| |
| ▲ | vasco 4 days ago | parent [-] | | You're equally fine with how you are now or having 20 to 50 less IQ points? Of course you're missing something, probably the most important thing in the world after rich parents is being smart. | | |
| ▲ | komali2 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | If you aren't born smart or with rich parents, the next best thing is to have a big wide network of diverse sorts of people. Sacrificing a couple IQ points is worth it to get it. I'm a nobody from nowhere with an unremarkable brain, but I've made it far in life just chumming it up with way smarter and luckier people than me at the Burn or poly parties or other random shit I get up to. | |
| ▲ | 47282847 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Of course you're missing something, probably the most important thing in the world after rich parents is being smart. I cry a small tear for that limited world view, if it even was meant seriously or just as sarcasm. | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | A large portions of "Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs" are an abstraction on wealth. At the bottom: enough food, shelter and clothing - all form of wealth. At Safety - all of forms that wealth can buy. Love And Belonging - this is the least affected, but it is common for couples to break up if wealth is lacking enough (and romantic when they don't) - still I'm not going to count it since if you pass the lower two you have enough wealth. Esteem - wealth is one measure of status, and everything is is a measure of things that lead to wealth in society (though sometimes in obsolete society - hunting is no longer needed to live but being a good hunter is still status). Self-actualization - the more wealth you have the more options you have - and as already established, wealth is required to even get this high. Not everything is about wealth in the above, I skipped them in the discussion but if you are not familiar with the whole you should find and read the whole list because it is insightful what I skipped. Remember money is an abstraction of wealth. It is easy to say I have X dollars (euros), it is harder to say what the picture on my wall is worth but there are a group of people into that type of art that will give that a high value (while others not into it will consider it worthless) as such wealth isn't an exact measure, but it is at the root of a large part of the good life. It is never the important thing itself, but it is behind a lot of important things and so a useful measure. | |
| ▲ | vasco 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Maybe you were just never surrounded by dumb people. The amount of damage they make to their own quality of life is almost unbelievable. I sure as hell think it's the biggest lottery we play with the most impact on the course of our lives. Intelligence and wealth of parents. What you do with that after is up to you, but those two factors will make for the easiest lives. | | |
| ▲ | 47282847 a day ago | parent [-] | | This is not my experience. I know people from different walks of life, some severely mentally disabled (Down syndrome etc) that are the most open and cheerful, to millionaires that are stuck in continuous streams of unhappiness and negativity. Most people one would consider “intelligent“ with university degrees and such I know seem stuck in unhappy relationships and work and negative stress, worried about big and complex topics such as climate change and politics, people one would consider “dumb“ or “plain“ that work as cleaning staff or at supermarkets and such that are fairly happy living their simple lives. They think they are too stupid anyway to understand politics so why even bother with things like that. They’re not chasing personal/career “growth“ and achieving “more“ every day. Those with money can afford luxury goods but it doesn’t seem to make them feel more content that some that get the leftover foods from foodsharing networks. And yes, maybe a factor are things like fairly functional universal healthcare in this country, in terms of basic needs and security. I know homeless people and also they seem generally happier than, say, the doctors I know. A few cans of beer a day and not-shittiest weather are totally sufficient to make them enjoy the day. They have no bosses that they need to report to, no alarm clocks, no calendar. I may not want to trade places with the “dumb“ or “poor“ but I don’t use my own judgment of their lives to determine if they are okay, I let them speak their own. Yes, I see them make decisions that I consider to be at least suboptimal given their situation, but that is my problem, not theirs. The homeless/unemployed I know have a strong support network, meet up every day with maybe a dozen equals, very simple interactions, nobody intelligent enough to majorly fuck the other over. And why, if there’s nothing to gain from that. Their problems are simple, day to day, nothing too complex. The millionaires I know have to deal with highly “intelligent“ manipulative people every day, and deal with all sorts of complex bullshit, which understandably can be very exhausting, especially if there is no end in sight. It will go on like that for the rest of their lives. And on top of that unfortunately they are intelligent enough to see that. |
|
| |
| ▲ | piva00 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | At no point in the thread it was said 20-50 fewer IQ points though, that comes out of your own fabrication. | |
| ▲ | fragmede 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In your list of important things, you missed sleep. | |
| ▲ | zimza 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Taking IQ seriously is the most "low IQ" thing | | |
| ▲ | sokoloff 4 days ago | parent [-] | | IQ as a precise, cross-comparable measure? Sure. As a conceptual shorthand to describe the concept of intelligence? No. | | |
| ▲ | zimza 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The previous comments were talking of IQ in a quantitative way ("x points less"), so they fit in the first definition. Even the second definition is not really a thing. Intelligence as a concept doesn't mean much and needs to be defined properly. Using it this way is just another way to divide people superficially. | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I started the thread with '"5 iq points dumber" (whatever that means)'. I intended that to be read something like "as if there was an objective measure of intelligence that scaled like iq'. I cannot say what other intended, but at least some people are reading this whole thread in that context and I would expect you to as well even if others didn't intend that. (that is "respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." - hopefully this helps you see context better) | |
| ▲ | sokoloff 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > talking of IQ in a quantitative way ("x points less") I read that as a within a single individual, case A (no brain damage from cause C) vs case B (with brain damage from cause C), where using it as a shorthand for intelligence differences within a single individual makes it a useful shorthand for most readers, IMO. |
| |
| ▲ | 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
|
