Slashdot Mirror
Can High Intelligence Be a Burden Rather Than a Boon?
HughPickens.com writes David Robson has an interesting article at BBC on the relationship between high intelligence and happiness. "We tend to think of geniuses as being plagued by existential angst, frustration, and loneliness," writes Robson. Think of Virginia Woolf, Alan Turing, or Lisa Simpson – lone stars, isolated even as they burn their brightest." As Ernest Hemingway wrote: "Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know." The first steps to studying the question were taken in 1926 when psychologist Lewis Terman decided to identify and study a group of gifted children. Terman selected 1,500 pupils with an IQ of 140 or more – 80 of whom had IQs above 170. Together, they became known as the "Termites", and the highs and lows of their lives are still being studied to this day. "As you might expect, many of the Termites did achieve wealth and fame – most notably Jess Oppenheimer, the writer of the classic 1950s sitcom I Love Lucy. Indeed, by the time his series aired on CBS, the Termites' average salary was twice that of the average white-collar job. But not all the group met Terman's expectations – there were many who pursued more "humble" professions such as police officers, seafarers, and typists. For this reason, Terman concluded that "intellect and achievement are far from perfectly correlated". Nor did their smarts endow personal happiness. Over the course of their lives, levels of divorce, alcoholism and suicide were about the same as the national average."
According to Robson, one possibility is that knowledge of your talents becomes something of a ball and chain. During the 1990s, the surviving Termites were asked to look back at the events in their 80-year lifespan. Rather than basking in their successes, many reported that they had been plagued by the sense that they had somehow failed to live up to their youthful expectations (PDF).
n/t
The answer is in the relationship between the mob and religion. High intelligence can result in blood money or rather human beings creating technology that will allow for them to make it out of reach which is considered a loss either way to both and could allow for happiness in the people that made it out of reach (what America was before being discovered by religion in 1492 but in reality likely discovered over 10K years ago). Very likely it was a happy place then with no king and no cross to complicate matters of life, probably considered on biblical terms to be heaven, not exactly what it is now huh?
Which I guess is why children and the senile are happier.
“Just about every adult human being back then had a brain weighing about three kilogrammes! There was no end to the evil schemes that a thought machine that oversized couldn't imagine and execute.
So I raise this question, although there is nobody around to answer it: Can it be doubted that three-kilogramme brains were once nearly fatal defects in the evolution of the human race?”
~ Kurt Vonnegut, Galápagos
Well now, this should end up a wonderful thread full of angsty "geniuses" whining about how they can totally identify with the Termites because no one "gets" them.
As do many fucking idiots who believe they're intelligent.
That... That looks like English...
Set children apart and tell them they are better than the rest and be surprised when they fail to live up to their perceived expectations...
I surely wouldn't qualify as one of the 'termites' in the study, but there still things in my life I take to quickly. There is a third metric that I am in my coming to respect even more: motivation and inspiration.
There is a big difference between having the ability to do something, having the need to do something, and having a want and drive to do something. That last one seems to get people much further then being at the very top in intelligence. It also provides a framework of interaction and social connection between peers, if it is truly a passion.
So maybe it takes being the best and brightest to be first chair violinist in a prestigious symphony, but being brilliant alone won't get you there. Meanwhile hundreds of others have a long and successful career they make out of their perseverance.
Pretty sure it's someone testing out a bot. At least I hope so.
-- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
this is nothing new: i believe the same study was the basis of the famous book "Outliers", which is a fascinating study of what makes people successful. if i recall correctly, it's completely the opposite of what people expect: your genes *do* matter. your attitude *does* matter. your circumstances *do* matter. working hard *does* matter. and luck matters as well. but it's all of these things - luck, genetics, circumstances *and* hard work - that make for the ultimate success story. bill gates is one of the stories described. he had luck and opportunity - by being born at just the right time when personal computing was beginning - and circumstances - by going to one of the very very few schools in the USA that actually had a computer available (for me, that opportunity was when i was 8: i went to one of the very very few secondary schools in the UK that had a computer: a Pet 3032).
so, yeah - it's not a very popular view, particularly in the USA, as it goes against the whole "anyone can make it big" concept. but, put simply, the statistics show that it's a combination of a whole *range* of factors, all of which contribute, that make up success. just "being intelligent" simply is not enough.
140 is surely a bit high for this oppressive feeling to manifest. I know people with a rather mediocre 115 or 120 who feel this way. I suspect our "everyone is special" culture will also be adding to this milieu, if it already has not done so.
Some ten or fifteen years ago, Scientific American published an article about the positive correlation of "general intelligence" with virtually every measure of success in life.
Like earning enough money to be comfortable, having the emotional intelligence to have a successful marriage, etc.
They showed that "general intelligence" which is correlated with but not directly measured by things like SAT scores, was basically a ticket to (or highly correlated with) a good life, and even good health.
And the article was mighty persuasive.
--PeterM
Even being above average means you're surrounded by (relative) idiots. Hell, just stay informed about world events, history, literature, and then stand there in disgust as all people can talk about is the latest episode of "Naked and Afraid". This is by no means a recent thing either; every generation throughout history has repeated the same sorry story.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Unfortunately, this is largely the natural progression of society. Back then, we didn't know how to handle these kids, thus we ham stringed them from the get go. They had the unfortunate luck to be born at a time when we're just awakening to the idea that we should treat children differently than adults, and with absolutely NO awareness that different children require different rearing techniques.
The good news is that, despite all the bullshit,we really have progressed quite far. I doubt, 80 years from now were you to quiz a similar group of kids from today, you'd get the same response. No, instead you might hear how society let them down, that they always felt society always failed to live up to their expectations.
Ah, progress!
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
It's fucking absurd how guilt-ridden liberals such as yourself talk of the Americas before the Europeans came.
The Americas were not "a happy place then with no king and no cross to complicate matters of life", as you so fucking stupidly believe.
It's well established that the Inca, Maya, Aztec, Toltec and many other pre-European civilizations in the Americas engaged in ritualistic human slaughter. Their high priests and emperors would cut the hearts out of living individuals, and then make those victims eat their own still-beating hearts before burning them.
There is also much evidence to suggest that warfare was rife within all of these civilizations, including the less-advanced Native American cultures living in what is today's United States and Canada. This is the reason that the Europeans encountered warriors time and time again during their travels in the Americas. The whole reason that these pre-European societies had warriors was because, guess what, they engaged in warfare with one another!
Native societies in North America did not live in peace with nature, as well. We know they hunted the woolly mammoth and other species to extinction. In some areas they killed all of the bison and buffalo well before Europeans arrived. Running buffalo off of cliffs was a common way of killing almost entire herds at once, with only a small fraction of the meat actually being consumed by humans.
Why the fuck do you make the idiotic claims that you do? Native North Americans were not peaceful. They did not live in harmony with nature. All of the evidence suggests to them engaging in behavior much worse than that of contemporary Europeans.
Somewhat relevant, I love his bit: "Stupid people buy guns, clever people know they shouldn't, because the world can be a depressing place if you really know what's going on.
Terman should have looked at what I call "mentis," the combination of the individual's accented motivation array and the tool, intelligence, used to build and execute the individual's behavior-space to satisfy that motivation array. Looking at intelligence alone is like staring at a wrench and wondering why it isn't doing something useful. What is happiness? Happiness is being able to build and execute a behavior-space that satisfies one's motivation array. See Warren Buffett. See Albert Einstein.
E Proelio Veritas.
People who think that they're highly intelligent end up being unhappy, because life has a way of cutting you down to size. If you've built yourself up in your mind to be better than everyone else, then it must really hurt to see all those other people being more successful than you.
I need, thanks
Lisa addressed this.
One of the worst things about having a great memory and a high intelligence is that you don't forget your failures and you over analyze them every chance you get. Sounds like fun, doesn't it?
(See? I used per se, so I'm... oh never mind...)
Intelligence and being highly observant are great skills both in society and from an evolutionary/survivalist standpoint.
But in a society I've found it brings up two downsides:
Guilt, because your intelligence allows you to avoid pain or achieve a higher level of comfort in society. You weren't "superman" you just made rational choices based upon your understanding of how the system works and now your friends and family are suffering because they didn't and you want to help them which requires more energy and effort or you can't which means your intelligence has limits and all you can do is watch them suffer.
Stress and anxiety. Once you figure out that you can problem solve and improve your quality of life it's natural, like any athlete, to grow and push your boundaries. But intellectual pursuits aren't as cut and dried as physical ones - It's easy to know that you can only bench press 200lbs and that's what you need to work on - Less so when you're trying to solve problems like familial and social discord but nobody will listen or trying to improve your company's fortunes by making proper investment choices. More to the point, I'm an engineer and there's nothing more frustrating trying to solve a problem you've encountered with your design that YOU pushed for, can't figure out why it's not working, might not work AT ALL and the boss is breathing down your neck (oh and the company is on the line). There's plenty of days I've driven by a building crew and daydreamed about just running the earth mover or driving a dump truck.
In an Agrarian society - in a pre-industrialized world these issues just didn't come about for intellectualism - Partially because it wasn't as much of a survival skill. (And that's probably why steampunk is so romanticized today)
Yes! Me being like waaaaay smarter than all you slashdot loosers are teh rediculus burden!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpI9yuv6D8o
there would be more people with high IQs. Natural selection, you know. An IQ of 100 is almost by definition ideal.
"We tend to think of geniuses as being plagued by existential angst, frustration, and loneliness."
This I think comes from identifying 'genius' as someone with special ability but not a popular, cool ability. Exceptional athletes, musicians, and actors are just as much outliers as 'geniuses', but their talents are never liabilities, and only rarely does society genuinely encourage any humility on their part.
I can bang my head against a brick wall all I want, but all I will ever get out of it is a broken head.
The trick is to pick a battle you can win, and then buckle down and win it.
I've climbed high in my own life, but that is because my goals were achievable and I had the tools (both born with and the opportunities I needed) to succeed.
There are many who work hard in life but don't get much of anywhere.
That said, working hard is the only way to MAXIMIZE your opportunities and inborn potential. Praise your kids for their hard work, not their brains.
--PM
That's not to say the study was totally useless, but the objection is fairly striking. Today. Oh well, indeed the decision to run the study was taken 80 years ago -and really it shows...
Herve S.
I said to myself, “Look, I have increased in wisdom more than anyone who has ruled over Jerusalem before me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge.” Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind.
For with much wisdom comes much sorrow;
the more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes 1:16-18
As intelligence goes up, happiness often goes down. See, I made a graph! I make a lot of graphs...
If you don't know, why post?
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
There are many obvious advantages to high IQ, if the genes related to it weren't also linked to major negatives then the process of evolution would have selected for them more effectively than it has.
This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
We have too many people in college / higher levels of the ivory tower some maybe very smart but at times in some fields when it comes down to real world work experience (out side of the ivory tower) they can be very dumb.
If high intelligence were an unmitigated benefit, natural selection would have moved the IQ average to 130, 150 or whatever over the eons. There _must_ be commensurate down-sides. Depression? Slower reflexes? Go fetch!
As it is, we just have the Flynn effect of average IQs rising about 1 pt per decade over the past century. That might [or not] be considered as fast evolutionary change.
>... can result ... could allow ... likely discovered ... Very likely it was ... probably considered ...
1. With respect that history has been shaped and taught to the liking of corrupt king and cross.
2. With respect that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
3. Respect that gospel of the bible itself has been revised several times yet remains gospel, most probably for reason 2 based on human nature.
If you're a genius you probably have exponentially growing dead-end research needs, and people who want ROI view that as a waste of money, and ask why can't you do just the genius stuff that explodes ROI. They see your wants as "gimmicks" and "toys" because you have "fun" learning them, but it doesn't add to their bottom line in any way. They conclude that you should buy the "toys" with your own money. But you're not exactly earning enough to afford all the toys you might want and a place to put them, and, because you're busy with work and life in general, once you have the toys you don't have the time to do the funky stuff you always wanted to try out. This same boss will call you a socialist if you say education should be free for all (paid by the state essentially), and then wonder why everybody in the workforce is so dumb.
Intelligence is a weaker selection trait in the wild then, say, strength, stamina, endurance and mate attraction.
It only becomes worthwhile once you have a stable society and can then pursue such "luxuries" and, even then, it appears to take thousands of years to become critical to society in general and, even now, it's still not considered a "desirable" trait for mate attraction...
Wow! This article on highly "intelligent" people seems to have mostly brought out comments by the barely sentient!
I thought there were supposed to be smart people on /.
OK. Knuckleheads, here is the reason that the smart people you know will never be happy.
Because they understand that everything sucks, both because it could be better (beer, tax system, etc) and because people who are dumber than they are somehow got in charge.
Or maybe that's why control freaks can't be happy, same difference tho
My brother Pete got a doctorate in math from UC Berkeley and has no social skills. He has never married and doesn't ever contact me or my sister. I used to call him and there was dead air if I didn't talk to him. He has lived in a tiny apartment for forty years. There are other things from his childhood that affected him.
Nope.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
It's not enough to be intelligent. You have to have social skills that help you convince others you are more intelligent than them. Otherwise your intelligent decisions will appear merely eccentric or even crazy or foolish. Your successes will be attributed to luck, or the contributions of others. And I don't mean you just need social skills that are better than your average awkward nerd. Your social skills need to be well above average, because you're trying to achieve something exceptionally difficult. Convincing people above you on the social ladder to put their egos aside and acknowledge that you have superior intelligence, which isn't something that comes naturally at all.
Only if you have a low tolerance for stupidity, which is rampant in the human species.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Speaking from an experience shared by many /. readers, growing up "way different" than the average kid, particularly in a way that most kids didn't idolize (i.e. not like 1st-string football players who were "way different" but in a way that brought fame not disdain), can lead to childhood and adolescent angst that followed me into adulthood.
This led to many missed opportunities growing up which meant I "missed out" on some things that most of my now-adult peers take for granted.
. . . used to say, "It ain't what people don't know, it's what they think they know!"
I've come in contact with at least one super genius that I know of, and it was a most humbling experience. I have solved technical problems which previous companies and persons have spent hundreds of thousands, and sometimes millions of dollars, to solve, to no avail. Perseverance prevails when intelligence is sometimes lacking . . .
This study says "Each point increase in IQ test scores is associated with $202 to $616 more income per year...The median net worth for people with an IQ of 120 was almost $128,000 compared with $58,000 for those with an IQ of 100."
Yes, absolutely.
Society loves a genius, but only long after it is dead.
Personally, I find defining achievement as wealth and fame as problematic.
A cop might be a detective and be great at solving serious crimes -- both intellectually an achiever, and also benefiting his/her community; while still being not terribly highly paid or famous. Or what about someone who chooses a quiet life as a homemaker/parent, and raises smart, confident, self-reliant, happy kids? Just a couple of examples I can think of.
There's a definite western capitalistic/materialistic bias in the study's assumption. You can debate whether it's 'good' or 'bad', but it's still a bias.
'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
I have a fairly high IQ plus a pile of education and so much bores me and I find myself toning my intellect down. For instance I am taller than average and find when I walk with a shorter person I will hunch to bring my head down to closer to their level. It seems to make conversation flow better but needless to say it hurts my neck. When surrounded by people who short in the intellectually curious department I just about lose my mind hunching down to their level. I go through life seeing where other people clearly don't have a clue about the world around them and are acting on their terrible understanding. Long ago I stopped even trying to help most people as I never could tell when they were actually appreciative or if they were just being gracious while thinking that I was being a know-it-all shit.
A perfect example was a guy who was filling in some holes in a wall in a room I was in with a water/powder based filler. He did a great job of making a beautiful corner but then proceeded to use a heat gun to "dry" the filler. Should I have told him that the chemistry of that product does not involve water being evaporated but the water actually becomes chemically incorporated into the final product? I didn't say anything but I felt bad because the guy is responsible for a large building and having his work later physically fail could cost him his job (maybe).
I also see people making wildly stupid financial decisions, wildly stupid life decisions, and of course make wildly stupid statements on science, engineering, or medicine. I just nod my head and don't offer any counter to the world being roughly 6,000 years old.
And before anyone completely label me some kind of intellectual snob, I have discovered many a hill-billy who kicks ass; the occasional gem who has taken the crappy opportunities life threw at them and led an intellectually stimulating life. They will have ripped the engine out of something, changed it from carbureted to fuel injected, run it on methane, and now have it crushing various food/bio waste into pellets that they burn all winter in a pellet stove of their own design. That person kicks ass and I want to be around them. They guy who hates his job, hasn't read a book in 10 years, would trade CERN in for sport stadium, and wants to talk about the "Game" is someone who I want to yell at and say "your mouth is producing noises that are making me dumber by the second."
I am quite intelligent. I had a fairly high paying job as a software engineer at a very large company. But I could only stay there for half of a career. Being the smart guy was a problem. Everyone turned to me for help. Yet when problems arose, I was the one who got blamed. I also do not have the personality skills to relate well to other people so even amongst the geeks I was an outcast. I am an introvert and socially awkward. Subsequently, I was not promoted much, grew very unhappy, and eventually quit.
I have been in more social groups in the last few years. But as the person with so many facts which I can recall from memory as needed, I became the guy everyone hated. People don't like being shown up as factually wrong. One of the groups even kicked me out after I was bullied repeatedly and I spoke out against the bullying. The worst incidents were when a couple of guys tried to run their car into mine and when another guy shoved me into a door and then called me an asshole.
Ignorance is bliss.
If high intelligence were an unmitigated benefit, natural selection would have moved the IQ average to 130, 150 or whatever over the eons.
Yours seems to be below the average, whatever number that is.
The IQ is standardized such that the fiftieth percentile has an IQ of 100. It's a definition, nothing more.
Anyone with an above average IQ will testify...
No one thinks of themselves as stupid. The mentally ill people enumerated above could not discern their own stupidity due to hysterically dissociated ego deflective logic. I think I've made my point! Later ...
The purpose of existence is to make money.
>Nope.
So... Not human nature... Perhaps conspiracy?
I only venture there as I am in no way the first to raise this question and actions to preserve power structure by ruling party's would still fall within human nature though.
Next thing they'll tell us that not all the tall people are good at basketball.
High intelligence CAN be a burden, but in general it is not.
I have above average intelligence and I'm rarely "happy," and am often a pessimist.
Meanwhile, mentally handicapped brother is the happiest person I know.
Obviously being mentally handicapped can be a burden for himself and for others, but we make it work. I can't imagine my life without him.
Long story short thankfully everybody is different and those of us who excel in one area can help others who are deficient in that area, and vice versa.
I've tested with an IQ in the top 1% of the population. I'll tell you what the biggest issue I see is - having the "long view".
Now, don't get me wrong, this isn't going to be some humble-brag. My achievement is very average. But my gift/curse is seeing what's going to happen. Like, in a relationship, or in life in general. Considering death. Or seeing red flags in a woman (physical or social), then wargaming out how those will play out.
The net result is a higher isolation level. A more dour outlook. Less of a desire to perhaps fully participate. On the other hand, I'm much more easily amazed by the universe too.
But - the long view is the biggest gift/curse.
1500 of the smartest people in the world, and their highest achievement was a sitcom?
The true burden lies in thinking a "high IQ" means you're better than other people. There are many valuable skills and talents which are not measured by an IQ test, including art, music, empathy, and so on.
The burden is the arrogance of presuming IQ means intelligence. It does not. It is simply one metric for measuring skillsets.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
*parties
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
When (if) one gets over oneself and asks the right questions it is possible to achieve a shift in ones sense of purpose that allows those who find the answers to transition beyond thinking patterns that lead to angst and frustration.
>That... That looks like English...
Actually, it is more Germanlishy, but as American does pre-date paperclip. English royalty did trade with German and I am a blueblood if that is what you are asking.
The danger when you have the intelligence to do anything you want to do in life is doing nothing. You hesitate to focus narrowly on one field of study because that means you'll have less time for all the others.
I won't say what my IQ is, but it's up there. My grades, especially in science courses, were practically perfect. People were expecting me to go into all kinds of careers, including medicine, chemistry, physics, computer science, etc.. But, I'm interested in everything! Always have been. I chose a career that didn't need much thought so I could keep up with what was happening in science and technology. It's worked. How many 62 year olds do you know who build their own computers? Or just bought two new microscopes? Or diagnose their own problems before going to the doctor?
I know a lot of successful people. Most of them have very little time for fishing, hunting, camping, going to ball games, watching television, listening to music, playing with the children & grandchildren, or working in the garden. I have all the time in the world to enjoy life. Isn't that what it's all about?
>*parties
That would depend greatly upon the beverages being served. Based on observation I'm leaning towards my spelling. ;-)
Here is what you are missing -- helping others.
Most of the activities of my life have been trivially easy for decades. Helping others remains challenging.
If you really are "so smart", you are able to see what a disaster this world is today. Well, get busy changing it. You will be up against the most powerful, greedy, selfish & moneyed people on the face of the Earth. Challenge enough for me. What about you?
I come here for the love
next question
You are headed for a fall.
I come here for the love
If high intelligence were an unmitigated benefit, natural selection would have moved the IQ average to 130, 150 or whatever over the eons. There _must_ be commensurate down-sides. Depression? Slower reflexes? Go fetch!
Um, hello? Homo sapiens moved from hunter-gatherer tribes to the threshold of being a space faring civilization in less than 25,000 years; that's the equivalent of a microsecond on evolutionary timescales. What the hell more do you want?
Intelligence is a weaker selection trait in the wild then, say, strength, stamina, endurance and mate attraction.
It only becomes worthwhile once you have a stable society and can then pursue such "luxuries" and, even then, it appears to take thousands of years to become critical to society in general and, even now, it's still not considered a "desirable" trait for mate attraction...
This is also based on the assumption that intelligence (which can take many forms) is completely dependent on genetics, as much as eye color is, and has nothing to do with nurture, personal development and self care or even acts of demonstrating intelligence in an objectively measurable fashion.. (all of which are lacking when considering why intelligence is not strongly correlated with natural selection demands on the microscopic measure of single generations.)
There are so many things that can affect intelligence more strongly than genetics (in terms of intelligence of both parents) which in general is measured in terms of a "Regression to the mean", that is based on genetics my intelligence falls somewhere between the intelligence of my mother and the intelligence of my father.. so in terms of one parent.. the intelligence of the family line may have gone up, while in terms of the other lineage.. for the other parent.. the intelligence will have gone down. In terms of genetics this does not do much to explain any significant generational change in intelligence, so it is patently clear that there are other factors not accounted for purely by genetics or natural selection, though these are factors.. just not big ones, in general (leaving out where genetics contributes to severe autism, retardation or other deficits.) I would say that it is more nurture than nature.
Because we have to be burdened with fucking idiots who question whether or not high intelligence is a burden.
Because we have to deal with people we know are very intelligent, but have been taught that being too smart is bad, and the become fucking idiots.
Because we have to deal with assholes who are smart enough to know they're lying assholes, but then use that intelligence to make deliberate logical fallacies to illustrate their point.
For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. ~Ecclesiastes 1:18
Rather, a burden causes intelligence, but intelligence cannot solve the burden.
Since IQ is a scale based on average intelligence being 100. Even if everyone got smarter, the average IQ would still be 100.
A good if not entertaining perspective of this is illustrated in the movie Idiocracy. It just goes the other way.
What is not addressed here are the following: If a person has intelligence and a "mentor" from an early age, he gains the book based knowledge and the wisdom derived from the mentor. I was above average and may be top 1% of my class and what made the difference was I had a highly intelligent and well experienced mentor. He guided me and told me that get "any degree" It does not matter. Use it as a ladder to move on. Never ever get attached to the one degree rather become an Eagle to view the world from different perspectives. Never compare yourself with others and envy if they are rich. Your goal has to be "happy", so help others and see they don't have things you have. Control your impulses to go after money or fame. They take time and will reach you. Apply your knowledge in field of study to another and try some thing new. Become a child to enjoy the results. So, I started with BS Physics, MA literature, MA Linguists, MS Computer Science, Ph. D Computational Sinusitis, studied Cultural Anthropology, wrote a unique book on Statistics, completed Read Estate Certification, Completed Para Legal studies and now moving to law school. How did I find time? I made it and avoided unwanted deviations and never bothered about opinion of others. I have helped many people and extremely happy. I still drive a 1992 car without shame or worry. So, finding the right mentor in addition to academic achievement is a must for success and happiness with a mind to say " I have enough:, let me help others. I am over 76 with no medical, financial or other problems. So positive attitude, learn to be happy are all part of your character.
"There are 100 physicists alive today who are as smart as Einstein, but immensely frustrated with their lives because they will never have a significant professional accomplishment to their name, simply because they are not lucky enough to be in the right place and time like Einstein was."
-A physicist I know
Said physicist recommended to me to work hard at my career, but to put family at the center of my priorities.
Maybe higher IQ means you are not just focused on looks, money, power etc. Those things will not bring you joy. You see how stupid the world is, and as smart as you are there is no way out.
If high intelligence were an unmitigated benefit, natural selection would have moved the IQ average to 130, 150 or whatever over the eons.
And how do you know it didn't? IQ is always measured against the current population of similar age, and is recalibrated all the time to have average at 100.
I didn't say people didn't get smarter but saying that the average IQ will go up is impossible since the average IQ is always 100.
So based on their job the study correlates intelligence? What?
Also how do you measure happiness? Either the study or this article has a left out a lot to wonder.
Certainly -- renorming measures the Flynn Effect. If it helps your understanding, please read the quoted sentence as "... moved the IQ average intelligence level to what we currently consider 130, 150 ...". And since you apparently like pedantry, please learn the difference between ignorance and stupidity.
But I agree hunter-gatherer societies find other traits more advantageous. Even industrialized societies have lower intelligence advantages than information societies. "Mate attraction" is obviously a second-order effect with lags (it is what used to pay). We are 10 generations into the start of industrialization but only 4 into info.
The gross advantages of intelligence are quite apparent and quite large. That intelligence is only slowly taking over implies the net advantages (after deducting disadvantages) are much smaller.
Whatever their's is, your's must be lower. Obviously they were comparing our 150 to the hypothetical 100 of a more intelligent society.
IQ is the median of a group. Obviously they're doing inter-group IQ comparisons, not intra. An IQ of 150 in one group can be the IQ of 100 in another group.
Reddit.com/r/iamverysmart
IQ estimated to be 148 by a hospital psychologist.
Was initially Senior Analytic and had university degree.
Now killed by psychiatric drugs AGAINST MY WILL etc (8 years of psychiatric drug use).
No anymore friends etc. to help.
If somebody wants to help (need place to hide ASAP in europe, preferrably in france): tomtom8034@yahoo.com.
Trust me it is. Have you tried arguing politics with a teabagger lately? They don't know history, the Constitution and its the Amendments, basic U.S. governmental function, basic economics, global politics, science, etc. They rant about their hatreds and fears but are unable to formulate a logical argument based on facts, instead blending in their religious beliefs and right wing sound bites as foundational arguments. It's all magical thinking and ignorance, and it makes being the intelligent one in the room a burden.
*** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
the term is "fool's paradise", never "genius' paradise"
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
Intelligence is a weaker selection trait in the wild then, say, strength, stamina, endurance and mate attraction.
It only becomes worthwhile once you have a stable society and can then pursue such "luxuries" and, even then, it appears to take thousands of years to become critical to society in general and, even now, it's still not considered a "desirable" trait for mate attraction...
Similarly; the next most intelligent creatures on earth, chimpanzees, even the other great apes, even the rest of the primates, are nothing more than a footnote in the book of earth's fauna, nor have they ever been terribly significant; and if humanity should vanish there is no possibility that their dominant place in the global ecology will be even partially assumed by apes, despite what the movies say.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
We have too many people in college / higher levels of the ivory tower some maybe very smart but at times in some fields when it comes down to real world work experience (out side of the ivory tower) they can be very dumb.
thats such a cliche, though. one could say that sometimes smart people can have tons of real world work experience, but when it comes down to analytical, theoretical understanding, they can be very dumb.
of course, that can be said of any two types of knowledge, besides ivory tower/real world. science/arts, for instance.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
Aren't there standardised tests for IQ? So if all the different groups take the same test with the same scoring system, doesn't that mean that an IQ of 100 in one group is also an IQ of 100 in another group?
Don't fornicate. Seriously, just don't do it.
My IQ is somewhere above 130, according to standardized tests. I am fully aware that IQ only measures very specific types of intelligence, and that I am probably both above and below average on other types of intelligence. For instance I absolutely suck at general small-talk. I love talking about things inside my sphere of interest, but the general "so, what's up?" kind of small talk completely flummoxes me.
I would say that being more informed of issues in the world, and being intelligent enough to know that there are better ways, definitely contributes to negatively to overall happiness. I mean, how can anyone be truly happy when there is war, hunger, injustice and exploitation in the world? How can anyone be content with the current situation when people are being mutilated and murdered by religious fanatics because they believe in different fairytales?
It's not that I never feel good emotions. I am moved to tears by particularly beautiful musical numbers, or sometimes movie scenes or books. I feel joy when I share good experiences with my friends and family. I am excited when I drive go-carts or ride my motorcycle. I am not a "*beep-boop* FEELINGS ARE ILLOGICAL" robot, I just don't think I have ever have felt true happiness, because I wonder and worry far too much.
Ignorance is bliss.
Eat the rich.
Source?
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
It is not enough to be a genius in this world, you must also have marketing skills. It is very rare for someone to 'find' you out of the blue and determine that you have skills that they need and can make use of. You have to sell your intelligence like any other product. You have to be able to actually solve problems show people how that is beneficial to them. I imagine the ones that can't market and don't reach their full potential from an intellectual perspective are very unhappy indeed.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
And the comment has been deleted; It seemed like it would've been funny to read.
I really hate way /. handles comment deletion. We now have these 2 orphaned comments without context - initially I thought you were both replying to http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7279815&cid=49502135 ...
Generally evolution isn't going to go on a per-decade rate, especially for humans that live for 50-100 years. That's something that happens over generations. It's hard to measure in the long-term because the standards of measure have also changed.
There's also the upbringing factor: development is not only genetics, it's tied to health and nutrition. Your average "poor" person might not have a great outlook in that regard due to malnutrition etc.
A lot of the fine article can be boiled down to "If you are so smart, why aren't you rich?"
I know a lot of musicians (classically trained flute players) who are happy to spend hours a day at practice even though they day job has little to do with music. To simply say that their life is wasted because they are not a super star is dopey.
I knew programmers at the large corporation I worked at who made good money but were as dumb as a stump. I suspect that they hated their jobs. Yes, these people were successful and had decent jobs -- unless you only define success as being a multi-millionaire.
Being smart gets you further than grit alone, in the same way that a kind word and a loaded gun gets you further than a kind word alone -- at least is some areas. ;-)
Parent may have lacked knowledge about the definition of IQ, but knowledge is not intelligence.
What a really bad pun such phrase, eh? If they are not schizophrenic frauds, it will be schizophrenics constantly complaining that they can *HEAR THE GENIUS GUY THINKING* and making matters impossible everywhere who... will make matters impossible for the genius guy, if they do not make matters impossible because the guy is REALLY, TRULY a genius and the schizophrenic will just JUMP onto The Idea(s) and make the money or snatch the opportunity displacing the genius guy, (as far as possible to deny they were *HEARING* the genius guy in their heads). Things are not that simple unfortunately, but if indeed a genius (or NORMAL...), brain potency will be noticed by the non genius brains (schizophrenics which you call normal), as interference! Or voices in the head or around I the air. So how do you expect to have a genius getting results from genius if all people go perturbed around and start deviating their behavior from normal? And the genius will have no privacy, either. And people identifying him correctly will have an interest to englobe to get the spilled benefits from (determining) the genius. And so on. See how things are now an uphill fight instead of reaping benefits from thinking better, or more, or however you define genius? If this is not evident it is because there is a (communications) continuum and **in the land of blind men the maimed one is king**, so... how many blind men are making noise promoting their maimed one as The Genius over the ones hiding a true Genius because if people know of him they would be deprived of him, or exposed as non genius THIEVES...??? And so on and on... to cover a few books on the analysis of NORMALITY, aka Genius by schizophrenics and common people. - DJB
Google the title for a perfect example of the headline's question.
Existential angst, frustration, and loneliness? How interesting...