/lit/ - Literature

>>13555277
It's garbage, for the simple reason that Murray conflates correlation with causation. See below.

>>13559995
Correlation =/= causation.

You seem to be implying that IQ determines GDP (and a number of other things), but the opposite seems more likely.

High GDP means high income from taxes, which in return results in more resources for childcare and schooling. I'd bet that good early education does more to raise IQ than high IQ does to raise GDP (or any other economic metric).

I'd also argue an even stronger point —that IQ has little to do with economic factors, and much more to do with the sort of community to which one belongs.

Keep in mind that philosophy majors have a higher average IQ than any engineering major, but make significantly less money long-term.

A civilization of philosophers would make much less money than a civilization of engineers, but it would produce a higher average IQ.

The person who truly cares about raising IQ, then, would abandon arguments from economics, and would instead push for allocating resources towards education that includes both the humanities and the hard sciences.

Note that these metrics also give us racial insights, since minority families typically have less access to educational resources (especially education in the humanities) than Asian and white families.

The solution is clearly education. You're putting the cart before the horse.

I'd say its more like iq envy. New ideas start at the top of the graph and trick down over the years. We will get relativistic learning plans in preschools soon, mark my words.

Philosophy

>tfw math physics double major too smart for literature unironically