IQ gets velocity of potential to demonstrate intelligence. General knowledge, broad life experience, due diligence gets you demonstrable intelligence. These narrow ones paradigm limiting error (predictive failure). Science and P produce most parsimonious paradigm, due diligence.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-26 11:42:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1309820559732158464
Reply addressees: @TruthQuest11
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1309813888289058816
—“Mean world IQ ≈ 86-87, about one standard deviation lower than in the developed OECD countries and China.”— First, afaik, the OECD and China cause is (a) climate (b) neoteny, and (c) manorialism. That also means: 1 – That’s the basal Eurasian IQ. we don’t know why the basal eurasian IQ is higher, and why the basal east asian IQ is higher than that. It appears purely to be the cause of neoteny on one hand an manorialism on the other. 2 – That the basal Eurasian IQ is in the ‘evil 80’s’ where most crime occurs. (Wonder why low trust societies in that range?) 3 – That the basal Eurasian IQ leaves a population HALF of whom can’t serve in a modern military because there is nothing that they can do that isn’t more costly, or dangerous to self others and mission than the value that they can provide. 4 – That the Pareto (power distribution (top 1%) is also shifted one standard deviation lower (from 135 to 120), the top 20% (113 to 98). IQ AND CAPABILITY 50-69 — Mildly retarded Educable, can learn to care for oneself, employable in routinized jobs but require supervision. Might live alone but do best in supervised settings. Immature but with adequate social adjustment, usually no obvious physical anomalies. Moderate and mild retardation, contrary to the more severe forms, are typically not caused by brain damage but part of the normal variance of intelligence, and therefore largely genetic and inherited. This is important with regard to the question whether or not retarded persons should have children; for especially the moderate and mild forms of retardation, with which it is physically possible to have children, are the most likely to be inherited. 70-79 — Borderline retarded Limited trainability. Have difficulty with everyday demands like using a phone book, reading bus or train schedules, banking, filling out forms, using appliances like a video recorder, microwave oven, or computer, et cetera, and therefore require assistance from relatives or social workers in the management of their affairs. Can be employed in simple tasks but require supervision. 80-89 — Below average Above the threshold for normal independent functioning. Can perform explicit routinized hands-on tasks without supervision as long as there are no moments of choice and it is always clear what has to be done. Assembler, food service. This is also the I.Q. range most associated with violence. Most violent crime is committed by males from this range. This does not imply that all males in this range are violent, nor that all violent males are in this range. But when the modal I.Q. of a group is in this range, one may expect trouble with with many male members of that group. When the modal I.Q. of a society or population is raised upward of this range, violence decreases as fewer males fall in this range then, given the shape of an even remotely normal distribution. When the modal I.Q. of a society is below this range to begin with though, raising it may increase violence. The causal mechanism behind the (statistical) relation between crime and below-average I.Q. is likely that lower I.Q. levels inherently tend to go with having less impulse control, being less able to delay gratification, being less able to comprehend moral principles like the Golden Rule, and being overstrained by the cognitive demands of society. And, this is the range into which men of average or just above average intelligence sink when under the influence of alcohol; alcohol reduces I.Q. by up to about 25 points while drunk (own data), which explains why many drunk men are violent and aggressive (own hypothesis). 90-99 — Average Able to learn a trade in a hands-on manner and perform tasks involving decisions. Craftsman, sales, police officer, clerk. Studies involving some theory are possible from this range upward. 100-109 — Average Able to learn from written materials. Employable in senior positions. 110-119 — Above average Able to learn in “college” format. Bachelor degrees. Manager, teacher, accountant. Just capable of taking high-range I.Q. tests. 120-129 — Above average Capable of gathering and inferring own information. Master degrees. Attorney, chemist, executive. About 93 % of high-range test candidates score I.Q. 120 or higher. 130-139 — “Gifted” May just be able to write a legible piece of text like an article or modest novel. Minor literary figures. Ph.D. in the “soft” sciences. In this range lies the mode of scores on high-range tests, and almost 80 % of high-range candidates score I.Q. 130 or higher. Regular psychology’s I.Q. tests should not be trusted beyond this range as their validity breaks down here, if such scores are given at all. 140-149 — Intelligent Capable of rational communication and scientific work. From this range on, only specific high-range tests should be considered. Important scientific discoveries and advancement are possible from the upper part of this range on. We do not know if intelligence from about this range on is simply the extreme end of a normal distribution centred at 100 and largely formed by heredity, or if high intelligence in some cases has other causes (non-inherited or non-genetic) which make it deviate from the normal curve centred at 100 and form a “bump” in the far right tail, similar to the bump in the retarded range (which has non-inherited and non-genetic causes). And since we possess no physical, absolute scale of intelligence, these questions are hitherto meaningless altogether. About one in two high-range test candidates score I.Q. 140 or higher.
—“Mean world IQ ≈ 86-87, about one standard deviation lower than in the developed OECD countries and China.”— First, afaik, the OECD and China cause is (a) climate (b) neoteny, and (c) manorialism. That also means: 1 – That’s the basal Eurasian IQ. we don’t know why the basal eurasian IQ is higher, and why the basal east asian IQ is higher than that. It appears purely to be the cause of neoteny on one hand an manorialism on the other. 2 – That the basal Eurasian IQ is in the ‘evil 80’s’ where most crime occurs. (Wonder why low trust societies in that range?) 3 – That the basal Eurasian IQ leaves a population HALF of whom can’t serve in a modern military because there is nothing that they can do that isn’t more costly, or dangerous to self others and mission than the value that they can provide. 4 – That the Pareto (power distribution (top 1%) is also shifted one standard deviation lower (from 135 to 120), the top 20% (113 to 98). IQ AND CAPABILITY 50-69 — Mildly retarded Educable, can learn to care for oneself, employable in routinized jobs but require supervision. Might live alone but do best in supervised settings. Immature but with adequate social adjustment, usually no obvious physical anomalies. Moderate and mild retardation, contrary to the more severe forms, are typically not caused by brain damage but part of the normal variance of intelligence, and therefore largely genetic and inherited. This is important with regard to the question whether or not retarded persons should have children; for especially the moderate and mild forms of retardation, with which it is physically possible to have children, are the most likely to be inherited. 70-79 — Borderline retarded Limited trainability. Have difficulty with everyday demands like using a phone book, reading bus or train schedules, banking, filling out forms, using appliances like a video recorder, microwave oven, or computer, et cetera, and therefore require assistance from relatives or social workers in the management of their affairs. Can be employed in simple tasks but require supervision. 80-89 — Below average Above the threshold for normal independent functioning. Can perform explicit routinized hands-on tasks without supervision as long as there are no moments of choice and it is always clear what has to be done. Assembler, food service. This is also the I.Q. range most associated with violence. Most violent crime is committed by males from this range. This does not imply that all males in this range are violent, nor that all violent males are in this range. But when the modal I.Q. of a group is in this range, one may expect trouble with with many male members of that group. When the modal I.Q. of a society or population is raised upward of this range, violence decreases as fewer males fall in this range then, given the shape of an even remotely normal distribution. When the modal I.Q. of a society is below this range to begin with though, raising it may increase violence. The causal mechanism behind the (statistical) relation between crime and below-average I.Q. is likely that lower I.Q. levels inherently tend to go with having less impulse control, being less able to delay gratification, being less able to comprehend moral principles like the Golden Rule, and being overstrained by the cognitive demands of society. And, this is the range into which men of average or just above average intelligence sink when under the influence of alcohol; alcohol reduces I.Q. by up to about 25 points while drunk (own data), which explains why many drunk men are violent and aggressive (own hypothesis). 90-99 — Average Able to learn a trade in a hands-on manner and perform tasks involving decisions. Craftsman, sales, police officer, clerk. Studies involving some theory are possible from this range upward. 100-109 — Average Able to learn from written materials. Employable in senior positions. 110-119 — Above average Able to learn in “college” format. Bachelor degrees. Manager, teacher, accountant. Just capable of taking high-range I.Q. tests. 120-129 — Above average Capable of gathering and inferring own information. Master degrees. Attorney, chemist, executive. About 93 % of high-range test candidates score I.Q. 120 or higher. 130-139 — “Gifted” May just be able to write a legible piece of text like an article or modest novel. Minor literary figures. Ph.D. in the “soft” sciences. In this range lies the mode of scores on high-range tests, and almost 80 % of high-range candidates score I.Q. 130 or higher. Regular psychology’s I.Q. tests should not be trusted beyond this range as their validity breaks down here, if such scores are given at all. 140-149 — Intelligent Capable of rational communication and scientific work. From this range on, only specific high-range tests should be considered. Important scientific discoveries and advancement are possible from the upper part of this range on. We do not know if intelligence from about this range on is simply the extreme end of a normal distribution centred at 100 and largely formed by heredity, or if high intelligence in some cases has other causes (non-inherited or non-genetic) which make it deviate from the normal curve centred at 100 and form a “bump” in the far right tail, similar to the bump in the retarded range (which has non-inherited and non-genetic causes). And since we possess no physical, absolute scale of intelligence, these questions are hitherto meaningless altogether. About one in two high-range test candidates score I.Q. 140 or higher.
I wonder if the ‘hole’ in the average IQ distribution (in the 3/4 standard deviation between 73 and 83) is due the top of the Pareto distribution being in the evil 80’s which would encourage bullying. And selection for cognitive improvement requires selection for sociability, and sociability requires selection for neoteny. (Haven’t done a search on this yet). Once the average IQ gets into the middle 80’s that means the top of the Pareto distribution is now in the low 90’s.
I’d bet money on it.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-25 12:33:00 UTC
Personal note. I think some of us just recall. Some of us form associations. And some of us develop models. I know that to undrestand anything I have to understand almost everything about it – otherwise I can’t create a model. But once I create a model I can answer far more questions than I could if I had understanding by association, or recitation. I know that as a kid in school (and I’ve hears this same self reporting from elite physicists), I always felt I needed more time, and that they tested us too early. This is why. It’s also why I want to change education from atomized disciplines focused on memorization and repetition to ‘the grammars’ which treat all bases of knowleddge as variations on the same theme.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-24 10:57:00 UTC
Well the african, neandertal, denisovian evolutionary deistribution is no different from the african, west eurasian, east asian evolutionary distribution. And it’s extraordinarily likely that the same distribution persisted throughout hominid history. The difference is that eurasia is an east-west distribution, and africa a north-south distribution, so as the climate varied, proto-humans could migrate with the climate, and african climate would adapt to the world climate. Once out of africa, the trend continued except it continued into cold. Cold is interesting because it decreases the disease gradient, decreases competitors, and predators, but preserves if not increases food availability since animals that surive the cold have the same benefits from it as humans. In other words, as soon as you can ccompete with the cold, its easier to compete with the cold than it is to compete with disease, competitors, and predators.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-24 10:54:00 UTC
You can lead a moron to knowledge but you can’t make it learn.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-24 10:47:00 UTC
A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING OF INTELLIGENCE – AND MAN
The history of the evolution of mankind is the incremental acceleration of adaptability due to periodic stresses. While we don’t study it, climactic stresses in Africa alone during the past five million years were challenging.
So it is better to describe individual and group intelligence as the rate of individual and group adaptability, and group strategy, metaphysics(paradigm), mythology, tradition, and *method of argument* as regulating our adaptability to our group ability.
Unfortunately, group strategy can enhance of limit group adaptability, and can advance it (european) or regress it (Islam).
By using the model (paradigm) of adaptability to relate human biological, social, cognitive, and linguistic processes, we create commensurability across domains and produce a universal understanding of human behavior – thus assisting us in demonstrating that the entire human spectrum of tools (biological, social, cognitive, linguistic AND informational) is not only ‘relative’ but absolutely non-neutral.
So I’ll take the opportunity to state once again:
Differences in ability are neotenic and neurological. They may be nothing more than neoteny facilitating differential neurological growth.
We have cannot yet identify genes determining intelligence, and those we find (thousands) appear to have tiny effect.
That differences in cognitive adaptability or the distribution of it (memory vs adaptability vs prediction-innovation vs agency) appear to leave little or no evidence in the fossil record other than minor variation in the volume of the braincase.
We have definite archeological evidence in the record of the evolution of tools and processes.
We have definite biological evidence in the record of differences in gestation rate, maturity rate, depth of maturity, and self-regulation (neoteny) – which is the direction of investigation that would help us understand intelligence.
We have definite biological evidence in isolated populations that the earliest people out of africa have the lowest cognitive rate of adaptation, and those people in highest stress environments (colder) the highest.
And we have a definite recent record in the size of class distributions across human groups.
And agrarianism obscured this evolution and it and possibly reversed it – which is my suspicion. And that only those groups that converted to manorialism (Rome, Germanic Europe, China) continued it. Agrarianism homogenized populations significantly, and limited evolution, in exchange for providing calories that allowed us a division of labor, specialization, and the application of our adaptation to the production of ‘tools, processes, and ideas’.
From what I can ‘guess’ from the record, females innovate in neotenic expression along the calcium-melanin channel which appears to have a dramatic effect on rates of reproduction (the time at which a woman appears desirable and fertile). And males innovate in the adaptive expression along the cognitive specialization channel – which as far as I know evolved from throwing spears (or throwing anything). And males either inherit neoteny from females or self domesticate along the testosterone channel since ‘bullying’ has to be kept at an equilibrium where there is sufficient aggression and dominance expression to maintain the competitive ability for the family, clan, tribe, without creating unmanageable internal conflict. My suspicion is that neoteny is a purely female specialization since women (unfortunately) do not select men for it, and therefore women maintain an equilibrium of their neoteny versus demonstrated male dominance, limiting of outsiders outside female social superpredation (control).
This is my current understanding of the evolutionary process and the differences in the sexes, races, subraces, groups, and classes.
What it would imply is that the great filter is rather obvious: that any species that develops a division of labor and the returns on it that allow continuous adaptation into niches (division of labor) – and especially any group that develops democracy rather than ‘paternalism’, and does not continue natural selection, will devolve. We can see genetic devolution in the west in just 150 years. We can see genetic devolution in islam and everything it touces. Islam(judaism christianity) is the most desirable falsehood other than drugs.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-24 10:17:00 UTC
Most people have an IQ below 105; the minimum for repairing a machine. Most people with college degrees can’t do basic math, reason truth from preference, grasp basic cog sci, Econ or law, or know history or disambiguate pseudoscience and sophistry from warrantable speech. Dumb.
Reply addressees: @AspLovePolitics @dormant511
Most people have an IQ below 105; the minimum for repairing a machine. Most people with college degrees can’t do basic math, reason truth from preference, grasp basic cog sci, Econ or law, or know history or disambiguate pseudoscience and sophistry from warrantable speech. Dumb.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 22:49:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1308901341625016322
Reply addressees: @AspLovePolitics @dormant511
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1308838545755439106