/lit/ - Literature

>>18902058
God I hate modernity.

...literature?

>>18902058
We would lose all our janitors, most of our truck drivers, most construction guys, society generally would just grind to a halt.

You got it backwards. Everyone with an IQ over 100 should be purged.

You really want 105-120 gone

>chuu resorts to increasingly more extreme tactics in her quest to save the planet

For one, do you really need an argument for why it's bad to create a slippery slope...which permit society to purge whole strata of people? Then what? Do you also need an argument and literary references for why being evil is a bad idea?

>>18902058
>IQ
shit criteria
I'd select all people who enjoy modern rap/pop music with autotune in it. just play a sample and if they smile or nod their head or do not mind it, any reaction but disgust and you drop them into the lava pit

>>18902058
Below 70 and between 100 and 120 are the problem demographics.

>>18902058
A good argument? How about nobody wants that but you, retard.

>>18902113
Midwits are the hidden menace to society, hindered only by the 130+ aristocracy corralling them. But once the midwits rebel, all retardation breaks loose, their numeracy and above average intelligence facilitates IQ envy which lashes out via egalitarian crab in a barrel cannibalistic rituals. Resulting in the demise of the underclasses and overclasses.

>>18902058
100 is literally just the relative median. Half the population will always be 100. If you got rid of everyone who was sub 80 the median would just shift and there will always be people sub 80.

>>18902179
your the only person in this thread who wood survive the first cut. congrats.

>>18902179
Op is a midwit, he doesn't think that far ahead.

I am high IQ but a failure and a nervous wreck. I should be purged.

>>18902058
>What's a good argument against purging everyone who fails to meet a 100 IQ baseline?
murder is bad m'kay

>>18902179
A large part of neo/lit/ carries this belief that IQ is some magical measurement that shows the complexity of thinking or some such thing. In reality, however, it's just normal distribution after some arbitrary test made up by dr.whoeverthefuck. Ironically enough the only reliable indication of low intelligence is that the person thinks IQ-tests measure something meaningful.

>>18902324
Please direct my attention to a single noteworthy physicist, mathematician, philosopher, or leader in some other similar intellectual field with a tested IQ of 70 or below. Below 70 is the bottom 2% of the distribution, and 130 the top 2%. If IQ is completely arbitrary, the quantity of intellectuals in both sets should be equivalent.

100 IQ is at any time the average IQ. If you kill everyone with 100 IQ. Then by definition half of people would still have less than 100 IQ since IQ points is calibrated to that 100 IQ always is the average.

So your plan is to continue killing the dumbest half of the population until there is only one person left? (Who by definition would have 100 IQ)

Or just kill everyone with lower than 100 IQ at this exact moment?

>>18902401
Since IQ-tests are competitive an higher general competency would obviously equate to a higher score on average. This general competency exhibited by educated individuals is of course not arbitrary, but the test-score still is; because while what you say is true, there are also a large amounts of high-scoring individuals which are, in seemingly every respect of their life, complete fucking idiots. Smart people score high, but also retards sometimes score high, which gives the score a strangeness since these high-scoring retards are factored into the normal distribution. You see the problem don't you? You can't use this anectdotal evidence that highly educated people score highly without shifting the measured criteria.

If we are to use your thinking we might as well point out that highly educated people are also very rarely overweight, as compared to the general population. And according to your logic this would prove that being skinny makes you highly educated, and furhtermore that the skinnier you are, the more educated you are you see how dumb this is right? The test doesn't have any tangible, measurable, relation to the qualities for which is purportedly tests. And while I can't send you the name of some Low-scoring physicist or whatever, I encourage you to instead go to Facebook or some other social media and look up a mensa-group. Then take a look at the group members and you will be suprised as to what bumbling fools are able to score high on IQ-tests.

>>18902058
the bible

>>18902418
THat's called selective breeding.

>>18902058

>>18902401
Please direct me to a noteworthy physicist, mathematician, philosopher, or leader in some other similar intellectual field who was not reliant on the labour of the sub-100 IQ and the society they sustained and propagated.

>>18902084
Based
>>18902086
Extremely based

>>18902584
IQ measures a person's analytical problem solving ability, generally. A tool can certainly be neglected or misused by those that have it, but it also cannot be used productively by those that don't. People with tested low IQ's do not have intellectual potential. This is extremely obvious. I sympathize with your point on high-IQ idiots, but their existence doesn't invalidate the premise of the test. These people simply poorly utilize the ability that they have.

>>18902632
I'm not OP, I'm just taking issue with the post I responded to saying IQ is arbitrary when it isn't. Middling intelligent people are useful.

>>18902058
Love these threads lately:
> something wrong
> what is a good argument it is wrong?

There's none, except the Bible.

>>18902664
>IQ measures a person's analytical problem solving ability
No it doesn't, that's the whole point. It doesn't measure anything that can be said to be substantial, which is to say, anything that is real. It's an imaginary measurement of an imaginary property – double whammy. You just believe it does measure something because you've heard people spout it as truth a million times. THINK DUDE, THINK. You are just parroting distinctions that mean nothing.

>>18902058
article 2

>>18902058
Because it's not politically feasible. Societies that try to "purge the inferior" don't last long.

It's also a slippery slope and you could ask why not draw the line at 110 IQ or 130 IQ?

>>18902699
>The ability to solve complex problems is not real and cannot be measured
Im'a go to bed.

>>18902058
having a three digit IQ isn't everything. in fact it could be argued that some more intelligent people are actually a bigger liability or threat to the natural world and balance of things. average people can live modestly, and achieve self sufficiency and reliance. whereas a triple digit IQ individual can end up being a psycho / sociopath bent on dominating others.

and honestly theres a lot of triple digit IQ people floating around who don't really contribute anything worthwhile to society or to the true advancement of mankind. it's not what you got but what you do with it... id rather have a good and honest two digit IQ farmer as a neighbor than a psychotic genius engineer.

Ted Kaczynski was right about a lot of things and he had a very high IQ. but, the people he was calling out, those driving industrialization were also intelligent. you don't need to be a genius to live in a sustainable and healthy way. may be hard for someone with a 100 IQ to wrap their small minds around, but what you believe to be progress or advancement is actually degeneracy and destructive. safe to say the world's greatest problems were caused by some of the brightest and most driven individuals.

>>18902736
It can be measured up to some point (~120, SD=15) but then it decorrelates as problem solving becomes domain-specific. That being said, IQ is not a fixed trait anyway.

>>18902098
>t.

>>18902098

>>18902750
low IQ post

Caring about IQ in a self-masturbatory way is just a pseuds’ internal justification for his having no goals, contributing nothing to society, and doing nothing to improve themselves. People on here will circle jerk about it here to fulfill their self-esteem needs and to deal with the dissonance felt when they fail at something for the first time, because they want to view themselves as some sort of genius who doesn’t need to try at anything.
>I’m insignificant in all areas of life, but at least muh online IQ test said I’m le smarty pants!!
Not only is this pathetic but it will also trap average iq people into thinking they shouldn’t even try at life; it’s not unlike the incel contributing to his pathetic existence by condemning all attempts at self improvement because of genetics.

Working to become the best possible version of yourself is the smartest thing you can do.

>>18902915
I agree with you but I really don't see it done that often here. I would say IQ-voodoo is much more popular among normies than on lit.

>>18902324
This. IQ is a terrible measurement.

>>18902915
Who exactly is this post aimed at? Do you have personal issues?

>>18902948
What are some better measurements?

>>18902058
Two questions. How is your post /lit/ related? Why set the baseline at 100 and not 130? Fucking brainlet who just scored 101 in his first IQ test had a funny idea. You are an embarassment that even your mother won't find the guts to confess.

EQ is the really op one

>>18902082
This. Machines need cogs you autistic fuck

>>18902082
>>18902967
Smart people can't be janitors? Do you call a professional janitor every time you need to do something in your house?

>>18902058
1. You and your entire family would fail to pass the test.
2. IQ doesn't matter.

>>18902058
Eugenics and other Evils - Chesterton

>>18903198
chesterton was a top boy

>>18902058
Go back to /sci/ with this retarded crap

>>18902082
you forgot to mention OP

>>18902058
Newfag here, 4chan is a bunch of losers lol

What is it that makes people SEETHE so much when you mention IQ?
They don't put forth any arguments, they just get angry and defensive, as if you insulted them personally.

>IQ
Pseudoscience

>>18902324
Predicts
For
Outcomes

>>18903464
More like cringe science

>>18902767
I just cut my hair and now I look like the chud meme
Oh no no no

>>18902976
Smart people are rarely happy being janitors, at least for an extended period of time.

>>18903502
so are most people in general

>>18902215
>I am high IQ but a failure and a nervous wreck
Break your wifi router, star lifting weights, read Plutarch, and take xanax

>>18902082
Exactly. Robotics needs to get up to speed first, which it won’t do for decades if not centuries, and civilization will probably collapse before then.

>>18902215
Same but I’ll purge myself in a few years if I run out of money.

>>18903502
You think dumb people are happy working menial jobs? No, they work because they have to. Smart people would too, just the same.

>>18903565
>>18903520
Many people live for their jobs and love going to work their mediocre job every day. Not everyone's a disaffected academic like you, kid

>>18903520
>>18903565
The difference is most people of reasonable intelligence would be glad to have work that challenges them intellectually on some level and puts whatever talents they have to use. Brainlets of course can still have talents they enjoy applying, but most simply don't give a shit and are happy that they get paid enough to get drunk with their boys and watch the game.