Source: Original Site Post

  • Re: The Neuroscience of Intelligence

    Jan 12, 2020, 3:47 PM @charlesmurray

    1. Correct but the opposite, via-negativa: The neuroscience is trivial. The causes of defects in intelligence are almost limitless. It’s not so much that we need to understand intelligence (g), it’s that we need to understand why defects in intelligence are so common.
    2. AFAIK, (g) is the most accurate measure in psychology, and stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social sciences. The problem with testing is casting (g) separately from personality traits (which it is), and therefore not ALSO testing for trait-conscientiousness.

    2 If we test intelligence, and the Big5 traits we see that success is determined MORE by trait conscientiousness than by intelligence, and that intelligence increases income only because it grants access to problems of greater complexity. Intelligence REDUCES ERROR in complexity.

    1. As such ADAPTABILITY (success) consists of applying trait conscientiousness and trait intelligence to exploit opportunities at one’s optimum of complexity. This means ‘the bell curve’ of overlapping bell curves from low IQ/conscientiousness to high IQ/conscientiousness.
    2. There are plenty of people who are high in both intelligence, high in conscientiousness, and high in agreeableness and therefore low in competitiveness. So once we stack the priority of these traits in the context of a given economy and rule of law, sortition is obvious.

    3. Furthermore, once we combine all 5/6 traits we see that personalities cluster around three archetypes: female mother(teach), ascendant male(experiment), and established or dominant male(defend).

    The world is simple – if and only if you use enough dimensions of measurement.

  • Combining Iq and Personality

    Jan 13, 2020, 3:20 AM What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences. We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection. There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together. We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not (or compensating). Well, that’s because you’re trying to redefine intelligence as other than access to complexity in time. This determines whether we are Helpless, Dim, Uncompetitive, Ordinary, Cunning, Smart, Competitive, Innovative, revolutionary. So demonstrated intel depends upon complex context. The test(s) yield(s) an almost infinite set of numbers. But aside from verbal and spatial-temporal, and the obvious gender bias in that dimension – they all scale together. Thats why they report on the one number (g) and it’s distribution (verbal-spatial). Again, the evidence suggests that by combining intelligence and big5 we would get even higher prediction because, Conscientiousness, Disagreeableness, and Aggressiveness (dominance) or lack of it, explain what IQ does not: how we COMPETE when USING intelligence.

  • Combining Iq and Personality

    Jan 13, 2020, 3:20 AM What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences. We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection. There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together. We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not (or compensating). Well, that’s because you’re trying to redefine intelligence as other than access to complexity in time. This determines whether we are Helpless, Dim, Uncompetitive, Ordinary, Cunning, Smart, Competitive, Innovative, revolutionary. So demonstrated intel depends upon complex context. The test(s) yield(s) an almost infinite set of numbers. But aside from verbal and spatial-temporal, and the obvious gender bias in that dimension – they all scale together. Thats why they report on the one number (g) and it’s distribution (verbal-spatial). Again, the evidence suggests that by combining intelligence and big5 we would get even higher prediction because, Conscientiousness, Disagreeableness, and Aggressiveness (dominance) or lack of it, explain what IQ does not: how we COMPETE when USING intelligence.

  • Carlos Gohn Arrested

    I’ve followed this guy for quite a few years as an example of someone whose empirical management and workload was something I simply had to be in awe of. I don’t know if he’s guilty of anything yet but his skill is certainly something to study. He was brutal (American) in both France and Japan. He did a job with Renault. Then he saved Nissan. But he’s been accused of financial reporting issues. Running both Renault and Nissan at the same time. But this put Japanese and french companies in conflict because Nissan is far better in engineering and selling into both Asia and America. This was a mistake. He should have taken one or the other. And he was … excessively greedy in executive compensation. Japan, esp, does not tolerate high exec pay. I”m not sure what he’s being accused of is a ‘crime’. Mixing companies across cultures does not work well.

  • Carlos Gohn Arrested

    I’ve followed this guy for quite a few years as an example of someone whose empirical management and workload was something I simply had to be in awe of. I don’t know if he’s guilty of anything yet but his skill is certainly something to study. He was brutal (American) in both France and Japan. He did a job with Renault. Then he saved Nissan. But he’s been accused of financial reporting issues. Running both Renault and Nissan at the same time. But this put Japanese and french companies in conflict because Nissan is far better in engineering and selling into both Asia and America. This was a mistake. He should have taken one or the other. And he was … excessively greedy in executive compensation. Japan, esp, does not tolerate high exec pay. I”m not sure what he’s being accused of is a ‘crime’. Mixing companies across cultures does not work well.

  • The Success of The Western Order

    Jan 14, 2020, 12:50 PM In the Western tradition, we are all members of a vast army fulfilling our duties because of accidents of time and space. We all are due respect no matter our rank, as long as we do our duty. We are all due disrespect or even punishment if we do not do our duties. This is how we produced harmony – more harmony than any other civilization in history – while at the same time producing the most adaptive and rapidly evolutionary body of people in human history. We took control of evolution. The left is the antithesis of Western civilization. Monopoly, equality, submission, dysgenia. The herd. Separate. Evolve, Speciate.

  • The Success of The Western Order

    Jan 14, 2020, 12:50 PM In the Western tradition, we are all members of a vast army fulfilling our duties because of accidents of time and space. We all are due respect no matter our rank, as long as we do our duty. We are all due disrespect or even punishment if we do not do our duties. This is how we produced harmony – more harmony than any other civilization in history – while at the same time producing the most adaptive and rapidly evolutionary body of people in human history. We took control of evolution. The left is the antithesis of Western civilization. Monopoly, equality, submission, dysgenia. The herd. Separate. Evolve, Speciate.

  • Recommended

    Jan 14, 2020, 2:42 PM Henri Pirenne – Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe-Mariner Books (1956) You can find this book on library genesis. So far it’s the ‘least wrong’ history of medieval europe I can find. Also can recommend: Hodgett, Gerald Augustus John – A social and economic history of medieval Europe (1972). Haven’t seen it on libgen. Shorter. But adequate.

  • Recommended

    Jan 14, 2020, 2:42 PM Henri Pirenne – Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe-Mariner Books (1956) You can find this book on library genesis. So far it’s the ‘least wrong’ history of medieval europe I can find. Also can recommend: Hodgett, Gerald Augustus John – A social and economic history of medieval Europe (1972). Haven’t seen it on libgen. Shorter. But adequate.

  • Explanation of The Success of The Western Order

    Jan 14, 2020, 4:27 PM by Bill Joslin (important) (riffing of post shared below) (note the multiple dimensions common in propertarian analysis) 1) Production Distribution: Whereby the square root of the population accounts for 50% of productivity (thanks Heavens Wolves for these connections). 2) Lower Power Distance = Greater Chance of Trust. Power distance index: whereby some people have a predilection to trust immediate leaders (personally known) , other are amiable to trust leaders at high distance (impersonal). 3) Lower Power Distance = Greater Agency Hierarchies that “chunk” into smaller units and delegate power (agency) into the smaller chunks, while maintaining accountability (risk) for the outcome, recursively maintain lower power distance relationships across a larger organizational structure. 4) Lower Power Distance = Easier to emulate those we trust. Lower power distance afford lower members the opportunity to emulate leaders which they have access to (my sargent, my supervisor etc) which increases their agency and calls them forward to become leaders. 5) Lower Power Distance = Greater opportunity for expression of excellence. By chunking, the square root of a smaller group, on the aggregate across many groups, produces more super performers. (a group of nine will have 3 super performers. a group of 100 will have 10 super performers – 10 groups of 9 will have 30 super performers by the standard of a single group of 90) 6) High power distance = obedience over trust. Those with higher power distance preferences, produce larger groups which delegate from one to many (one leader to 100 or 1000 men with no ranks between) 7) High Power Distance = lower agency. They do not capture the square root potential of recursive groups, which mean few super performers are available for emulation – to wit they have little to no proximity or exposure. This reduces their ability to increase agency at the same time, encourages dependence on the leaders (also known as demand for authority) 8) Western Hierarchies = produce velocity and agency. The west, via militias and presumption of individual sovereignty, has allowed low power distance individuals to organize at larger scales. in doing so has captured more benefit from the square root performance distribution. the result has been velocity. So now I can make my point: 9) Western Social Cohesion = via proximity, delegated agency, distributed accountability. This structure of chunked groups with delegated agency, bound by accountability, allowed us to emulate and respect our betters and inspires us to become them… at the same time as being able to have a higher resolution (and speed) in applying accountability. This becomes of paramount importance in maintaining cooperative class structures. Because class structures are no different from military structures Respect and reward where due, disrespect and correction where due. HOW DOES INTELLIGENCE ENTER THIS? 10) Communication breaks down across 2 Standard Deviations. A standard Deviation is 15 points. 11) Lower power distance, via “chunking” allows for IQ-capture across scales. A general (IQ 145+) communicates to a senior officer (IQ 130+) who communicates to an officer (120+) who communicates to an NCO (110+) who communicates to the soldier (IQ 85+). 12) High power distance communicates from leader to soldier whereby the leader expects blind obedience and the soldier is unable to understand context for commands. This breeds confusion and resentment whereby the leaders have no respect for lowers and lowers see leaders as tyrants. class conflict then ensues. 13) Organizational patterns: i) Centralized, ii) Decentralized, iii) Distributed i) Centralized moves organization toward high power distance relations to reap the benefits of organization at larger scales. (3rd world armies)(herd with a shepard) ii) Decentralized preserves lower power distance while scaling to larger scales. (western armies)(pack) iii) Distributed attempts to remove the centralized by clipping off leaders (antifa) and in doings reduces itself to “intelligence of the mob” (only as smart as the lowest component) (herd) 14) Leftist i.e. western liberals, coming from a culture and predisposition of a lower power distance, (distrust power at the more distant levels), attempt to organize themselves in a decentralized manner but can only achieve distribution, eventually devolve into a mob due to the dissonance between their desire for authority and low power distance predilection (from being western) That is why socialism/communism may work in China without social de-cohesion (asians being high power distance) and will not work in the west. The outcome results in the distribution of a mob (herd).