General

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Esuric — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:30:06 GMT

So the spurious correlation claims that we're not smarter than the average Obama voter. Statistics is real useful. They can't refute our positions, so they say we're too stupid to understand their superior proletariat logic. How convenient for them.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Justin Spahr-Summers — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:04:37 GMT

As if to illustrate the silliness, someone made a comment suggesting I was a hardcore Republican.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Caley McKibbin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 06:23:19 GMT

Cork:
It's basically like saying, "smart people hold so and such views, therefore they are sacred and cannot be legitimately challenged."

That is, of course, the purpose of the "study".

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Caley McKibbin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 06:04:35 GMT

Few people know that the modern IQ test was invented by a eugenicist as part of a plan of forced sterilization, which was practiced in some places at some times. I remember seeing some video depicting a teen girl being politely told that the doctors were going to do a little something. The test is designed to measure what they think are innate abilities. It's all based on that quackery and the people who design and administer them are ironic idiots.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Nitroadict — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:54:16 GMT

Cork:

But isn't it better to worry about actual ideas instead of who's 'smarter'?

Not in today's modern state society. Social reality reigns supreme, which is why such a pop psychology study will prove to be even more "ammo" for those it depicts positively that they are "right" & "correct".

They will be shooting blanks with such nonsense, but their egos will inflate further all the same, making any realistic arguments further impossible.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Justin Spahr-Summers — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:54:03 GMT

Cork:
Even if someone is "smart" in one area (or a number of areas), it doesn't necessarily mean they're smart in other areas. And it's easy for someone super smart to be lacking in basic common sense.

Indeed. This is part of the reason why I find IQ silly. I mean, it can be somewhat informative at the extremes (e.g., someone with an IQ of 50 is probably mentally handicapped, while someone with an IQ of 150 is probably smart), but intelligence can't be measured quantitatively.

Cork:
Also: many of these studies glibly assume the conventional "conservative, Ay-rab hatin,' NASCAR Republican" vs. "tolerant, educated, sophisticated urban Democrat" dichotomy. If those are the two groups one is using, then maybe it's true that the Democrat is typically smarter. But isn't it better to worry about actual ideas instead of who's 'smarter'?

Well, I don't know about the study itself, but the article phrased it in a way that suggested that "liberals" care about everyone, while "conservatives" care about family and friends. If I had to guess, libertarians would fall in the latter category as well, because "caring about everyone" means "social welfare" to most people.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Cork — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:45:18 GMT

I'm an atheist myself, but don't really see the need to walk around proclaiming myself "smarter" than everyone else. It's a cheap way to end debate and discussion. It's basically like saying, "smart people hold so and such views, therefore they are sacred and cannot be legitimately challenged."

Even if someone is "smart" in one area (or a number of areas), it doesn't necessarily mean they're smart in other areas. And it's easy for someone super smart to be lacking in basic common sense.

Also: many of these studies glibly assume the conventional "conservative, Ay-rab hatin,' NASCAR Republican" vs. "tolerant, educated, sophisticated urban Democrat" dichotomy. If those are the two groups one is using, then maybe it's true that the Democrat is typically smarter. But isn't it better to worry about actual ideas instead of who's 'smarter'?

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Retrolives — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:40:03 GMT

I've become a theist and an Austro-libertarian in the last two years. Does that mean I have become dumber?

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

William — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:53:19 GMT

There are many correlations stated in the article, which could mean many things. It also seems more interested in the ends of reaching ones conclusions and not the means. The word "liberal" is also a vague word, and a word in which libertarianism could easily fall under. The word "intelligent" itself is also a vague word, that could have multiple meanings. There is also nothing that states that "intelligence" is intrinsically desirable, nor "better" for the world if everyone had the intelligence that the article is defining.

Most importantly, the article states almost nothing as to how the experiment was carried out. It would be best to look at the methodology of the experiment and the actual experiment itself than to critique a "pop" magazine article.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Praetyre — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:46:46 GMT

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Nielsio — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:40:20 GMT

Almost 100% of those kind of studies are giant correlation-not-causation findings and therefore utterly meaningless.

Re: Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

MarketFundamentalist — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:36:44 GMT

I think such studies are severely flawed as most of them are funded off public money and are biased towards statism. Also, its most likely that the people conducting those studies were themselves liberal atheists. On a side note, I don't mind the part about atheists, as I am one myself. But about liberals, I have the gravest doubts,

Article: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter?"

Justin Spahr-Summers — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:56:00 GMT

Someone posted a link to this on Facebook: "Liberals and Atheists Smarter? Intelligent People Have Values Novel in Human Evolutionary History, Study Finds." My response was thus:

Great. So intelligent children are "intelligent" enough to care for everyone, but not intelligent enough to realize that liberal policies only hurt everyone in the long run.

And I don't think any IQ close to 100 is statistically significant because the measure is so arbitrary anyways.

What do you guys think?