asians higher IQ because they're mode developed? china was a total shithole until like 10 years ago

and yet their IQ is higher than whites

that doesn't translate into IQ thoough, you can't educate IQ

it does translate into real world success, though

and yet china is a conter example

they're farmers with higher IQ

were until very recently

china only sttarted to be industrialised like 15 years ago

VERY recent

to a degree yes

but with literally millions of farmers still

like yuo can't compare western europe to china even 10 years ago

and developmental deficits due to malnutrition etc wouldn't manifest in such a short time

or we would see their IQ rocket up like 30 points

it was until recently

farmers do exercise their brains btw

if you dropped elon musk in feudal farmland, he'd make waves

he'd invent shit, gather a following, all kinds of shit

farming is technological

IQ is general intelligence

you can be smart and dumb at farming

he wouldn't be inventing electric cars tomorrow

and his opportunity to utilise that IQ would be limited

but it's still present

he'd still be smarter than a dumb farmer

his farm would be better, more productive

agree

hence I don't think being a farmer somehow caps your IQ

I think there is an argument to be made that being totally removed from modern society with no exposure to spatial tarks might make you more likely to perform poorly on some IQ tasks

well yeah, IQ is at most 80% genetic. probably 60%

it is though

IQ is a proxy for general intelligence

there are no theoretical physicists that score an IQ of 80

literaly 0

grit and determination and hard work decide how successful you are, but when it comes to theoretical physics, you need an IQ of 160 to get in the door

you cuold give me 1000 years and I would never produce valuable work in theoretical physics

I'm just not smart enough

but I am an effective engineer

but also only average

there are WAY smarter people than me in my field

and they completey eclipse me effortlessly

the science doesn't su pport that. while people have stronger and weaker areas, almost nobody is say an 80 linguistically and 160 mathematically

they might be 160 mathematically and only 140 linguistically

the stereotype of "physicist who can't spell" isn't really true

there are different components that make up an IQ test, have you ever done one?

that's not what IQ trests at all

but it's a proxy for that

have you ever sat an IQ test?

yes

well it is in some ways exactly what you say it isn't

it's made up of several different factors, such as linguistic ability, spatial reasoning ability

and they're very highly correlated

so for example, I don't remember exactly since it was 10 years ago but 2 tasks are a vocabulary test, and another is spatial reasoning. I'll explain

they'll ask you to explain the definition of increasingly uncommon words

starts with like dog and cat or whatever, goes up to "unstoppable" or "ubiquitous", and on and on

spatial reasoning is rearranging blocks to fit a given pattern

but then they change the rules unexpectedly and you have to kind of break the mould of your thinking, for example say you had 5 tasks to rearrange blocks with an explicit border around the outside then the 6th removed the border. it's an unfamiliar task and smarter people perform better at it

and for whatever reason, rearranging blocks is a really really good proxy for all sorts of things including mathematical ability

you can't train people to do this shit

you can't take someone with downs syndrome and coach them to get a 160 on an IQ test

and it's not only vocab

it's other things like verbal reasoning

like you'll have to pick a word most similar

that requires genuine understanding now rote memorisation

and other th ings like pick the odd one out

low IQ people are just worse at this

and it cannot be coached

you can get a bit better with a lifetime of practice yes but not much

if you can take someone with an iq of 80 and coach them to get a score of 160 I'm sure the scientific world would love to read the paper

but having done an IQ test, I can tell you it's not possible

but if it was possible it should be possible in the extreme right

I'm not taking about bumping another 5 or 10 points

of course environment matters some

but if you genetically don't have the 160 iQ you can't get there from 100

I never said it was completely natural, maybe 60-80%

I never said it was 100% natural

it's 60-80% natural

but even if you took a genetically dumb person and coached them like royalty you would never be able to turn them into a 160

yep because malnutrition is a thing and gimps your IQ

also especially for spatial reasoning, the more you see 3d shapes and manipulate them etc you do get better at it

as you say, brains develop new pathways etc

but only 20-40%

you cuold give me 1 million years and I would never be as smart as elon musk

his brain is better than mine

I want a star trek future

😄

liberalism without identitarianism or cultural marxism

birth rates are a problem

people gonna fuck

I'm not racist

nothing to do with their skin color

I just don't wanna work with fobs who can't communicate

lol

ty ty, agree completely

TNG > Voyager > The Orville > DS9 > Enterprise > Discovery imo

don't even watch discovery anymore, can't stomach it

I dunno man ds9 never tickled me as much as the others.

in some ways voyager is my favourite, it's the most "trekky" trek imo

and best exemplifies what trek is, what the federation is, and what future I want for us

I think star trek speaks most to political sensibility, not IQ. Consider sargon's love for starship troopers and his analysis video, he contrasts star trek's liberal utopia with starship trooper's civic national ? utopia