like sure they might be smarter and more "connected"

If Dunlaps Number represents the upper bandwidth limit for juggling social relationships, then what used to be divide amoung a select few is now divided by millions making the relationships extremely shallow

but put them in a room of 30 peers and tell them they must talk and make friends no tech allowed

they struggle

its been shown we have less trusted friends on average than people in.. the 80s I think it was.

Truly trusted relations

eyup

I only have one homie I REALLY trust

the rest of them are kind of just side friends

the easy sailing types

Are you even human if you can listen to Luke Kelly and not be moved?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSDzOKPvedc

I think it was 2-3 before and now its less

only one for the storms though

could be it was even higher before than, as even things like TV affect that

most people of extremely high intelligence have issues with social interaction mainly because they have to concede more than the rest

Perhaps even reading affects that

so that is deemed as 'unfair'

I think every human ever has had the whole fair weather friend thing though

Concede?

unless youre a my little pony fan

then you have no friends

dumb people dont like to admit they wrong

myself included

<:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>

this means you either concede to them

concede; admit you are wrong even if you are not for the sake of belonging and being fair

Its deemed unfair for them to concede to others

or lose friend points when you argue over dumb shit

So

They would form less friends

yup

I dunno are people really wrong that often in such a way an intelligent person could tell

if it feels like an unbalanced exchange, it is harder

depends on what though

If they were trained in a particular field, for instance

intelligent people sometimes are too autistic with nunbers

numbers*

but if you make as many mistakes as others, it is easier to give and take

they say well my math and theories say this

intelligent people are aLWAYS too autistic with numbers

therefore your outcome is logically not possible in this model

I think intelligent people might have an overabundance of stimuli

this is true more of the lower tiers actually

They can't focus. Maybe with high functioning autism for instance

so rick and morty are right

They will lose sight of other things

we need to pair literal retards with geniuses

balance them out

As their brain focuses on other aspects they have trouble ignoring

estavor, you are onto something there but it's more like a problem with prioity and hyper focus

You think its truer of less intelligent people?

that is where the divison of labor idea comes from

Wait

well this was what i was saying earlier with the 20Iq gap

youve put it into a framing excellently

one person sets the course, the other implements that course

so

feudalism now?

<:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>

typically, the women dictates the prioroties and the male figures out how to acheive these

but the problem with too much information effects both people differently

Back to this... eh...

those that think things through logically, as you said, have trouble focusing and thus tend to fall into a rabbit hole easily

they focus on one thing more in order to counter the effect of working harder to focus period

hm

on the flip side, the other person who must rely on their ability to sense who to TRUST goes haywire

But then a person can be good at thinking over things generally. Estimating. The like

I wonder about that

this explains the right vs left dicotomy.

so each moment in your life, you can choose to process stimuli by thinking it through or trusting your instincts

You would think there must at least be correlation.

What a strange thing

At least.

each time you make this choice, you develop one tool but the other tool tends to atrophy

Does it?

I think you might kinda trapped yourself here

each time you choose one method over the other, the likelihood increases you will reach for the tool you are most comfortable with next time

there is a coorelation

This sounds like it would take more time to explain

it's the rate of input

Hmm

Well lets see anyway

So they would not utilize the other as often I see

Okay that's safe enough territory

the idea is that people develop two different ways of processing information which are mutually exclusive

we can each do both but we are more clumsy at one than the other

Could you not alternate use

and the tool we prefer is better suited to some jobs and lousy at other

And the atrophy could be negated at least until your body begins to truly degrade etc

Assuming a healthy person

this is a cognitive model

We'll just assume a young healthy person over time...

when your a women who insists on walking alone at night and refuses to carry any sort of weapon because no it is the men who should change

hmm...

Are we still discussing gender differences or just cognition in general

to describe how people tend to develop and gravitate towards two sides; think vs feel

(I'd rather discuss cognition in general)

(For the record)

it also describes how as the information we process daily increased, people became more polarized