/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9905357]

what is the evolutionary advantage of having high iq?

[Anonymous No.9905366]

There isn't one. For women at least.

[Anonymous No.9905370]

>>9905357
It's far better to be of average iq evolution-wise. Retards are annoying, and due to pride/arrogance most people don't like ideas that they didn't come up with, and they like the people who came up with them even less.

[Anonymous No.9905388]

>>9905357
Being able to outsmart animals, smart predators and other humans to gain food/shelter etc. or to survive.

[Anonymous No.9905390]

>>9905366
Ummm what cunt? High iq male breeds with high iq female = smart kid

[Anonymous No.9905414]

>>9905390
>High iq male breeds with high iq female
Raising an autistic kid that is another man's genetic offspring is not an evolutionary advantage, anon. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[Anonymous No.9905454]

Because intelligence is a function of doubt, highly intelligent people experience the Dunning-Kruger effect powerfully. Those with the greatest mental prowess are often almost disabled by the intricacy and complexity of something like water in a bathtub (see the Navier–Stokes equations - Wikipedia) whereas the rest of us are functionally ignorant enough to ‘get on with life’. Hence, the smartest people naturally doubt their own abilities by virtue of their capacity to appreciate ‘known and unknown unknowns’ and their ironic error is often reinforced by the ease with which their possibly less cerebral colleagues perform functions they thought impossibly complicated.

For example, I still struggle with counting. Seriously. I am not sure that I can ever believe that 1+1=2 since it seems almost irreconcilable to my sense of logic that two discrete entities (ones) might be magically made identical (despite clearly occupying different positions in the very short series 1+1…) such that some new number can be constructed from them and yet share none of their essential properties. How is it that the (square root of a thing) added to (itself) produces (something) whose own square root is not the (original square root whose addition to itself produced [thing two])? Seriously, that's annoying. The square root of one is one and the square of one is also one such that the square root of two can be logically described as the square root of two squares whose products are themselves. As you see, language can't even contain what I am trying to describe. I am forced to name (or enumerate) the entity I am trying to prove non-existent by virtue of the attempt at disproof. If such a linguistic proof (using typographical number theory) of the hypothesis ‘two does not exist since it cannot be logically constructed’ is rendered impossible by such forced enumeration (naming) then how is it that you get the gist of what I am unable to say?

[Anonymous No.9905484]

>>9905454

[Anonymous No.9905489]

>>9905484
kek

[Anonymous No.9905494]

>>9905484
saved

[Anonymous No.9905510]

I'm going to go and repost this in /pol/ right now.

[Anonymous No.9905597]

>>9905454
t. brainlet

[Anonymous No.9905612]

>>9905357
It makes your pack better able to exploit local resources.

[Anonymous No.9905638]

iq is strongly correlated with income

[Anonymous No.9905655]

Iq allows for one to more easily solve problems of aquisition and weakness.

High IQ usually means you're well socialized, fit, intelligent, quick and content with life and has enough problem solving ability to get whatever he needs in a way that benefits the pack or group.

low IQ usually means you have none of those things and you don't have the problem solving ability to get those things. Low esteem and insecurity due to low problem solving ability is usually a good signifier if low IQ.

[Anonymous No.9905664]

>>9905655
pretty telling that you rank well socialized and fit above intelligent with regards to high iq. then you make implications about the importance of acquiring material wealth (i.e. nice things).

[Anonymous No.9905667]

>>9905655
>low IQ usually means you have none of those things and you don't have the problem solving ability to get those things.
>assuming everyone with high iq gives a fuck about getting "things"
>assuming everyone with high iq is rapacious and greedy

you're winning at game that most high iq people don't even feel like playing, congrats, hope it makes you feel big.

[Anonymous No.9905672]

>>9905655
Smart people don't care about all that stuff, they care about one or two things at most. That what makes them smart. Being well-ajusted is correlated with mediocrity. Einstein divorced his wife and married his cousin after already having two kids. Newton (who is arguably smarter than Einstein) died a virgin and try to decrypt The Holy Bible in his spare time. And those are the two smartest people to ever live.

[Anonymous No.9905676]

>>9905454
This sort of convolution and descent into chaotic abstraction is what has led many people (including myself) to describe me as an idiot. I can't even do the simplest things without bringing the whole universe to bear. Even when making coffee I am manic to the point of ironic catatonia and caffeine improves my state. I would love to blame my symptomatology on ADHD but getting obsessed with something for hours on end speaks against that. I would love to blame OCD but I'm perfectly lazy at times. I'd love to blame Bipolar Disorder but a maniac who describes himself as such and a melancholic who giggles at irony is probably neither of those things. I'm faced with the crushing diagnosis of Normal Spectrum Disorder Not Otherwise Specified.

What do you think? Do I seem smarter than average, or has this whole rant been a spectacular waste of time?

That's the point. Intelligence is not a virtue of itself and functionality is what matters. Of course, functionality is a function of context and many contexts involve a normal distribution.

Sit in the middle of that distribution and it’s as if the world was made for you (because it sort of was, on a very deep level). Sit far enough either side and I can pretty much guarantee you'll be constantly thrilled and tortured.

But who's labelling the axes? I'd love to think I'm a bunch of standard deviations up the positive end but I've just argued that that's illogical. The fact is, the guy who graduated high school and can add up the change in his pocket is probably doing better than me, a twit who accumulated only letters and acronyms on both sides of his name. What do they achieve? They just make it more time-consuming to sign letters. Even preschoolers recognise the stupidity in that. That's why they give each other nicknames…

[Anonymous No.9905680]

>>9905638
but with today's societal structure you won't necessarily produce much more offspring if you have a larger income, and most peasants have access to the things they need to survive

[Anonymous No.9905683]

>>9905655
not only that, but you think you're smarter because you're winning at a game that most high iq people dont even participate in because they see as boring and drab. furthermore, those same high iq people who you're so happy about winning against dont even notice you and couldn't care less that you and your ditzy trophy wife and mercedes even exist beyond the fact that your superficial mentality and materialism is literally turning the world into a war torn shit hole.

[Anonymous No.9905685]

>>9905680
>most peasants have access to the things they need to survive
No they don't or has poverty really improved that much? Last I heard all of African and the third world (most of the world) was starving and fearing for their lives.

[Anonymous No.9905688]

>>9905685

[Anonymous No.9905692]

>>9905655
As a smart but lazy individual, I can not agree with your assessment.

[Anonymous No.9905712]

>>9905638
>>9905680
>There is generally an inverse correlation between income and fertility within and between nations. The higher the degree of education and GDP per capita of a human population, subpopulation or social stratum, the fewer children are born in any industrialized country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility

[Anonymous No.9905715]

>>9905712
Because you gotta work to make money. Lazy people are boinking all day.

[Anonymous No.9905744]

>>9905692
fucking brits. go back to bed.

[Anonymous No.9905748]

>>9905712
why is niger not pronounced neeger? the nuances of the inglish language continue to amaze and astounced.

[Anonymous No.9905784]

>>9905685
that's propaganda. there is terrible poverty of course, but it's not like all of africa sits in ghettos and dies of aids and hunger like some unicef commercials would have you believe.
in reality they're improving, albeit slowly because of obvious limitations, and the result is massive amounts of middle class africans 'fleeing' to the richest european countries.

[Anonymous No.9905894]

>>9905357
none today. but 200 years ago it let peeps plan for harsh winters and what-not.

[Anonymous No.9905905]

>>9905484

The guy who said that can go FUCK himself

[Anonymous No.9905909]

>>9905905
He is wise beyond his years.

[Anonymous No.9906216]

>>9905484
Is melanin inversly correlated with IQ?

[Anonymous No.9906376]

>>9905454
>using typographical number theory
So you read that shitty book and decided you're smart? If you really understood what you're talking about, you'd just say "Peano arithmetic", instead of referring to some particular implementation thereof.

[/armchair/ No.9906387]

>>9905357
why is ths hoe being pictured on our board.

[Anonymous No.9906393]

>>9906387
those lips bring attention

[Anonymous No.9906405]

>>9905454
meanwhile my low iq italian brain smells somewhat nice pasta

[Anonymous No.9906440]

>>9905357
Civilisation.

[Anonymous No.9906446]

I unironically the best iq evolutionary wise (being successful and having children) is something like 120~140 iq. Lower you will not make it and higher you autism becomes evident.

[Anonymous No.9906480]

>>9905454
>I am not sure that I can ever believe that 1+1=2 since it seems almost irreconcilable to my sense of logic that two discrete entities (ones)
> not discreet, not entities
might be magically made identical
>no magic involved
(despite clearly occupying different positions in the very short series 1+1…)
>position based upon whose perspective
such that some new number can be constructed from them
>the new number is not from them, and is not constructed
and yet share none of their essential properties.
>it shares all their essential properties

STOP LYING TO YOURSELF YOU FUCKING IDIOT

[Anonymous No.9906486]

>>9905357
jews run the world
sorry you lost the lottery you dumb fuck- killing enough of the stupid of your breed over many millenia may help

[Anonymous No.9906531]

>>9905692
>the smart but lazy meme
Sure buddy

[Anonymous No.9906540]

>>9905390
Except that males don't usually mate with females based on their iq, they mate based on perceived fertility. That's why females go to such lengths to look young and ready to mate (makeup and clothes which expose the right areas).
Females don't go after high iq males either, as they're attracted to perceived status. More accurately higher status than their own. This is why women are attracted to men who treat them like they're shit. It gives them the feeling that their mate is higher status than themselves. This is also why females act on hypergamy and basically throw their mate under the bus once a higher status male shows up that they think they have a chance with. It's also why the divorce rate is over 80% for couples when the woman makes man than her husband, they perceive most of the available mates to be lower status than themselves and seek a higher status mate.