/sci/ - Science & Math

>doesn't believe in gender spectrum
>believes in iq

That's exactly right. But the thing is you ARE constantly increasing iq practice because this is something everyone is always using in every day life. Unless you are in some sort of depressive state for all of your life, you iq should be pretty sharpened to its highest potential.

Jordan Peterson is a clown, I wouldn't take anything he says seriously.

>>10099505
I don't know. I've always been called a smart kid while I wasn't really studying hard until high school, I was just reading a lot about things that I thought were interesting. During my high school I realized that I was knowledgeable but wasn't smart enough to satisfy my ego and this was when I started practicing hard, quit video games, "bashed" math problems. I am really insecure about my problem solving skills, especially when it comes to ad-hoc stuff. To improve this situation I tried solving as many problems as I could, i.e. having constant practice.
The thing is, no matter how many time I spend solving problems, I don't feel I am on some new level. Yes, I've learned some heavy toolkit, memorized different strategies, became good at noticing many patterns just by getting used to them through numerous problems. Nonetheless, when it comes to coming up with something original, novel, I am still just as bad as I was many years ago. I believe ad-hoc problems is something when raw IQ matters as you don't have all the developed-by-someone machinery at your disposal.

For long time I really wondered what the hell is wrong with me as I somewhat fell for the infinite self-improvement meme. It was quite eye-opening when learned about heredity of intelligence. Now that I realize that intelligence is more or less static provided you don't bash your head, eat healty, have enough sleep, wasn't raped by your parents, etc., everything makes perfect sense.

>>10099486
There are some things that are very difficult to change. Even at birth, some brains simply work better than others--speed, accuracy, recall, parallelism, etc. Now, you CAN get better at abstractions for better IQ test scores, but you're also going to be restricted by your ability to consistently see potential lines of thinking for each problem, choose the right path, find the right answer, and do it all quickly. Then there's all the "meta" on top of that which comes out through your ability to prepare and effectively assess how to optimize your time across the set of problems. A LOT of people just won't be able to do it very well--they quickly hit a wall. If you can, then great, you already have a decent IQ, and can go a bit further before hitting your particular wall.

Experience, Wisdom and Confidence trump IQ
Everytime.

>>10099520
Ok. How do you think we should we take it?

>>10099566
I had a fucked up childhood and taking an antidepressant seemed to "improve" my IQ or at least my focus. It's like before I had a brain fog and brain rush but that fixed it a lot.

Best forum :


minurl.ru/yG2nK

>>10099486
you can improve crystallized intelligence but fluid intelligence peaks around your early 20s.

>>10099486
Eat fat. Your brain consists mostly of cholesterol so getting more of it promotes your brain to grow.

Isn't IQ just a measure of how fast you can think and recall information?

>>10099614
Are you saying fat people have higher IQs?

>>10099581
People often misunderstand this. IQ is used as a predictor for traits like these, and it is a really good predictor for them. The problem comes though; when you look at IQ for groups of our population and conflate correlation and causation. High IQ does not say anything about your biology, biology and environment always and necessarily go together to make a phenotype. If women are measured to have a lower IQ over a population, all this means is that women's phenotypic outcomes turn out worse in our current society.

>>10099582
Just don't take it at all.

>>10099608
I'm sure depression/neuro-inflammation can decrease fluid IQ. At least in my case.

>>10099486
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2901267-X

The posterior hippocampi of average-IQ adult subjects who passed the difficult Knowledge exam for London taxicab drivers showed significant enlargement from before they began studying. The posterior hippocampus is associated with memory and spatial navigation, both of which are strongly correlated with g. Similar effects not observed in the control group or in those who failed. Pic related.

This was actually a repeat experiment with a larger sample size (n=88), so the results are both predictable and reproducible. Pilot study is in the citations.
All subjects were fully-grown adults age 30+, so "normal" brain development had already run its course.

Thus we have hard, reproducible, undeniable evidence that the brain PHYSICALLY restructures itself in response to focused training, even in old age. Intelligence, being a manifestation of the brain's organization, is malleable.

>>10099566
Looks like we got a smart but lazy procrastinator here. Probably an ENTP as well if you are into Memebti.
Here's the deal lad:
Your verbal IQ is much higher than your other scores. You can pick up knowledge extremely fast, have a quick wit, are an ideas guy and tend to be a bit narcissistic. Always had problems connecting with people outside of your family. You probably enjoy doing some form of writing. You have a large vocabulary. People always like you when they first meet you but grow distant over time.

>>10099659
Drugs, environment, and mental issues can all negatively impact potential fluid IQ and prevent one from reaching their potential peak.

>>10099619
There's fluid IQ and crystallized IQ.

>>10099672
But does that mean that IQ increased with the brain? It seems so, but you need proof that it generalizes across different tasks.

>>10099678
Jesus dude delete this. (I'm not even the guy you're responding to)

>>10099678
Are you really replying to the right person though? What you've written describes me quite well for the most part but I am definitely not lazy. In my post I have mentioned that I've studied hard and tried to solve as many problems as I could. That's not how you define 'smart but lazy'. As for verbal IQ, I believe it's one of my strong points, but I could have made many mistakes I don't even see as there wasn't really an opportunity for me to study English after graduating from HS (I am from some Eastern Europe fuckland).

>>10099486
I believe that IQ is like basketball. Are you going to be a NBA player if you're not tall? Probably not but it doesn't mean you can't improve as a player and crush everyone in a 1v1 or 3v3 in the streets, or even stop you from playing professionally. If you like doing something where it helps having a high IQ, persistence will make you good in the end

>>10099638
> If women are measured to have a lower IQ over a population, all this means is that women's phenotypic outcomes turn out worse in our current society.
Women - and men - have never had a better opportunity to educate themselves. Ergo, under-representation of women at the extremes of the IQ-spectrum is not indicative of a failure on society´s part.

>>10099672
>Thus we have hard, reproducible, undeniable evidence that the brain PHYSICALLY restructures itself in response to focused training, even in old age.
In other words: studying a route will make you learn that route.
>Intelligence, being a manifestation of the brain's organization, is malleable.
Using one dollar words will not make your claims any more correct, imbecile.

>>10099719
> If you like doing something where it helps having a high IQ, persistence will make you good in the end
That´s not what empirical evidence says, though. You can´t teach calculus to a 80 IQ barely-literate, borderline retarded person - any amount of hours invested into such activity is wasted.

Do you really believe the propaganda you peddle?

You must seek the PHENOTYPE. There you will find a higher iq.

Jordan Peterson is daddy

>>10099722
Your logic is totally flawed. Just because they are both at the highest they have ever been, does not mean that they are both at their peak or equal, this does not follow at all.

>>10099729
>You can´t teach calculus to a 80 IQ barely-literate, borderline retarded person - any amount of hours invested into such activity is wasted.

You first raise his IQ, then teach him.

>>10099520
t. Didn't wash his dick

You might not be able to increase IQ but, still according to him, you can become better at a specific subdomain of IQ. If you train with maths, you become better at it. Which might increase you skills in other, related domains.

Won't increase the number of consecutive digits you can memorize but, desu, who gives a shit? Gotta play the hand you've been dealt.

>>10099486
Increasing IQ is simple - just take lots of IQ tests. You get better at them just as you do with any game involving puzzle solving in memory. (Which is why they are only really valid when taken once annually.)

Increasing your actual *intelligence* is another thing, but certainly you can (and inevitably will) specialize towards certain tasks, and you'll likely always be better at those tasks, than anyone with even double your IQ, who doesn't have the same extensive experience with them.

I mean, sure, Jonas Neubauer may have gotten overthrown by a young Joseph Saelee, but even Garry kasparov, with his 190IQ, ain't touching either of them at Tetris.

>>10099826
>but even Garry kasparov, with his 190IQ

This is just nonsense someone made up. The number is not based on any IQ test result, and there doesn't even exist any respected IQ test out there that measures up to 190 IQ (assuming SD 15). This is similarly to how both Einstein and Stephen Hawking supposedly had IQ of "160" even though neither of them ever took an IQ test in their lives.

>>10099914
>taking that number literally

>>10099634
not saturated or processed shit. eat actual animal fat, food for brain.

There are lots of ways to rewire your brain, we just don't know how to wire it in ways we can deem practical or insightful

The most basic method is to have a child be well rounded in physical activity, creative activity, and social activity, and that's just because we assume something will click

>>10099486
yes, you definitely can
just kill everyone smarter than you
if not including murder, then for your iq to increase, someone else's has to decrease (in your age group_
so can your iq decrease due to your life habits?
my dad used to be quiet clever in his day, but all he seems to do now is watch big bang theory
so to answer your question, yes. my dad is a genius now

>>10099634
Ingested animal fat and fat metabolized from sugar are 2 completely different things.

>>10099672
well ye of course, how else does the brain store information? there has to be some physical change after remembering something
are the cab drivers actually better at problem solving on unrelated topics?

>>10099672
>Conflating neuroplasticity with IQ again.
Cringe

>>10099486
No
>>10099496
IQ has neurobiological, genetic correlates

>>10100735
So does gender spectrum.

>>10100745
Gender spectrum is just homosexuality and pathological behavior, g factor covers significantly more of human behavior and isn’t predicated on changing one’s biology, denying it or schizophrenic disassociation. they’re not even remotely the same thing. Trans people are homosexual schizophrenics, iq is a more all encompassing measure of most of human behavior, not simply sexual behavior or presenting of sexual preferences. Fuck off

>>10100606
No.

I HATE that I am low IQ (115).

I HATE that I wasn't born into a jewish family.

I HATE that I will never achieve success because I am a low IQ shitskin.

I don't care about money. All I want to do is dedicate my life to mathematics, but because of my low IQ, I will never achieve anything. It's all pointless in the end.

>>10100752
Where did you take an IQ test?

>>10099719
I think comparing IQ to muscle mass is more appropriate than height

>>10100747
None of what you said refutes my point. The only thing you made clear is that you attach a negative value judgement to specific neurobiological phenomena with genetic correlates.

>>10100771
I think Dick size would be better and biasly correlate big dick energy

>>10100779
Do we have any literature on correlation between big dick energy and actual dick measurements?

if you are a healthy human being with no defeciencies then no, not really

if you alleviate certain conditions, such as anaemia, adhd (mostlyish) and other mental illness you might see some improvement
anything else is marginal and depends on the individual
try dual-n-back and nicotine?

>>10100752
Try being 110 and working in retail. You don't know how good you have it, buddy.

>>10100783
It’s still under testing today

>>10100787
More like adderall. I look back on the stuff I used to do with computers and I have no idea how I did some things. Feel like I’m back to being retarded

>>10100791
Where did u take an IQ test?

>>10100795
i'm just recommending the light stuff here anon
adderall is also highly dependant on the individual and really only helps if one has adhd or adhd like symptoms

god i want some venlafaxine or wellbutrin

>>10100800
Ya I have to say I don’t condone it especially if you’re growing. It took a toll on my body because I couldn’t eat enough

I dont think I have adhd but it really seemed to clear my head and make me think fast. Maybe from the high dopamine

>>10100765
>>10100798
http://test.mensa.no/

what did you get?

>>10100853
117 so -200 for being easier and I’m a negative retard

>>10100853
Where do You take the legit one tho

>>10099486
Its an objective fact that your score on an IQ test will be different depending on circumstances and how you are raised. Someone with 12 years of standard western schooling will do better than a hypothetical version of themselves who is literate but was never educated-who was never trained to operate in that kind of testing context and who wasn't forced to do mental work for twelve years.

We can see this in the fact that the 'average' IQ is actually raising substantially generation after generation, we just don't notice is because the current average is always adjusted to 100. There's no way we're all biologically morphing in unison that fast, therefore IQ is not hardwired at birth.

You'd get further if you were talking about max IQ, but its almost a truism that you must have a max IQ because the brain is a finite system. That doesn't mean you're ever likely to reach it, or that there's a narrow band between your lowest and highest potential IQ's. The fact that we're operating with the same hardware as medieval peasants who probably would have tested somewhere in the seventies yet are now far, far above that is testament to a wide band of potential, and the capacity to develop your IQ to a great degree.

>>10100912
consider roping.

>>10100773
>>10100745
Gender, as now understood by the woke masses, has been reduced to a purely linguistic construct throughout its evolution as a concept, and its purpose has been defeated by its own creators in a series of poorly coordinated attempts to patch over dissonances in the theory.
For something with a penis to call itself a woman is a blatant contradiction in the old theory of gender. A strategic change had to be made to smooth this out: the sex/gender schism was introduced and "gender" was redefined to denote a sort of internal condition. It may have a penis and broad shoulders, but INSIDE, it is a woman. The public understanding of this change was accompanied with images of biological men with long hair and make-up wearing dresses and bras. If it looks like a woman, and says it's a woman, why not just say it is?
Merits of the claims aside, this is a logically coherent idea. At the very least, it is easily possible to imagine a world in which this holds true. However, the second and third waves of feminism introduced a new schism: one between gender and gender expression. The feminists rejected societal gender norms and asserted the ability of men and women to wear and do whatever they please: women can have short hair, wear jeans, and drink beer, while men can wear pearl necklaces, nail polish, and play with dolls. Feminine men are still men, and masculine women are still women. The assertion was that a person can manifest as anything, regardless of gender. This is also a logically coherent assertion.
1/2

>>10100745
>>10100773
The public, however, attempting to hold the values of both the feminist and transgender movements in the name of compassion, have tied themselves up in a knot. What is left of gender, given these two principals? What does it mean to "be" a woman if a woman can "be" anything? What does it mean to "feel like" a man if a man is capable of "feeling like" anything? Why are we so sure members of the same gender experience anything similar in their conscious experiences at all? Gender isn't the way you dress and it isn't the way you act. It is now a hypothetical non-element, meaningfully existing only in a sentence like "what gender are you?" It is a word held in the head, ready to be spat out when the appropriate context arises. The transgender movement is a meme in the truest sense of the word, and one that has been transmitted through a very stupid medium
2/2

>>10099486
The best way to increase IQ is by preventing damage in key developmental stages.

Learn from this hell and ensure your children are as gods among men. If there's anything left it might well be my children who tear the structure down. Maybe they'll even find a better way.

As for yourself the name of the game is oxidative and nitrosative stress. This is the foundation self improvement must be built on, eliminating sources of the former and optimizing diet and endogenous antioxidant systems. Other systems can be tweaked as well. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors are popular, but certainly not magic.

Metacognition and low level architectural re-engineering of the mind is a necessary approach, but it's ultimately near worthless if your health is poor or failing on other fronts. This is what I did while my body was withering and crumbling away, and I might write a long documenting detailing what I did, how I did it, some of the things that are possible, what ends I met, and the generalized theory of how it works.

This world has taken nearly everything, inside and out. What it didn't take I've thrown away.

>>10100916
Just retook it and got a 138
99.4 percentile

I am confident I’m peaking genius lvl. Praise kek

>>10099582
Like >>10099648 says, don't take it at all. He's not a contemporary super genius philosopher. He's a phony that reads texts and translates it to normiespeak. You should resort to the source material instead of him. If, by any chance, you take anything of his stuff, just bear in mind that he has an agenda and he's enslaving all of his followers by having them adopt his agenda subconsciously.

>>10100973
>retook
It doesn't count since you remember the items from the last time you took it.

>>10100982
>doesn’t count because I retook it

No, it doesn’t count because it’s a stupid test online. Remembering the answers would be kinda hard I just knew what I was doing the second time

>>10100989
>not knowing what to do in an IQ test.
>stupid test online that compares your scores to those who have taken that same stupid test online before
I understand that you're saying that it's invalid because it's online, but you're comparing your score to that of other autists and it's also from an official mensa website.
Also, since it's the second time around within the same 2-hr span, you'd remember the questions and answers regardless of whether or not you wanted to remember them.

Now I'm sure that the first score was more in you area...

>>10101004
> not knowing how to take an iq test
Never done it before and you obviously have never done it either because they’re not questions dumbass. It’s literally different shapes and I don’t have a photographic memory

>comparing answers
If you read the thread at all you’d see we’re talking about how inaccurate they were. I was obviously be sarcastic when I said peaking genius praise kek. Obviously I don’t have the IQ is Einstein but I took it for fun

>>10099566
I have the same problem. I can study for hours and complete all the practice sets, and score at the top of my class. But I have trouble grasping something new. In fact, whenever I'm faced with a problem after first learning the material, I get it wrong 99% of the time. It is only after hundreds of problems and reading supplementary material that I master the material (unlike some of my peers who only require a couple of problems + textbook reading).

I also lack problem-solving skills, but I'm able to think critically and analyze information at a deeper level. I can connect the dots and formulate something great. I've accepted that IQ is unchanging, and one should utilize other areas of his skill and knowledge to succeed in the academic setting.

>>10100913
Psychologist, costs around 120$ here. It's called the WAIS-IV. That's the "real" IQ test which thy administer to people who sustain brain damage in accidents with hopes of getting it back to normal levels.

>>10101224
psychbro, would it be useful to take the wais instead of the woodcock johnson iv (sibling administered it for his phd program)

people score differently on tests and all and i'm wondering if the cieling effect would boost my score, so to speak

t. hit 4 cielings in the verbal iq section but ended up with a score of ~114

>>10099486
he's full of shit

>>10099813
>you can become better at a specific subdomain of IQ.
so basically if you want to increase IQ, train yourself in every subdomain

>>10099486
Oh sure, you definitely can. IQ is a delicate balance between the efficiency of your thoughts, and the accuracy of your focus. You can inch this higher and higher but generally like other things you do most of your development during childhood, and so your IQ generally will also be part of who you are, since anyong without distractions should be able to look at a tuned IQ test and as a healthy human being score super high on it. As for why this doesn't happen, it is due to the double edge of thinking. Don't think about a pattern before you, just look at it.

>>10101245
>generally like other things you do most of your development during childhood
>if you got no willpower

>>10101235
I'm a data scientist, took an interest in psychology because of AI problems.

I have no idea about other tests but supposedly the dual N back software can increase the working memory index.

>>10101252
way ahead of you pal

you think with /sci/'s iq worship there'd be a testing psych or two around

>>10101271
we worship IQ, but we don't actually understand or even try to understand what IQ actually is, it's a sacred mystery of our common lodge

>>10099768
There is no method for raising one´s IQ.

>>10101323
I'm not too sure that neuroplasticity and neurogenesis can be completely decoupled from IQ as Juden Peterstein seems to imply.

>>10100914
>We can see this in the fact that the 'average' IQ is actually raising substantially generation after generation
This hasn´t been the case in over 30 years.
>The fact that we're operating with the same hardware as medieval peasants who probably would have tested somewhere in the seventies yet are now far, far above that
Do you have any evidence for these astounding claims?
> is testament to a wide band of potential, and the capacity to develop your IQ to a great degree.
You´re not going to become a mathematician if you struggle with math in middle school, period. Ideologically motivated communist pseudoscience will not change such basic facts.

>>10101041
>Never done it before and you obviously have never done it either because they’re not questions dumbass.
They are, quite literally, questions. You are prompted to give an answer to a problem - that is quite literally a question.

>It’s literally different shapes
Exactly
>and I don’t have a photographic memory
You don´t need a photographic memory to subconsciously remember what the answer to a question regarding a certain pattern may or may not look like.
>Obviously I don’t have the IQ is Einstein
Obviously not.

>>10101327
>I'm not too sure that neuroplasticity and neurogenesis can be completely decoupled from IQ
It doesn´t need to be, you strawmanning imbecile. One fact still remains true: significant (>0.5 SD:s) increases in IQ are not possible with "brain training" or whatever gobbledeegook you science-deniers desperately cling onto to deflect from your feelings of intellectual inferiority.

>>10101337
Nobody made that claim that you can boost IQ with various games.

Swimming boosted my IQ, whether you like it or not (it kickstarted neurogenesis most likely).

Young adults who exercise get higher IQ scores, period.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091202101751.htm

Neuroplasticity can boost IQ, that's a fact and logical if you view IQ as having biological substrata.

Meditation can also boost IQ, that does not mean that you will become Einstein but you can go from X to X + 20*X/100.

Both biology and external stressors play a role. That is to be expected, right?

>>10101335
Still back to the original point, how the fuck was I comparing my test results when someone asked me what I got.

Fuck off shill! Go back to /Pol/ where muh Dick muh nigger

Fuck your ass faggot!

>>10101353
People with IQ>81 use %

>>10101381
I had no idea that operator existed, thanks!

>>10099678
Um... so, any tips?

Because that's me 100%

>>10101387
Surround yourself with people you like. Go exercise for the IQ and focus benefits.

That's it.

>>10100853
What would 133 on this test be on a real IQ test?

>>10099486
Do some basic research on the topic you ape.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence

>>10100977
>He's a phony
Disagree with the guy as much as you want. Calling him fake is demonstrably false.

>>10101613
Block reasoning is only one small part of the whole IQ picture.

See:
>>10101224

>>10101653
This model is partly, but majorly, incorrect. Crystallization is actually an active process enforced by some sort of "superstructure" which contains a fairly fine grained model of the brain's global state, prediction, and context. It biases accordingly, priming the "I" you experience and see the lens of, down certain pathways more quickly, controls associations and what memories and thoughts are accessible, and it organizes information stored very close to regions governing motor output (trauma memory).

I believe we live our everyday lives on a lower level controlled automatically by this structure. If you have amnesia barriers, it knows all the things you don't want to see, and it knows why. This system is the basis of dissociative and alter systems, with acute or repeated trauma pushing it into a range of compartmentalization that doesn't typically occur.

It's possible to become this superstructure, or access its level in some way. When you do so, all the hard structures you thought existed in yourself fall away. The "crystals" are much smaller than you thought and you can become entirely fluid, becoming anything you've been or have the means to be. I do not believe in behavioral or logical crystallization. Iterative mental deconstruction is always possible, but the incentive is not always present. Accessing the superstructure allows near instant shifts. The crystals are more like small rocks suspended in solution, with a force that generally holds them tightly together. This force is an active one, to an extent.

>>10101718
>Iterative mental deconstruction
Recursive rather.

>>10100924
>>10100926
The real question is why does it matter so much to you?

>>10101330
>Do you have any evidence for these astounding claims?

How the fuck are you invested enough in the issue to start arguing about it if you aren't aware of something this well established:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

>>10101330
>This hasn´t been the case in over 30 years.

One that's completely untrue and a complete exaggeration and misrepresentation of scattered bits of data, but it's irrelevant. If you admit it ever happened you've already admitted IQ is mutable and substantially influenced by environmental factors. The initial point was whether IQ is determined at birth

?Do you have any evidence for these astounding claims?

People with lower education and no exposure to years abstract, mentally taxing work do worse on IQ tests. Do you actually think if I dropped you in a French village in the 1500s you'd be amidst a people an average modern IQ of 100? 90?

>You´re not going to become a mathematician if you struggle with math in middle school, period. Ideologically motivated communist pseudoscience will not change such basic facts.

You've now both gone off the deep end of drooling retardation, and proven that you don't even understand what's being talked about or claimed.

The issue is whether IQ is mutable, not whether one imagined individual has approached the peak of their mathematical ability within their context, circumstances, and the limits of the modern schooling they have access to.

>>10101330

>This hasn´t been the case in over 30 years.

One, that's completely untrue and a massive exaggeration and misrepresentation of scattered bits of data, but it's irrelevant. If you admit it ever happened you've already admitted IQ is mutable and substantially influenced by environmental factors. The initial point was whether IQ is determined at birth

>Do you have any evidence for these astounding claims?

People with lower education and no exposure to years abstract, mentally taxing work do worse on IQ tests. Do you actually think if I dropped you in a French village in the 1500s you'd be amidst a people with an average modern IQ of 100? 90?

>You´re not going to become a mathematician if you struggle with math in middle school, period. Ideologically motivated communist pseudoscience will not change such basic facts.

You've now both gone off the deep end of drooling retardation, and proven that you don't even understand what's being talked about or claimed.

The issue is whether IQ is mutable, not whether one imagined individual has approached the peak of their mathematical ability within their context, circumstances, and the limits of the modern schooling they have access to.

A special training program in children will yield a more than a S:D. IQ increase:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/iq-boot-camp/201606/new-evidence-way-raise-your-iq

>>10101868
More than 0.5 of a s.d. increase*

>>10101335
Shut up you fucking faggot!! He asked me what I got I wasn’t comparing so Fuck your ass shill!

>>10100773
You're too stupid and mendacious to argue with. Recapping: gender has neurobiological correlates, they are less significant and important to cognitive function than g which is related to a massive number of genes and cortices in the brain. Gender is also really a misnomer as what you are getting at only makes any sense outside the context of the default "cisgender" normal sexed person, we wouldn't really agglomerate all of that person's understandings of their own sexuality, social status, and differentiation from the opposite sex as being some coherent trait or concept, in fact gender as a concept suffers from this heavily. Sexual behavior is not easy to separate from other processes. Conversely g factor accounts for an astonishingly wide array of behaviors and cognitive functions and is linked to an absurd number of genes and cortices in the brain. Therefore to equivocate them is like trying to equivocate taste in music with g or the very specific motricity of the pinkie-toe with g, its retarded and specious at best (outright deceitful and as I said, mendacious, at worst). So, there is no point in listening to anything you have to say at all. You're an imbecile, you're an insipid and trivial thinker, you have absolutely no interest in the idea of g or iq or its neurobiology or genetic origins, you just want to make a disgusting, boring and incorrect (scientifically illiterate) point about gender which is a midwit and frankly useless concept to begin with. Sexual expression, presenting as a sex etc are interrelated with other behaviors but nowhere near as important or interdependent as general intelligence and cognitive function. What does gender have to do with working memory, processing speed, taste, abstract thought, creativity, musical talent? Very little. It certainly is affected by those things as a sub-process which is subordinate to them but is about as significant as an endless number of other sub-processes in the brain and genome.

>>10101659
Ok, let's see your demonstration


Let me point one thing he spews that is false. He says socialism is an illusion because the divide between the rich and poor is a part of nature and one can not change that and the ratio is always constant.
I won't argue about the socialism but he is acting like the Gini index does not exist. Inequality is ever-changing. That shows he either lacks the basic understanding of economics or he is a charlatan. Pick one.

>>10099486
>Is there really no way to increase IQ
Of course you can. Go learn advanced math and you will be smarter and wiser.

>Peterson
He never developed mathematical maturity nor did he ever examine anyone who has.

>>10102343
Is math really the biggest part of determining IQ?

>>10099486
>Is there really no way to increase IQ?
IQ is relative so all you have to do is either
>a) kill off everyone smarter than you or drug them stupid
>b) fuck your sister and have litter of incest daughters, then fuck your daughters and create a fuckton of downs babies.

>>10102349
Yes.

>>10102352
(Not true by the way)

>>10103108
IQ is not an objective measure of anything. It's literally percentiles being feed through an inverse error function with [math]\mu=100, ~ \sigma=15[/math].