist, or monogamist.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you're more likely to be "liberal, atheist, monogamist etc." if you have a high IQ and vice versa.

The findings in this study are nothing knew. There have been countless studies analysing the correlation between these items and people's disposition.

The "findings" presented in this article (a very loosely edited version of the original press release) are highlighted to generate public interest, while they are (ironically) substantially nothing new and not even the main focus of this research.

The novelty aspect of this study lies in the bigger scheme. Those items (political-, religious-, sexual- etc. disposition) are rather indicators than actual research subject. They're indicators for insecurity avoidance, a cornerstone in cultural studies.
 
liberal --> check (except dillo huntin' ;) )
atheist --> check (more on the agnostic side, bet that counts too?)
man --> check
sexual exclusivity --> check (8 years constantly getting more)

WIN!!!
 
JBroll said:
I don't buy into the IQ thing - there is no way that I'm farther separated from an 'average' person than that person is from someone who is legally considered to be mentally disabled. That said, it's not too surprising that the researchers identified some things that wouldn't have helped much in the past... and, of course, some things that are being held as intellectual badges of honor in more than a few places...

Jeff
Click to expand...
You know IQ-Test work an a simple basis: you do a certain number of exercises and the tst result tells you how good you did this compared to the hole population based on a certain norm. The IQ cannot really be compared between different tests and societys. If you have a math teacher do some math exercises and he gets a 120 he still can get a 80 in a grammar test. People always mixing the IQ up for something that really doesn't exist. There are IQ-tests trying to measure a lot of fields of knowledge, but cannot really make a statement of the entire construct.
 
JeffTD said:
You say you "just can't generalise like that," but you go on to say that middle/upper class people have "some shocking parental priorities"?? I'm not going to say they always make the best parents, but there are shitty parents in all socioeconomic brackets.
Click to expand...

:lol: Yeah I thought that was a bit silly just before I hit reply. But after experiencing the upper echelons of private education here theres some blaringly obvious trends occuring that don't in strictly middle class arenas.

as for..

JeffTD said:
I don't care what kind of exceptions to the rules you can find - wealthy people are, by and large, smarter and more intelligent than poor people. Without getting into any other obvious reason as to why this is true - just think about it. Anyone remotely intelligent is going to find a way to money. If they lack skills, they'll find a way around it. If they lack qualifications, they'll find a way to get them or to work without them. Stupid people will just lack those skills and qualifications and not make as much money
Click to expand...

I still disagree man, defining success based on capitalistic ideals, and relating that to actual intelligence just doesn't go together. Knowing how to get money isn't exactly an intellectual pursuit. I still do see your point and can acknowledge it. I guess I'm taking intelligence as meaning genius or top 2% instead of above the norm.

edit; I'd agree to disagree but clearly I can't afford it :lol: :lol:
 
I'm as atheist as it gets, and I guess indeed quite liberal but I'm pretty much the least sexually exclusive male I have ever met.

I do consider myself to be really smart either way though.
 
Okay; imagine this...

You're in a five year relationship with a girl. She's started to develop rashes all over her body through some adverse reaction to environmental factors. Neither are sure why it's happening, but it puts a strain on the relationship. A strain because the girl feels less attractive, and less willing to have sex. The man feels more and more frustrated that he cannot please her, and that he doesn't seem to interest her. Communication breaks down. They argue a lot, and he spends a lot of time pursuing other things rather than trying to fix the relationship - he's just had too much rejection.

What's the smart thing to do in this situation? I'm sure there are many things he could do, but one of them would be to leave her and start fucking anything he could, which has more chance of reproductive success.

Just toying with the idea here that intelligence isn't really linked to monogamy at all. It depends on how you measure intelligence - is intelligence measured by the ability to reproduce, or something else?

Meh.
 
drew_drummer said:
Okay; imagine this...

You're in a five year relationship with a girl. She's started to develop rashes all over her body through some adverse reaction to environmental factors. Neither are sure why it's happening, but it puts a strain on the relationship. A strain because the girl feels less attractive, and less willing to have sex. The man feels more and more frustrated that he cannot please her, and that he doesn't seem to interest her. Communication breaks down. They argue a lot, and he spends a lot of time pursuing other things rather than trying to fix the relationship - he's just had too much rejection.

What's the smart thing to do in this situation? I'm sure there are many things he could do, but one of them would be to leave her and start fucking anything he could, which has more chance of reproductive success.

Just toying with the idea here that intelligence isn't really linked to monogamy at all. It depends on how you measure intelligence - is intelligence measured by the ability to reproduce, or something else?

Meh.
Click to expand...

I think you're reading a bit too much into this. You're taking a very specific example and using it to inform your thinking on a statistical matter. Obviously there are a lot of very intelligent people who aren't monogamous, a lot of stupid people who are, whether by design or just by their situation. Just that on average, if you are monogamous then you are likely to have a marginally higher IQ.

Also, if you say high IQ causes monogamy, that does not necessarily mean that it is a direct connection leading to the conclusion that monogamy is the intelligent choice.
 
The problem is the phrasing.

"Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ" ... linked to IQ? I think they're the ones reading a bit too much into this. It is about statistics you're right, but the article goes more towards insinuating a causality - which doesn't exist, imo. The proof? Exactly what you've just said - there are very intelligent people who aren't monogamous, a lot of stupid people who are, lots of liberal christians, etc.. etc...

It's the academic equivalent of those tabloid articles talking about who Brad Pitt is banging this month.
 
JBroll said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ghIU_tlX0k

Jeff
Click to expand...

I think the big bang theory is just as outlandish as a man in the sky.

If he is trying to be smart for lulz, it would have been funnier if he took it in a different direction. Being an Atheist means you don't believe in God(s). It does not automatically mean you trust the big bang theory or even creationism.

Speaking of which, I took a drive down to Darwin Day a few weeks ago, and found out some pretty cynical facts about the Florida education system. Lets just say they are dragging their feet on the whole "science" learninz.
 
JBroll said:
... thefyn, you had better be simply trolling again with that first line.

Jeff
Click to expand...

So you are telling me it is fact? It is a theory.

Here is the truth: We don't know how the universe started (or even if anything actually started). And people who think they have a general idea are fooling themselves and literally stabbing in the dark.

I respect people who can throw their hands up and admit WE DON'T KNOW how the universe started.

I don't belive in God(s), and I certainly don't think we have a handle on how everything works and never will. People believing in the big bang is akin to a religion in itself: Words on a page that a MAN wrote giving people COMFORT that they have an insight to the workings of space and time.

Good luck putting your "faith" in theories.

I'll just say it like it is. We are a bunch of shaved monkeys pretending to be smart. Science has been around for how long??? And we think we have figured out a (so they say :) 5 billion year conundrum of how our solar system was spawned? Sorry but that is vulgarity. Not much beta testing there buddy. We need a couple thousand more years of research before you can even being to scoff at anyones theory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
Is Black Metal Friendly to Nazism?
Replies
21
Views
1K
The Philosopher
infoterror
I
Top Bottom
Back