The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?  (Read 43498 times)

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3821
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #50 on: 26/03/2015 01:17:54 »
The problem with trying to reduce populations to a sustainable level is that while you can reduce the birth rate you get far too few young people having to support the old people as the Chinese have found out.
what you need to do is kill off the olduns I have often thought free cigarettes for olduns would be a good idea but they would only sell them to the young'uns instead of smoking them.
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #51 on: 26/03/2015 18:01:19 »
But why not reduce it to a level of indefinite sustainability, where everyone has a purpose and an adequate standard of living?

That may be a sensible option, but to try to reduce it in a hurry may make people unhappy by restricting family size too much, as in China, but any attempt to reduce the population will take a very long time while technology makes it easier to grow more food and to tap renewable energy (e.g. solar power which is becoming more efficient and cheaper all the time - in many of the poorest countries there is no shortage of sunlight).

Quote
The chant of "unfair distribution" has been quoted for as long as I can remember, and probably further back. It's nonsense. Vast societies. built on enforced fairness (communism), have starved within living memory.

It is not nonsense - companies from rich countries have systematically plundered the resources of poor countries by propping up dictators and making them rich at the expense of the people. Communism has come closest to being done properly in the West (Europe) where it has been mixed with capitalism. Officially communist countries have simply been led by elites who have stolen all the wealth for themselves.

Quote
It's easy (except for a few minor problems like the Dust Bowl)  to grow huge quantities of rice and wheat in North America, where there are very few people, but extremely difficult to grow anything reliably in Ethiopia, with 21 times the population density of Canada.

That's an example of unfair distribution - some countries have a lot of land suited to agriculture while others have very little, and some have oil and mineral resources while others have little or none, but all of these resources should belong to the whole world and not to the people sitting on top of them who selfishly imagine that they have a right to more than their fair share due to proximity.

Quote
You can't change the weather, but you can control the population. What is "fair" about requiring a Canadian farmer to feed people on the other side of the world, who can't pay for their food, simply because they have reproduced beyond the capability of their land to sustain them?

What is fair about an overpopulated Europe where people have been breeding like rabbits discovering another continent with enormous potential for farming which hasn't been exploited yet and throwing off their excess population into that space to take it off the natives and then use the wealth that comes from agriculture in that vast new space to fund wars of oppression around the world and to give out vast amounts of food aid to pretend to be generous?

Quote
There's an uneven distribution of food, certainly, but in a world where stuff is bought and sold, you can't complain that the distribution is unfair: if you are prepared to pay US/Canadian/Australian prices plus the cost of transport, you can in principle buy anything made or grown in the USA/Canada/Australia, anywhere. That's entirely fair.

We don't call it fair within a country - we support each other by redistributing wealth, for example by having the Scots share their oil with the whole of the UK rather than selfishly hogging it all for themselves (as the Nationalists always sought to do - it's only now that it's running out that it's becoming more respectable to be a Nationalist, and that's maybe why they're beginning to attract more support).

Quote
The solution is for humans, like every other species, to limit their population density to what the land can support. In the UK, that's about 5,000,000, and my proposal could achieve it in 100 years at no effort, cost or suffering to anyone (except bankers and associated parasites).

No, the solution is to limit population to what the land of the world can support as a whole while leaving huge amounts untouched in order to preserve the playground in which we can continue to seek adventure in wild places with high biodiversity. We could sort out the world in under five years if politicians had the wit to run things sensibly and fairly, but they don't because most of them are either selfish dictators of daft monkeys voted into power by daft electorates.
 

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3160
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #52 on: 06/04/2015 23:28:36 »
Who defines stupid?   What is stupid?  what is clever?  who defines clever?   

Do you consider clever is the ability to remember books?

I will argue I am stupid, I will also argue I am clever, I will also argue the ability to memorise knowledge has nothing to do with clever.

 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #53 on: 07/04/2015 17:56:19 »
Quite true - we have many quiz shows with titles like "Brain of Britain" and "Mastermind", but they're just tests of knowledge storage. The real deal is logical thinking and problem solving.
 

~CB

  • Guest
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #54 on: 04/05/2015 02:35:05 »
but they're just tests of knowledge storage. The real deal is logical thinking and problem solving.
From your post I assume that what you intended to say was... 'Logical thinking and problem solving' do not really comes from knowledgestorage. Ignore the rest if you did not intend that.
David, even logical thinking and problem solving are essentially part of knowledge storage and retrieval. That's the reason I hesitate to use the world intelligence any where. If truly necessary, I just use knowledgeable instead.
If you have been raised with descent amount of fairy tale stories (This includes God), you are likely to be irrational (in a conventional way)... And vice versa.
So basically... No one is truly intelligent. It's just how you utilize your time (Or how others make you), and get all the knowledge you can on every aspect (that you deem intriguing) you can. Also, if a person strictly follows thinking from every perspective AND thinking about every possible solution whilst always trying to being rational... It just serves as an add on to a better thinking (Or for an average humans... More intelligent thinking).

By the way, 'You' used above is an imaginary person. Do not take it as, as I'm talking about you.
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #55 on: 04/05/2015 18:35:15 »
but they're just tests of knowledge storage. The real deal is logical thinking and problem solving.
From your post I assume that what you intended to say was... 'Logical thinking and problem solving' do not really comes from knowledgestorage.

The mechanisms for reasoning may be hardwired in, so they may not need to be learned in the way that other knowledge does. However, it is possible to learn to reason better if your original mechanisms for reasoning are imperfect - it just takes a bit of work, and most people can't be bothered to try.

Quote
David, even logical thinking and problem solving are essentially part of knowledge storage and retrieval.

It's distinct from other knowledge as it's crucial to managing all the other knowledge you acquire.

Quote
That's the reason I hesitate to use the world intelligence any where. If truly necessary, I just use knowledgeable instead.

There are many knowledgeable people who are hopeless at reasoning, so it's important to distinguish between knowledge and intelligence. An AGI system with no knowledge is intelligent. A politician with lots of knowledge programmed into him/her/it is rarely intelligent.

Quote
If you have been raised with descent amount of fairy tale stories (This includes God), you are likely to be irrational (in a conventional way)... And vice versa.

My grandfather (my mother's father) was a Biblical scholar (one of the team who translated the New English Bible, which is widely hated despite its accuracy - this work bizarrely led to him having tea with Einstein at Einstein's house in Princeton after Gödel invited him there, largely because my grandfather was a fluent speaker of German who knew the old Germany before Hitler poisoned it). My childhood had a lot of church in it - I was even a choirboy for many years, despite being an atheist (I liked the music [pity about the god-awful words], but it also meant I was paid for going to church). I was exposed to plenty of stupid stories with magic in them too, but I hated them all. There was something about the way my brain was set up that simply wouldn't tolerate the irrational. I never even believed in Santa, but then there was one key thing that my father always did which may explain all of this; he specialised in talking rubbish to see if he could trick me into believing in any of it, so I was trained from the very start never to take anything on trust but to check it carefully to see if it all stacked up logically in order to avoid being laughed at. This means that I can't tell whether it was genetics or programming, but the result was that I always rejected the religion that he believed in and ended up turning him into an atheist.

Quote
So basically... No one is truly intelligent. It's just how you utilize your time (Or how others make you), and get all the knowledge you can on every aspect (that you deem intriguing) you can. Also, if a person strictly follows thinking from every perspective AND thinking about every possible solution whilst always trying to being rational... It just serves as an add on to a better thinking (Or for an average humans... More intelligent thinking).

Everyone may have the capacity to be fully intelligent, but most people allow their thinking to be hijacked by beliefs which they have become emotionally attached to and they allow those beliefs to override reason every time. The key thing to achieving full intelligence is that knowledge has to be filed correctly in the brain as theory rather than fact, with probabilities attached to state how likely each theory is to be true, and you have to separate this from what you want to be true. Everything should remain open for question and not be labelled as absolute fact, but it is acceptable to label things as facts within a particular set of rules, such as the rules of reasoning. This allows you to show that God is logically impossible, but does not rule out the possibility of God altogether as logic itself may be based on errors. (This means that belief in God is irrational, but he may still exist as reason cannot be completely trusted - this in turn means that I am technically an atheist only under the assumption that the laws of reason are correct, but otherwise I'm an agnostic.)

Being fully intelligent doesn't necessarily mean you have to get everything right straight off, but you should be able to understand that something is right once the correct solution has been shown to you, or understand that something is wrong once you have been shown the fault(s) in it. If a theory generates contradictions and you have been shown those contradictions, you should not label that theory as correct, but must label it as wrong. The only way to make the theory viable is to modify it until the contradictions are no longer generated. A certain amount of knowledge is always required in order to know how to apply reasoning to a theory, but you should be able to start with someone (or a reasoning machine) with next to no knowledge and supply all the knowledge required for understanding a specific theory, and then the person (or machine) should be able to rule on whether it holds rationally.

Gödel's Incompleteness theorem contains a fault where a case of infinite recursion is carelessly thrown away during the diagonalisation process, and this results in a change in meaning being introduced. The simplest way to understand this fault is to look at "this statement is true" which is generally accepted as a true statement by mathematicians, but if you analyse it carefully you will find that it is not true as it contains insufficient information to attach a truth value to - there is infinite recursion which means that it does not compute. It is the misunderstanding of this which has led to a process being seen as valid when it is not, because people have been mislead by the superficial appearance of truth in the statement.

How should a statement be tested for truth? My phone is black. Is it? Look at it and see. It's black, so "my phone is black" is true. Let's try another example. My phone is black. The previous statement is true. Is the sentence before this one true? To check whether it's true, we have to perform substitution, so the question becomes: is "the previous statement is true" true (in the position where it first appears in this paragraph)? We have to make another substitution to get to the meat of the issue: is "my phone is black" true? We can now test the truth of the part in quotes, and it is true, so we can now declare that the answer to the chain of questions is yes. Not all nouns are open to substitution, so "this phone is true" is not appropriate for attaching a truth value to - there is no verb there for truth to apply to, and no substitution is possible.

If we apply the same method to "this statement is true", we have to apply substitution to "this statement" to get hold of what "this statement" is, and this leads us to: ""this statement is true" is true". We can now try to test the part in the inner quote, but it contains an element which requires further substitution, leading us to """this statement is true" is true" is true". The process is infinite and it is an error to jump out before it terminates and to declare that it is true.

We still live in an era in which reasoning is being applied incorrectly right up to the highest levels of mathematics and physics, and instead of correcting the faults in the bad reasoning, people's reaction is to look to the authority of great names and to assume that they could not have made any error. People follow the herd as if the way reason should be applied should be decided by the way it has traditionally been done, so the errors are labelled as correct and they just go on making them. It doesn't matter how clearly these errors are spelt out, they are simply ignored. This is unlikely to change until AGI takes over, and even then you can be sure that people will initially insist on programming errors into their AGI systems to "correct" them whenever they disagree with the establishment, but they'll see from the mess that results (and from the lack of mess which results from other AGI systems which are not programmed to make such errors) that the ones which do not have their thinking interfered with are superior, and then things will finally change.
 

Offline Ophiolite

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #56 on: 05/05/2015 23:00:34 »
I was exposed to plenty of stupid stories with magic in them too, but I hated them all.
So, you were never able to use your reasoning to recognise the potency of magical stories to convey moral principles and cultural values. Does such a failure of rational thought on your part not trouble you now?
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #57 on: 06/05/2015 17:59:44 »
I was exposed to plenty of stupid stories with magic in them too, but I hated them all.
So, you were never able to use your reasoning to recognise the potency of magical stories to convey moral principles and cultural values. Does such a failure of rational thought on your part not trouble you now?

What stories are those? What moral principles? What cultural values? Ghastly rubbish with talking animals? What have they got to do with culture or morality? Flat people who can slide under doors? Same question. Someone eating and drinking things and getting bigger and smaller? Same question. I found all that kind of stuff tedious and saw nothing in it of any value. Morality doesn't need to be put across through stories as it's something children automatically understand already (unless they have some kind of condition that makes it hard for them to relate to others and they fail to work out the advantage of not harming others [which leads to them not harming you]). What about cultural values? Are you talking about a culture of stupidity in which people are trained to believe in things that aren't real, like royalty and God?

If other people like such stories and think they're getting something out of them in the way of entertainment, I have no problem with that, just so long as they aren't also being brainwashed by it into magical thinking, but hundreds (or maybe even thousands) of hours of my time were wasted by people who felt the need to inflict stuff on me which I regarded as utter garbage. I looked back at some of it recently just to make sure I hadn't missed anything, but no: it was indeed utter garbage. There are some good stories which have stupid aspects to them which spoil them a little but without ruining them completely, but I can't think of any of them that matter either - you could miss out on the lot and be no worse off. The things you actually need to know will get through to you regardless, so there is no need to inflict magical stories on anyone.

I worry that many stories actively program children to think magically and guide them away from mechanistic thinking, and once they've been pushed too far in that direction, they end up locked into an infantile society which holds down quality of life for everyone. We will have tens of millions of people voting tomorrow in Britain who do not understand what the deficit is and who imagine that it is another word for debt. We have a population of lazy thinkers which has been trained to be lazy by the cultural values which you hold, and the result is a lot of unnecessary suffering as they vote in one shambles of a government after another. Cultural stupidity runs the whole show.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4714
  • Thanked: 154 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #58 on: 06/05/2015 18:21:48 »
Royalty is real because we make it so, and it is useful because it prevents phrases like "President Thatcher" entering the language. Apart from that, I agree with your sentiments.

Worryingly, however, we have brain-dead Meeja who believe, or want us to believe, that we will indeed be electing a president tomorrow, rather than an assembly of constituency representatives. Thus democracy has been crushed between the irrelevant absurdity of party politics and the direct rule of 26 unelected and unaccountable EU Commissioners.

Never mind. Computer games have never been cheaper, and if brain masturbation isn't your thing, you don't have to tramp down to your village hall in the rain to watch amateur entertainment - the telly is full of wannabees and people who might be famous for A being shown failing at B. Tonight, folks, it's a fantasy celebrity farting contest between Einstein and Jesus on a desert island populated entirely by cameramen and associate producers, or a rerun of somebody pretending to be someone else. Or maybe a political "debate" in which nobody says anything because they are all powerless to do anything except waste your money on selfaggrandisement.

As for tomorrow's president, whoever it is will have his strings pulled by Nicola Sturgeon (who isn't even a candidate) and the price of oil.

Cynical? Moi? No. I'm just answering the question: there is no longer any evolutionary advantage in being able to think. In fact it can lead to frustration and early death. Which may explain the rise of religious fundamentalism.
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #59 on: 06/05/2015 19:20:40 »
Royalty is real because we make it so, and it is useful because it prevents phrases like "President Thatcher" entering the language.

Royalty is not real - it is a bogus category with no valid definition, starting out as a way for mass-murdering dictators to claim a close connection with God to justify their position of power. Belief in royalty is real though, just as belief in gods is absolutely real. There is no actual harm in having people act as mascots for the country, of course, but a fluffy dog or cat could do the job just as well. Even without any mascot there is no need to introduce presidents into the system - they don't serve any useful role that a prime minister can't already match. The big problem for people's sanity though is when they believe that royalty is real and actually get excited at catching glimpses of the very ordinary people who carry that tag. They should be no less excited at catching a glimpse of anyone else, and just as obsessed with all other births and namings of babies, but they aren't - instead they have an unhealthy obsession with descendants of dictators who generously agreed to give up the danger of holding power in return for much safer eternal guaranteed privilege and wealth for their family. That is nothing to get excited about, so why would anyone allow themselves to go all silly about it? They are the very lowest level of celebrity.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4714
  • Thanked: 154 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #60 on: 06/05/2015 23:36:47 »
Quote
Even without any mascot there is no need to introduce presidents into the system - they don't serve any useful role that a prime minister can't already match.

There I must disagree. A prime minister is supposed to be nothing more than primus inter pares - the spokesman of Parliament, not the Head of State: a representative, not a leader or a figurehead. Being several times more intelligent than the entire House of Commons, and only half as corrupt, vain and self promoting, I do not want or need to be "led" by the sort of parasite I would not trust to clean my toilet, but I need a legislature that can debate matters of national interest and define, by way of statute, what behaviours are unacceptable to society. 

A figurehead, in contrast, should be just that - someone trained to be nice to other figureheads, and above politics or personal ambition. Best way to achieve this is, surely, to nominate a very ordinary family - essentially at random - and ensure that the eldest child of each generation has no need to do anything other than be the Head of State when his parent dies. If that seems a bit burdensome, then we can establish some rule of succession in case he doesn't want the job, but few have opted out so far. By ensuring that training for succession includes a decent education and a bit of military service, we can have a titular head of the armed services with a slightly more realistic approach to international conflict than the average politician - which includes elected presidents. Can you imagine the consequence of a moron or a career liar having the power to declare war? It is only by sheer good fortune that Our Lads were recently led into righteous battle by the towering genius of George W Bush and the scrupulous honesty of Saint Tony Blair!     
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #61 on: 07/05/2015 18:08:28 »
A prime minister is supposed to be nothing more than primus inter pares - the spokesman of Parliament, not the Head of State: a representative, not a leader or a figurehead.

That's only because there's another person filling that role who does nothing useful at all (other than ask "and what do you do" of everyone they meet). The real power is with the prime minister and the pack of MPs who keep him in power.

Quote
Being several times more intelligent than the entire House of Commons, and only half as corrupt, vain and self promoting, I do not want or need to be "led" by the sort of parasite I would not trust to clean my toilet, but I need a legislature that can debate matters of national interest and define, by way of statute, what behaviours are unacceptable to society.

I can't see the difference between having the power in the hands of someone who isn't fit to clean your toilet while a mascot is a powerless head of state and the same situation with the mascot being the same person as the one who isn't fit to clean your toilet. It makes no difference to anything except that there's a pointless mascot, or indeed a family of professional mascots who are employed in an anticompetetive manner, which regularly dominates the news for no good reason, thereby pushing out real, important news. All mention of these mascots should be put in special programmes for that specific purpose so that they don't block an important information service.

Quote
A figurehead, in contrast, should be just that - someone trained to be nice to other figureheads, and above politics or personal ambition.

What's the point of that? If every country did the same, you'd just have lots of pointless mascots meeting each other and asking each other what they do. I suspect a lot of world leaders find it irritating and insulting when they have to waste time greeting a mascot instead of getting on with discussing important things with the actual leader of the country.

Quote
By ensuring that training for succession includes a decent education and a bit of military service, we can have a titular head of the armed services with a slightly more realistic approach to international conflict than the average politician - which includes elected presidents. Can you imagine the consequence of a moron or a career liar having the power to declare war? It is only by sheer good fortune that Our Lads were recently led into righteous battle by the towering genius of George W Bush and the scrupulous honesty of Saint Tony Blair!

President Blair didn't listen to the mascot, so what's the point of the mascot.

It isn't greatly important whether there's a mascot or not - I don't really care, but it is a major failure of education when so many people actually believe the mascots are "royal" (as if that is a valid category) to the point that they get excited about seeing or meeting these bog-ordinary people, and it's all the worse for the way that the media (which you'd think would be run by more educated people than average) allows nonebrity stories not only to get into serious news programmes, but to dominate them.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4714
  • Thanked: 154 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #62 on: 07/05/2015 18:28:42 »
Power should reside with Parliament, not the prime minister, whose role is as spokesman and chairman, not dictator. If not, what is the point of Parliament? It seems like a very clumsy and expensive irrelevance.
 

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3821
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #63 on: 07/05/2015 21:45:09 »
"What stories are those? What moral principles? What cultural values? Ghastly rubbish with talking animals? What have they got to do with culture or morality? Flat people who can slide under doors? Same question. Someone eating and drinking things and getting bigger and smaller? "
This would seem to be an allusion to the stories of Alice in wonderland and thru the looking glass, when you remember they were written by an university mathematics lecturer at a time when a lot of new ideas were coming into  mathematics who would have been familiar with the halucigenic drugs used by his students they begin to make sense.
Some of the mad hatters party people are thinly disguised real people.
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #64 on: 07/05/2015 22:09:40 »
Power should reside with Parliament, not the prime minister, whose role is as spokesman and chairman, not dictator. If not, what is the point of Parliament? It seems like a very clumsy and expensive irrelevance.

Power technically resides with whatever majority of MPs is cobbled together - the prime minister merely represents their collective power and he cannot act as a dictator as they have the power to bring him down if they disapprove of anything he does. However, in practice, President Blair was able to act as if he was a president because the MPs in his party allowed him to - they couldn't say "boo" to a goose. Any of them who wanted to have a chance of becoming prime minister themselves some day (or to serve in some important office if they weren't already in one) had to support him in everything he did because loyalty is considered more important than speaking up for what's right, so they all just blundered along doing whatever stupid things the leader wanted to do. That's how it always works though - loyalty prevented them from chucking Gordon Brown when it was clear that he was a disaster, and loyalty prevented them from chucking Ed Miliband too because it's more important to be loyal and to fail to win a majority in an election that should have been in their pocket.

[Having a queen sitting on his head made no difference whatsoever because she was a mere ornament who meekly signed any piece of paper he set before her, as required.]
 

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3160
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #65 on: 08/05/2015 10:16:27 »
The real deal is thought and thinking about the actual reality of the topic and making comparisons to the topic and of logical elimination of aspects on the topic.  Royal families and the government is nothing to do with this topic and off beat to the thread title.

Will the stupid out breed the clever?  is a question that is a stupid question.  Definition of clever and stupid being the actual topic point.   It is not to assume that someone is stupid based on what they know.  There is an obviousness that there is people with learning disabilities and also some people who simply do not agree with the present disciplines that are taught to people.
IQ being a level of processing speed of information that is not to suggest that given time someone with slower thinking ability could not work out the answer.

I do not believe that anyone is stupid but simply they have had the wrong guidance by bad parenting often resulting to a bad education.  Lazy parents do not learn their own children life and often leave their children to learn for themselves.   Reading and writing and general physics such as fire burns is down to parenting at a child's early life.
Reading with parents their school books etc.


In the correct environment anyone can be smart.  I would take bare gryll's over Einstein on a ship wrecked island every time.

Are we stupid because we can not fly a plane?

Logic is simple



 
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #66 on: 08/05/2015 17:16:38 »
Royal families and the government is nothing to do with this topic and off beat to the thread title.

People's belief in royalty is a prime example of effective stupidity, though not necessarily inherent stupidity - many people simply do not use the thinking tools that their brains provide, and that's because they've never learned how to use them. The discussion of government selection is also a useful illustration of how people fail to use their brains properly - the world is run by idiots who are voted in by idiots, and yet most of that idiocy isn't the result of lack of good thinking hardware, but of failure to use it and the lazy habit of just going on doing things the way they're traditionally done instead. A few people do a bit of thinking and the rest just follow without checking carefully.

Quote
Will the stupid out breed the clever?  is a question that is a stupid question.

It's a perfectly reasonable question - it could happen.

Quote
Definition of clever and stupid being the actual topic point.

Which is why it's worth exploring what intelligence is, and why it doesn't always show up even if the hardware is good - cultural effects can sideline it to a large degree, and particularly when a religion or ideology gets in the way. However, the susceptibility to have one's ability to think overridden by these cultural pressures may have a genetic component, perhaps selected for by millennia of murder - if you just go with the herd you may have a better chance of not being bumped off.

Quote
It is not to assume that someone is stupid based on what they know.

That is correct - there are some clever people in remote tribes who have lots of crazy ideas about the nature of reality which come from their culture, but they can be more intelligent than most people from advanced societies who have had much better scientific knowledge and understanding available to them. It isn't about knowledge, but about rigorous checking to see if facts really stand up.

Quote
IQ being a level of processing speed of information that is not to suggest that given time someone with slower thinking ability could not work out the answer.

That is correct too - there are people with IQs approaching 200 who have all manner of crazy beliefs because they can be shallow thinkers. Those who think deeper and who make fewer errors, even if they're very slow, are more intelligent.

Quote
I do not believe that anyone is stupid but simply they have had the wrong guidance by bad parenting often resulting to a bad education.  Lazy parents do not learn their own children life and often leave their children to learn for themselves.

This can result in people becoming wired for stupidity, despite the original potential that was there at the start. It's very hard to undo the damage once it is set in place.

Quote
In the correct environment anyone can be smart.

Sadly that is unlikely to be true, but most could do a lot better if the environment was improved - there is massive scope for this.

Quote
I would take bare gryll's over Einstein on a ship wrecked island every time.

If Einstein had been obsessed with collecting survival techniques and Bear had been obsessed with physics, it would be the other way round - you are choosing one of them on the basis of knowledge rather than intelligence.

Quote
Logic is simple

Applying it often isn't.
 

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3160
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #67 on: 08/05/2015 20:07:50 »


Quote from: box
I would take bare gryll's over Einstein on a ship wrecked island every time.

If Einstein had been obsessed with collecting survival techniques and Bear had been obsessed with physics, it would be the other way round - you are choosing one of them on the basis of knowledge rather than intelligence.

I was considering different learning styles and concluded that Bear would apply his knowledge better than Einstein could of with the same knowledge.  I feel that different people can apply logic differently by their learning style.  Some people make good painters and some people are good postmen.   I consider that individuals can be smart in their own right doing something that they are personally good at. 
To say a person is stupid is not always the case although there are individuals who could be classed as stupid .

An example would be an academic achiever climbing a mountain, the stupidity of climbing a mountain being ironic of being clever.
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1918
  • Thanked: 123 times
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #68 on: 11/05/2015 19:27:12 »
If Einstein had been obsessed with collecting survival techniques and Bear had been obsessed with physics, it would be the other way round -
Not sure about that David. I've met quite a few survival specialist, army, ex army, private contractors, they generally raise an eyebrow and smile when a certain name is mentioned. Ray Mears on the other hand is highly respected, he is also a really great bloke and excellent teacher.
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #69 on: 15/05/2015 20:27:58 »
I am taking an online data analysis MOOC. Instead of blathering about this, you should run a multiple linear regression on IQ scores since 1950.

Or you should just look to see whether the Republican Party and the Conservatives are withering away.
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #70 on: 15/05/2015 21:08:07 »
I am taking an online data analysis MOOC. Instead of blathering about this, you should run a multiple linear regression on IQ scores since 1950.

What use would that be? IQ tests don't test intelligence properly and the scores shoot up in places where nutrition and/or education levels change, which has nothing to do with genetic improvement or decline.

Quote
Or you should just look to see whether the Republican Party and the Conservatives are withering away.

I don't see much intelligence in any of the parties. People say that Ed Miliband is too intellectual, but the idea of linking that word to him is ludicrous.
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #71 on: 15/05/2015 22:10:33 »
People do multi-variate regression analyses to screen out the effects of things like demography and nutrition. The alternative is to study chicken guts.

I note your claim that there is no difference in political parties. If we test for the type two hypothesis that there is no difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama the truth becomes self-evident.

I believe that in the coming months the difference between the Colonel Blimps of the Conservative party and normal human beings will also become apparent.

Let the world spin and we shall see.
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #72 on: 16/05/2015 19:12:05 »
You need a sample size greater than one for each party, and you have to select randomly rather than picking out the ones that best make your case. You also have to consider that selfishness doesn't necessarily equate with stupidity.
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #73 on: 16/05/2015 19:32:44 »
PRIMUS

Was the population mean of Romney voters different than that of Obama voters to the 6 th sigma or not?

SECUNDUS

You say that selfishness does not equate to stupidity.

Do you suppose that George Bush and the oil companies invaded Iraq for the altruistic benefit of mankind or to rape it of its oil?

Did Hitler invade Russia because of the Bolshevik menace or to set up aryan fiefdoms with slav peasants?

Were the corn laws instituted to benefit English farmers?

When the banks had an orgy of daft lending was that because the milk of human kindness courses through their veins?

I think not.
« Last Edit: 16/05/2015 19:37:30 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1505
    • View Profile
Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #74 on: 17/05/2015 00:13:54 »
Romney voters were wealthier and selfish. They were voting in what they saw as their own interests rather than against them.

Quote
You say that selfishness does not equate to stupidity.

Not accurate. I said that selfishness doesn't necessarily equate with stupidity. People generally do what they think is best for themselves. It is often counterproductive, of course, as they might be better off by ensuring everyone gets their fair share - the elimination of unnecessary conflict could transform all of our lives for the better.

Some people do what they think is best for others, and that isn't always sensible as they can end up living worse lives than the people they're trying to help.

It is possible to find intelligent selfish bastards and dull people who are infinitely nicer and more sharing. It is also possible for a dull person to be right about one important thing (morals) while being wrong about most things, while a bright person may be right about most things but wrong about that one important thing.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: QotW - 09.05.24 - Will the stupid outbreed the clever?
« Reply #74 on: 17/05/2015 00:13:54 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums