Intelligent people have 'unnatural' preferences

reply to post by malcr


Totally agree. I'm intelligent and I exercise and do weights too. Hell, that's the intelligent thing to do if you want to remain healthy.

I have to say, I am only 5'6" though

People - don't take articles like this for granted.

I'll highlight several precautions when you think about this article:

1. Your ego and vanity may go way over your head one day.
   
2. Being a socio-path or antisocial can not be good regardless of "statistics" provided.
   
3. A "useless" and annoying man is a lazy man with no virtues, not a stupid man. I've seen people with IQ of a frog that are more "useful" than those intellectual artistically rebellious types with super-mighty IQ.
   
4. Not sleeping will NOT change the course of human evolution leading towards nocturnal lifestyle. I mean, how smart is that? Really. Playing MMORPG's 20 hours a day without sleeping is not intelligence. That's just simple vanity. Still though, listen to your natural bioclock even if it is "nocturnal" by default.
   
5. This article is doing dirty games with people's minds, in the same fashion as the breast size, penis size, hair care etc. marketing campaigns. Promoting atheism and liberalism is so painfully obvious. To make it worse, Hitler did the same thing when promoting "master race of Aryans" making people believe they are actual Aryans based on stuff like weight of their testicles (well not really but still disturbingly close).
   
6. Again, your IQ cannot define anything other in you than ability to quickly solve mathematical problems. Regardless of IQ, chances are equal for everyone to simply be nothing more than a jerk.
   

Though I think the article is agenda driven, I respect opinions and consider them. However, these kinds of IQ based researches have been done before, it is nothing new. The "let's put stupid people on an island" idea is as old as man himself and is a symbol of hypocrisy, arrogance and vanity among "intelligent" folk. I suggest only taking these articles for entertainment, like those chain letter quizzes you get from your co-workers and family.

Also, it is very interesting how man's attitude changes as soon as he discovers the numerical rating of his intellect. How little do we really have...

[edit on 26/2/2010 by SassyCat]

reply to post by SassyCat


A. I try not to keep my ego in check,and it works
B. Agree who would want to be a soci path or antisocial, thats like wanting to get kicked in the nuts each morning.
C. Agree one of my best friends who can berly read and wright, is a dam brilliant when it comes to car engines, infact i used to wash cars at a dealear ship for a while, he used to come over and id healp him with his papperwok, his first car wich was a pice of shient the engine was holding together with duck tape were he taped all the leaks and was holding some parts together.
D. To much coffe does that, so does an overactive mind, as for mmorpgs thats just fun believe my I know used to play guild wars like crazy, played so much once 3 days straith was seing blury in one eye for a week, going to sleep after this, its what hapens when u got no job and bored like heel.
to be continued

E. no games just facts and opinioned facts, that make some uncomfortable. The aryans did exist as a tribe in india and syberian regions. they created hindu colture today there desendents are known as blondes.
F. I took 2 IQ tests that i can remember, have no clue what score i got most likely average. The fun one was the puzzle one, the math one sucks i dont like that language. probably flunked that one. If I come off ass a jerk im sorry, must be the sleepyness.
I dont think thers a cospiracy behind IQ tests. like crossword puzzles just something people do. That artical iss bull though, if stuff like it is not suppresst there will be missinforemation. And I dont want some guy coming up to me and saying, so do u know athiests and liberals are smarter then bla bla bla. Then theyll start talking abouth god and clouds and how it prefers one group of humans over another. If god is omnipotend then were all hairless talking monkeys before its eyes. No deffinetly dont want that. I dont take it serious its just words.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
E. no games just facts and opinioned facts, that make some uncomfortable. The aryans did exist as a tribe in india and syberian regions. they created hindu colture today there desendents are known as blondes.

The Aryans are as factual as big bang theory to me, just like all the Atlantis civilisation stuff. Or that we're all Genghis Khan kids. Don't take me wrong, I do believe in much of that stuff but don't consider it factual knowledge by which I identify my own self. My point was that you can convince crows that they're birds and can fly if you have enough power to do that, it doesn't even matter if birds do exist or not.

I agree with the other stuff you said. Though it's not often that someone doesn't remember his IQ.

Originally posted by Yissachar1
According to an IQ test performed on me as a kid, I have an IQ of 162, however I still believe in God, am Jewish therefore a chimp, and even worse a career soldier......

Go figure.. Oh yeah I'm pretty conservative too, believe in God, and also see this thread as liberals who wan't to make themselves look good to themselves with an intellectual pat on the back... Whatever floats your boat I suppose.... Funny though how the same liberal intellectuals who teach our kids in universities, have created an immoral degenerate society that we live in now where our kids are sexualized from an early age, and their world view consists of who is wearing what... Destroy the family too..... You aint that clever... Guess it will come down too ex knuckle dragging squaddies with higher IQ's to sort the social engineering crap you created...

Well done.... I will give you a slap on the back for being sooo smart.. But it WILL smart .. And YOU won't like it!!

[edit on 25-2-2010 by Yissachar1]

Well if you had an IQ of 163 like me you'd realise how wrong you are

Joking aside, liberalism isn't only about creating an 'immoral degenerate society' it's also about democracy, human rights, freedom of belief, emancipation, racial and sexual equality, freedom from prejudice etc etc

If that counts as immorality then I don't want to be 'moral'.

However, I think you're right to question the motives of the original study, it does seem politically motivated. I'd posit that life experience and upbringing have a far more profound effect on people's political outlook than simply what their IQ level is.

The idea that right-wing=stupid and left-wing=intelligent is clearly nonsense.

[edit on 26/2/2010 by MarrsAttax]

reply to post by constantwonder


Interesting that I have know this all along in my life before I even read this article.

no wonder I am the opposite of what my parents raised me to be.

But that is OK is four of us at home and we all do not subscribe to social standards and question everything that we do not agree with.

Sad that our parents are not like that, so I wonder why my siblings and I are so different . . .

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by truthquest

 

Well we surely have a different definition of 'liberal'.

Mine doesn't come from wikipedia. I'm afraid like a lot of people you have fallen for conservative politicizing of the term.

To be liberal simply means to be open to change and not stuck in past values and traditions that keep us from evolving and our communities from improving and flourishing.

Do you think communities are getting better? You have fallen for the system the PTB wants, a system full of people with no connection, or responsibility, or consideration for those around us in our communities. They want you to think of only yourself, that makes you easier to control. They don't want strong communities, because strong communities don't need the government and their BS. Strong LIBERAL communities are self sufficient and autonomous. The PTB only exist because we let them, and we let them because they create boogie men for us to be scared of to justify their existence, power and control.

You have no idea what is beyond your front door, another media educated armchair commenter. You are scared of change, full of media sensationalistic BS with no real perspective on the world.

liberal

adj.

1. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.

2. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

Only in America does the term 'liberal' replace the term 'fascism', and the society fall for it. Oh wait, there was Germany, more than just scientists were transferred to the USA after WWII.

Some definitions are better than others. If your definition is what people mean when they say "I am a liberal." I'd definitely be shocked. I think most people who self-identify as liberals want one world government.

And your definition begs the question, is a conservative the polar opposite of liberal? Conservatives have limited the scope of their viewpoints? Conservatives are bigoted? Conservatives are narrow-minded by definition? Intolerant of all ideas and behaviors other than their own?





[edit on 26-2-2010 by truthquest]

I don't believe this study to be true. I think the belief in God is akin to any other mythical creature and frankly ridiculous in the 21st century. But i also think that the religious have a sort of split personality, they can be very rational, logical and intelligent UNTIL it comes to religion/God. That's when they throw all those traits on the ground and stamp repeatedly. I also think IQ tests are a waste of time and can hardly be used as a measure of intelligence. As for the liberal/conservative aspect. I think true conservatives and liberals have alot more in common than they do not, but the faux liberal and conservative movements are both overflowing with idiots imo.

[edit on 26-2-2010 by Solomons]

Malcr,Yes I was saying that a big man picks up the big rock and moves it ,the little man with the same need invents the lever,little man feeds big man and rock aleays gets moved.

I am shorter than 5'8,and I was not athletic as a fat little boy,but I learned to be the best at everything during my moments and capitalised on situational dynamics and developed into the most outstanding male athlete in my high school,eventually being offered athletic scholarships by several US schools.

I learned to be the best ,some were,bigger,some were faster,some were smarter,but none understood leadership and situational dynamics AND AS A RESULT I WAS ---ALWAYS---THE BEST,but only because of them allowing me to be without knowing it I found ways to make myself valuable to them by helping them as opposed to competing with them in a conventional manner,this is how it works,dont ask me why.

Thats why I CHOSE to not persue a higher conventional education and specifically chose the school of supposed hard knocks.I dont think a doctor or a lawyer is more intelligent than me in fact I think it is the opposite ,they are like flys in a web lured in by money and salary and captured by their own intellect while they are young and vulnerable,never to ever really break free.its actually sad how humanity has been sandbagged like this,for gods sake we even medicate adhd kids who have progressive active minds and progressive needs and requirements as to learning environment these kids dont want a sip of life they want a gulp even at five years old,and we dont want to admit that they can handle over twice as much input as we can in fact we cant even supply input fast enough for these kids at least not all of us,this is why we medicate this personality type,to hide our OWN shame at not being on the same level,we actually hold back humanity to encourage a level playing field so OUR feelings dont get hurt.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Since we now know that the Genesis story of Noah is but a re-hashed copy of the original flood story from the Sumerian civilization, the Gilgamesh, why not reference directly to the original rather than the cheap copy?

Noah's name wasn't Noah, it was Ut-Napishtim.

Abraham was from there. His dad is said to have worked for Gilgamesh or Nimrod. So if the story and it does proceeds from that point its little mystery why.

Originally posted by one4all
Malcr,Yes I was saying that a big man picks up the big rock and moves it ,the little man with the same need invents the lever,little man feeds big man and rock aleays gets moved.

Woe there Nepolian! Big man invents big lever and little man makes little lever. You get my drift?

reply to post by Heliocentric


If i'm understanding correctly, what you're saying is that intelligence is based on personality. Intelligence being defined as being led by another person is opinion. Being led or not has nothing to do with a person linguistic, verbal, or even mathematical ability.

In-fact, Hebb ( a known and respect psychologist) found that " intellectual ability" (i put this as quotes because there are too many opinions on what intelligence is) is affected by a person's environment AND genetics. This gives the article some(?) merit for being on a semi-right path, but the conclusion is wrong.

The intelligence theory that makes the most sense (in my opinion) is Sterberg's Tri-archic theory of intelligence which states that a person's intelligence is composed of analytical(mental mechanisms), creative(automating old tasks and successfully completing new), and practical intelligence (intelligence reflecting the behaviours that were subject to EVOLUTION... adaptation, selection, shaping).

I may have gone on a rant... However, what you're referring to is a factor of PERSONALITY (conscientiousness), not intelligence .

reply to post by one4all


Do you have any backings for your claim?

Studies suggest (because I can't prove) that intelligence is HERITABLE. Galton conducted a series of tests using twin studies and found that twin's intelligence is highly correlated. Also, adopted twins also had a higher IQ correlation with each other than their adopted parents. It's still affected by the environment. However, we're NOT born equal in intelligence.

reply to post by antonia


Well, I wouldn't say it's wrong to "compartmentalize" intelligence (if done properly.) Factor analysis has a lot of merit; intelligences DO mix. That's the problem with measuring intelligence. Every KIND of intelligence mixes and mingles with another kind of intelligence. It makes its impossible to measure one definite value.

Originally posted by pplrnuts
EXCELLENT, this article is very true. In the USA alone, one can pull up the state statistics to confirm this. State statistics reveal that the LEAST educated people are those found to live in the SOUTHERN region of the country. The MOST educated people exist in the NORTHERN regions. The south is extremely religious, and conservative, while the majority of the north is the opposite. In my own personal experience I began as a conservative person of the Christian faith. Through dedicated and exhaustive studies and educating myself for over a decade, I have evolved from those views. Of course just like everyone who is religious, I myself at the time could not be convinced otherwise that religion was nothing but a bunch of silly superstitious, man made stories that breed nothing but division and is counter-productive to mankind. NOTHING will change such ridiculous beliefs other then LOTS of study. Education is key to breaking free from that silliness that is in reality just an adult Santa Claus. Excellent thread OP.

CHEERS! Its like you took the words out of my mind! Thank you!

Originally posted by Loki Lyesmyth

Originally posted by pplrnuts
EXCELLENT, this article is very true. In the USA alone, one can pull up the state statistics to confirm this. State statistics reveal that the LEAST educated people are those found to live in the SOUTHERN region of the country. The MOST educated people exist in the NORTHERN regions. The south is extremely religious, and conservative, while the majority of the north is the opposite. In my own personal experience I began as a conservative person of the Christian faith. Through dedicated and exhaustive studies and educating myself for over a decade, I have evolved from those views. Of course just like everyone who is religious, I myself at the time could not be convinced otherwise that religion was nothing but a bunch of silly superstitious, man made stories that breed nothing but division and is counter-productive to mankind. NOTHING will change such ridiculous beliefs other then LOTS of study. Education is key to breaking free from that silliness that is in reality just an adult Santa Claus. Excellent thread OP.

CHEERS! Its like you took the words out of my mind! Thank you!

What you fail to consider are EXTRANEOUS FACTORS. Correlation does not mean causation. Perhaps the education system is different. Or maybe, educated people in the South move to the North for better jobs. Personally, I don't even know if the south is heavily-religious, but It seems like a gross over-statement.

Not to mention education does not = intelligence. Clap Clap.

Originally posted by Benji1999
But the point I'm trying to make is that if you don't believe we need a designer, then you must believe we require 'chance'.

Not necessarily. There could be other explanations. Nature, for one. A corroboration of "designers" for another. A third possibility is that, as humans, we are not capable of understanding the nexus of our beginnings. Maybe one day we WILL be able to understand it, but we aren't yet. Or perhaps we ARE capable of understanding it, but haven't figured it out yet. Like a person in 1800 not understanding radio waves. Or it could be chance.

You're stuck on "God or Chance" when there are other possibilities.

But you have to believe in a chance or accidental explanation,

No I don't.

So, once again, I'm not knocking your or anyone elses view point, but I'm genuinely interested to know why you'd wait for proof of God, but accept the alternative as the 'default position', so to speak.

The Big Bang explanation as to HOW the Universe began carries scientific evidence so I think that's probably right. It could be wrong, but the evidence leans toward that. So for now, that's what I think happened.

There is no explanation as to WHY we are here. People have been in search of the answer to that question since our beginning (which is, incidentally, where I think religion and a "belief" in God came from: People thinking that there HAD to be an explanation that they could wrap their minds around, verbalize and understand, even if it was a fantasy.) There are theories as to why we're here, but no evidence. And I'm comfortable with not knowing. In fact, I don't really care WHY we're here. We're here and that's good enough for me.

There are a number of reasons why people will believe in God, but I believe that faith is the main reason - which doesn't require any scientific validation for the believer, as - by definition - it's a supernatural belief that couldn't be answered by a natural process such as science.

I totally agree and would never ask a person for evidence or proof for their beliefs. I also don't put them down for holding their beliefs.

''Because I have no idea what is or what isn't required for the universe to exist, but I know that it wasn't God...''

Perhaps "many atheists" feel that way, but not this one. My statement would be more like: ''I have no idea what is or isn't required for the universe to exist, so I don't hold a belief about it. All explanations people might give, whether it's God, Thermogopolis, or the FSM, hold the same weight with me, so I don't believe in any of them."

I definitely agree with the premise of the OP with the exception of the word "unnatural". Just because something is not widely accepted throughout society, does not mean that it is unnatural.

The reason that intelligent people tend to be less in sync with societal norms is that because they have the ability to sort the fact from the fiction. They are able to look deeper than the surface in creating their views while the less intelligent are willing to take things at face value a much larger % of the time. It really is as simple as that. The more intelligent you are, the more you realize that the 'norm" is generally not the best way.

Of course one should not confuse intelligent with successful. The more brain washed folks are in line with the norm, the easier it is to sell it the norm to others. Intelligent folks tend to have a harder time selling their ideals and views to the public. That's why you see a bunch of under achieving intelligent folks. A society programmed to the norm tends to reward the norm much more than they reward those who abandon the norms despite their superior intellect.

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by blujay

 

I believe I am a mature soul but not an old soul. My question is how many reincarnations does a soul get? What happens to the soul when it can go no further? Does it just become some other form or does it keep reincarnating. Are animals reincanations of older souls?
Can souls reincarninate onto other planets?

I believe souls go through a process from when they separate from the All up to the point of reunification with the All. And the amount of incarnations you get is ultimately up to you. You construct your whole experience, all of your experiences. Then you come in to earth, veiled as all get out, you are confused as heck, and you have to trust your inner instincts or intuition to lead you out. Basically you have a plan and your higher self knows what it is, but when you get here you are subject to all of the diversions around you, and free will or choice is paramount, so your decisions make your journey.

These would be the signs or steps in the process of finding your way out when you've had enough:

1. Being unsatisfied by what ego based consciousness has to offer you, longing for “something else:” the beginning of the end.

2.Becoming aware of your ties to ego based consciousness, recognizing and releasing the emotions and thoughts that go with it: the middle of the end.

3.Letting the old ego based energies inside you die, throwing off the cocoon, becoming your new self: the end of the end.

4.The awakening of a heart based consciousness within you, motivated by love and freedom; helping others making the transition.

Regarding incarnating on other planets, this time around we are stuck incarnating on earth until the end of this cycle. It's the end of the planet's cycle and the end of humanity's cycle. But once you've fulfilled your soul contract, I believe you take 'time' to heal from the trauma's, and see where you need to go to round out your experiences. There are so many realms of possiblities for souls to explore, infinite they say.

As far as how far can a soul go, it seems to be endless. At one point though, you do merge with the All That Is again, and begin again. It's basically never started and never ends. It's all actually happening NOW. Our experience goes where our focus lies. And our focus just so happens to be here on earth right 'now.'

We are God experiencing itself. Right now and never ending.