Message from @SilverLining

Discord ID: 488240090024247296


2018-09-09 06:45:59 UTC  

to disprove my point

2018-09-09 06:46:35 UTC  

For the record, I've never even looked into this study, so I don't know if it's even reliable @SilverLining

2018-09-09 06:46:44 UTC  

and I will not use it as a source

2018-09-09 06:47:16 UTC  

But you did present it as evidence and, from what little time I just spent reading over it, it does not conclude with the same results you claimed it did

2018-09-09 06:47:49 UTC  

it does to a large degree

2018-09-09 06:47:59 UTC  

It kind of doesn't....

2018-09-09 06:48:06 UTC  

It just points out that IQ isn't the end all be all

2018-09-09 06:48:08 UTC  

which is true

2018-09-09 06:48:11 UTC  

Not that it's useless

2018-09-09 06:48:28 UTC  

eh, that IQ isn't the be all end all is what I'm really trying to get at

2018-09-09 06:48:52 UTC  

You said it was terrible and unreliable, but it's getting into semantics at this point

2018-09-09 06:49:07 UTC  

The point is, the study did not conclude IQ wasn't invalid, just that it was far from perfect

2018-09-09 06:49:17 UTC  

oh

2018-09-09 06:49:24 UTC  

that IQ is terrible and unreliable is another point

2018-09-09 06:49:42 UTC  

that there's a minimal, arguably negligible correlation between IQ and success is separated from that

2018-09-09 06:50:07 UTC  

it wasn't negligible as far as this study is concerned, but I've barely look into it so I will not use this as personal proof

2018-09-09 06:51:03 UTC  

it is a fairly old study, so *maybe* it's wrong

2018-09-09 06:51:25 UTC  

you're not... digging into the study, then

2018-09-09 06:51:28 UTC  

one that has been overseen by different people

2018-09-09 06:51:34 UTC  

the point isn't that some people who were termites achieved great things

2018-09-09 06:51:48 UTC  

but rather, that many of those overlooked reached greater heights

2018-09-09 06:51:51 UTC  

On average, they were better off than their peers

2018-09-09 06:51:54 UTC  

and that many of those with termites were...

2018-09-09 06:52:01 UTC  

That does not at all contradict what I just said

2018-09-09 06:52:02 UTC  

well, near average

2018-09-09 06:52:40 UTC  

iirc

2018-09-09 06:52:43 UTC  

On average, they were above average.

Outliers don't really disprove that

2018-09-09 06:52:51 UTC  

it mentioned like...

2018-09-09 06:52:53 UTC  

let me find it

2018-09-09 06:53:33 UTC  

@SilverLining The NYT did mention that C students who were "Termites" did see less success than those who made "As"

2018-09-09 06:53:45 UTC  

"He found that gifted children did not fit the existing stereotypes often associated with them: they were not weak and sickly social misfits, but in fact were generally taller, in better health, better developed physically, and better adapted socially than other children."

2018-09-09 06:53:56 UTC  

physically, yes

2018-09-09 06:54:00 UTC  

they probably were better off

2018-09-09 06:54:21 UTC  

Which actually kinda forwards the well-proven notion that IQ is correlated to nutrition and education

2018-09-09 06:54:36 UTC  

Alright

2018-09-09 06:54:57 UTC  

You're not staying within the boundaries of what is currently being argued

2018-09-09 06:55:12 UTC  

Whether or not IQ is correlated with nutrition is irrelevant right now

2018-09-09 06:55:37 UTC  

I know, but you mentioned they were "better off"

2018-09-09 06:55:48 UTC  

Also

2018-09-09 06:55:54 UTC  

that's one of the ways

2018-09-09 06:55:55 UTC  

From the same wikipedia article you just quoted