What's your opinion on this? Jordan Peterson on IQ

[Gottfrid]

3 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Jordan is very intelligent (>150), and he studied and worked in psychology for decades.

Nobody of us knows even 1% of what he knows.

What's the point of us arguing about what he says.

 

It's like arguing with Elon Musk how to optimize his rockets. Who wants to tell him how to make it better?

So you think he knows how to make rockets the best way just because he owns one or several companies???? His engineers tells him what needs to be done. The point of telling Jordan something he might not know, is very important. Who the hell have the need to measure things in IQ-numbers and levels. A normally intelligent person can define another by a short conversation.

[Gaccha]

4 hours ago, retarius said:

. The main point that got me was the no jobs for people with IQs under 83

This is concerning because the reputed average IQ of Thailand is 85. 

[GammaGlobulin]

18 minutes ago, Gaccha said:

This is concerning because the reputed average IQ of Thailand is 85. 

No worries, though!

The Flynn Effect shows that, within one hundred years, the average IQ of the population could increase about one standard deviation (give or take a few points).

 

"The Flynn effect refers to a secular increase in population intelligence quotient (IQ) observed throughout the 20th century (1–4). The changes were rapid, with measured intelligence typically increasing around three IQ points per decade."

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1718793115#:~:text=The Flynn effect refers to,three IQ points per decade.

 

The question then begs:  Can we wait 70 to 100 years for IQ here to reach average IQ in Hong Kong, as it is now?

 

 

 

[Gaccha]

9 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

The Flynn Effect shows that, within one hundred years, the average IQ of the population could increase about one standard deviation

I fear across the world in all countries of mid-income and above we're going to see quite a rapid deterioration in IQ levels.

 

Put simply, the middle class are not having enough children, and lower classes are having children.

 

IQ tends to congregate among the middle class. If you have 10 children, and this continues through each generation, you end up with 1,000 great grandchildren. If you have 0.7 children, the average in South Korea, then in each generation the population shrinks by 35%.

 

The religious are also more likely to have children than the secular/atheist. The religious are likely to have a lower IQ.

 

Eventually, people will look back on General Prayuth as a veritable genius.

[GammaGlobulin]

4 minutes ago, Gaccha said:

I fear across the world in all countries of mid-income and above we're going to see quite a rapid deterioration in IQ levels.

 

Put simply, the middle class are not having enough children, and lower classes are having children.

 

IQ tends to congregate among the middle class. If you have 10 children, and this continues through each generation, you end up with 1,000 great grandchildren. If you have 0.7 children, the average in South Korea, then in each generation the population shrinks by 35%.

 

The religious are also more likely to have children than the secular/atheist. The religious are likely to have a lower IQ.

 

Eventually, people will look back on General Prayuth as a veritable genius.

Do you have any hard, and supporting, evidence for your claims?

 

[eisfeld]

50 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

No worries, though!

The Flynn Effect shows that, within one hundred years, the average IQ of the population could increase about one standard deviation (give or take a few points).

 

"The Flynn effect refers to a secular increase in population intelligence quotient (IQ) observed throughout the 20th century (1–4). The changes were rapid, with measured intelligence typically increasing around three IQ points per decade."

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1718793115#:~:text=The Flynn effect refers to,three IQ points per decade.

 

The question then begs:  Can we wait 70 to 100 years for IQ here to reach average IQ in Hong Kong, as it is now?

This doesn't make sense. Per definition the average IQ will be exactly 100 because it's a normal distribution with mean 100. "mean" is a synonym for "average". In other words the IQ is defined to have the value 100 for the average of raw scores.

[GammaGlobulin]

25 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

This doesn't make sense. Per definition the average IQ will be exactly 100 because it's a normal distribution with mean 100. "mean" is a synonym for "average". In other words the IQ is defined to have the value 100 for the average of raw scores.

It makes sense to me that you do not understand the Flynn Effect, in fact, judging by your recent challenges understanding other things I have posted.

 

The point is that the general intelligence continues to increase. Why? We are not completely sure, however better nutrition, better vaccines, better health, and also environmental factors such as earlier attendance at pre-school, and mass media stimulation causing a richer environment at an earlier age, could all lead to increase in general intelligence in the population as a whole.

 

Of course, the statistical calculations remain the same.

 

However, the IQ test must be standardized over again, periodically, so that it compensates for the overall increase in general intelligence of the population, over time.

 

All this is described very clearly in the literature.

 

Maybe you should do some more reading.

 

Also, the Flynn Effect says nothing about the reason behind the observed increasing general intelligence, which can be measure, and is measured.

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

[eisfeld]

9 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

It makes sense to me that you do not understand the Flynn Effect, in fact, judging by your recent challenges understanding other things I have posted.

 

The point is that the general intelligence continues to increase. Why? We are not completely sure, however better nutrition, better vaccines, better health, and also environmental factors such as earlier attendance at pre-school, and mass media stimulation causing a richer environment at an earlier age, could all lead to increase in general intelligence in the population as a whole.

 

Of course, the statistical calculations remain the same.

 

However, the IQ test must be standardized over again, periodically, so that it compensates for the overall increase in general intelligence of the population, over time.

 

All this is described very clearly in the literature.

 

Maybe you should do some more reading.

 

Also, the Flynn Effect says nothing about the reason behind the observed increasing general intelligence, which can be measure, and is measured.

 

Hope this helps.

And per usual you reply in an insultive manner but missing the point. Please read again. Intelligence might increase. The average IQ will not. Hope that helps you understand your misunderstanding.

[GammaGlobulin]

4 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

And per usual you reply in an insultive manner but missing the point. Please read again. Intelligence might increase. The average IQ will not. Hope that helps you understand your misunderstanding.

You are correct that the average IQ is 100.

 

However, average intelligence of the population has been increasing over the past 100 years, and the Flynn Effect is just an observation of this phenomenon.

 

So, I really am confused about what does not make sense to you.

 

 

[eisfeld]

3 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

You are correct that the average IQ is 100.

 

However, average intelligence of the population has been increasing over the past 100 years, and the Flynn Effect is just an observation of this phenomenon.

 

So, I really am confused about what does not make sense to you.

 

 

Let's try again with a simpler sentence: what does not make sense is that you stated the average IQ will increase. It wont. It will remain 100 by definition. You did not say the average intelligence will increase. You said the average IQ will increase. Hope this helps.

[JensenZ]

6 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Jordan is very intelligent (>150), and he studied and worked in psychology for decades.

Nobody of us knows even 1% of what he knows.

What's the point of us arguing about what he says.

 

It's like arguing with Elon Musk how to optimize his rockets. Who wants to tell him how to make it better?

"Nobody of us knows even 1% of what he knows"

 

LOL! Really?   

 

I won't argue about what he is saying, but I find this man talks too much and there is very little purpose to what he is saying. I've never liked him - he seems to like the sound of his own voice too much. There are much better speakers around with much more purpose to what they are saying. Of course he's only interested in talking to people with IQs above 120.

 

Now I'll standby to cop vitriol from his fans...

[OneMoreFarang]

6 hours ago, JensenZ said:

"Nobody of us knows even 1% of what he knows"

 

LOL! Really?   

 

I won't argue about what he is saying, but I find this man talks too much and there is very little purpose to what he is saying. I've never liked him - he seems to like the sound of his own voice too much. There are much better speakers around with much more purpose to what they are saying. Of course he's only interested in talking to people with IQs above 120.

 

Now I'll standby to cop vitriol from his fans...

I like a lot of what he does. There is also some which I don't like, like his religious videos.

I saw mostly interviews from him when he interviewed interesting people. He asks questions, listens, and he adds his own (educated) thoughts. I think there is nothing wrong with that.

 

After he spoke out against the (at that time proposed) new law in Canada he got a lot more media attention. He is often invited as a controversial guest. It's no surprise that that is controversial.

 

I am sure he is not only interested in people with IQ over 120. But listening to him people below that IQ level will have often problems to follow his thoughts and what he says. I don't blame him for not dumbing down what he says.

He also spent time as clinical psychologist with below average IQ people, and he helped them. 

He is not perfect, but he has definitely many interesting thoughts which are worth listening to. 

 

This is one of those fascinating conversations I listened to.

 

 

[Gsxrnz]

When Jordan B. Peterson enters a room, he doesn't turn the lights on, he turns the dark off.

 

Apologies to Chuck. 

 

 

[retarius]

16 hours ago, NextG said:

The last time I tested, it was a disappointing 144/5.  But I deliberately under-performed…. as was my wont. How about you?

You my IQ was 250 before I came to Thailand and I wan't really trying, I was hoping to fail the test really so I wouldn't get the 10 million a year job that was on offer. 

[1FinickyOne]

My 3 smartest friends all killed themselves... 

[alanrchase]

IQ is not a measure of intelligence it is a measure of how good you are at IQ tests. How do you measure intelligence? Is someone who can speak ten languages more intelligent than a rocket scientist who can only speak one? My 16 year old nephew is more intelligent than JP when it comes to fishing in the local river.

[NextG]

4 hours ago, retarius said:

You my IQ was 250 before I came to Thailand and I wan't really trying, I was hoping to fail the test really so I wouldn't get the 10 million a year job that was on offer. 

“You my”? Perhaps that’s what they mean, when they state that many leave their brains at home when going to Thailand. 

[impulse]

15 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

15 hours ago, Gaccha said:

I fear across the world in all countries of mid-income and above we're going to see quite a rapid deterioration in IQ levels.

 

Put simply, the middle class are not having enough children, and lower classes are having children.

 

IQ tends to congregate among the middle class. If you have 10 children, and this continues through each generation, you end up with 1,000 great grandchildren. If you have 0.7 children, the average in South Korea, then in each generation the population shrinks by 35%.

 

The religious are also more likely to have children than the secular/atheist. The religious are likely to have a lower IQ.

 

Eventually, people will look back on General Prayuth as a veritable genius.

Expand  

Do you have any hard, and supporting, evidence for your claims?

Idiocracy.  Just watch the first 10 minutes, because it's downhill from there.  With an occasion laugh, but still not worth it.  First 10 minutes is genius, though.

 

[ChrisKC]

Not interested in an IQ

 

Just hope my intelligence is enough to acquire wisdom - much more important!

[rumak]

18 hours ago, NextG said:

Most of them were likely continually beaten by their short time companions at Connect 4…

but...... You and I are different !!    

[Walker88]

Abilities, whether intellect or athleticism, are a function of the # and efficiency of neural connections, inside the brain regarding intellect, and brain to skeletal musculature for athleticism.

 

Much of this is a function of heredity. Some is a function of nutrition of the mother during pregnancy. A bit more is a function of environment while the brain is still plastic.

 

Some poor souls lose the Birth Lottery and never have a chance of reaching the level of intellect that would allow them to function at the highest levels of society. One cannot fully make up for the loss owing to bad genes. Depending on whether one is politically correct or Shockley and Jensen, Robert Sapolsky or E. O. Wilson, heredity accounts for somewhere between 20% and 80% of intelligence, Where heredity really sits is lost in confirmation bias and goal-seeking research.

 

The brain seems to remain fairly plastic until about age 25, though the ability to form new neural pathways drops considerably after the first 10 years. A minimal amount of plasticity remains into old age, but not much. I've learned a few languages as an adult, but it was through brute force memorization rather than the ease with which a child can learn.

 

One concern I have about any continued upshift in general intellect is that so much of the brain is no longer being used. Most people of a certain age no longer bother to learn their 'tables' and can do precious little math in their heads. People use GPS instead of actually learning the landscape, so many are incapable of conceptualizing the layout of a city and absent GPS would get lost searching for the bathroom in their own house. We also no longer write much longhand, so spatial orientation skills suffer. Our language ability is deteriorating because we speak in emojis or LOLs. I think there's a 'use it or lose it' experience with brain function. James Flynn has argued that intellect has been increasing because the world demands more interaction and provides more stimulation than in earlier times. His research, however, predates the most recent technology, which removes humans' need to interact so directly with the world, as computers or phones do the work for us. We might lose what we had previously gained.

 

Though there is no research to back this up, it seems to me we are also losing natural curiosity. So many young people know absolutely nothing and don't even care, so long as they can post a banal TikTok and get "likes".

[rwill]

The smarter you are the more you realize how little you know.

[retarius]

1 hour ago, NextG said:

“You my”? Perhaps that’s what they mean, when they state that many leave their brains at home when going to Thailand. 

Are you so dense that you cannot recognise irony? I'll put you on ignore. 

[KannikaP]

21 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Some say they are smart due to their diet and all the fish they eat...seriously. We are what we eat. The stomach is the minds brain !

What IS the IQ of a cod, or a salmon? 555

[tgw]

On 10/3/2023 at 3:32 PM, GammaGlobulin said:

I cannot say that I am in complete agreement with Jordan Peterson's thinking concerning IQ.

 

What about YOU?

 

Do you agree, disagree, or differ in important ways, with Jordan' views about IQ, the importance of IQ in daily living, and the importance of IQ in determining the mix of IQ in the workplace?

 

Please be specific in replying to Jordan's IQ points...

 

Also, enjoy these short UTUBE videos made by Jordan...

 

 

 

 

 

 

excellent videos

what exactly is controversial about them ?

[NextG]

36 minutes ago, retarius said:

Are you so dense that you cannot recognise irony? I'll put you on ignore. 

???? I understand it perfectly, hence my reply. ☺️

Good humour my friend… yours appears to be missing. 
You ‘ribbed’ me, I returned the favour; you threw your toys out of your perambulator. 
Learn from the experience. 

 

[GammaGlobulin]

1 hour ago, tgw said:

excellent videos

what exactly is controversial about them ?

Nothing is controversial about them!

 

NOTHING.

 

If you don't want to attend the University of Toronto, then this is up to you if you feel Toronto is just TOO controversial.

 

Academic debate is academic debate.

Academic debate is SUPPOSED to be contentious...

 

 

[PremiumLane]

On 10/3/2023 at 3:32 PM, GammaGlobulin said:

I cannot say that I am in complete agreement with Jordan Peterson's thinking concerning IQ.

 

What about YOU?

 

Do you agree, disagree, or differ in important ways, with Jordan' views about IQ, the importance of IQ in daily living, and the importance of IQ in determining the mix of IQ in the workplace?

 

Please be specific in replying to Jordan's IQ points...

 

Also, enjoy these short UTUBE videos made by Jordan...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peterson is an utter clown

[Hanaguma]

I have been following my fellow refugee from Canuckistan for a number of years, since his days at U of T, when he was railing against government mandated speech laws. He was a lot more fiery in those days. As he grew more as a public figure, he began to be more measured in his speech and take more time to give thoughtful answers. He is very careful to choose his words so as not to give any ammunition to his detractors.

 

Basically, my boy's wicked smart. A rare person who actually listens when asked a question, and who thinks before answering. Also honest enough to say "I don't know" when he doesn't know.  

 

His daughter is also fairly far along the smokin' scale!

[GammaGlobulin]

24 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

utter clown

I agree.

 

Also, I hope you might enjoy the tears of this CLOWN....

 

 

 

QUESTION IS:  How did he ever get tenure???