This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Why wouldn't he be?
I'm not sure there even exists any group biased in favor of IQ, except for communities self-selected on this exact condition – psychometricians, biodeterminism evangelists, and Mensa losers who do not have any other achievement in life; ironically, this makes IQ an invalid metric in their case, and largely redundant in every other. Most intelligent people have external validations of their superiority – diplomas, professional outcomes, power. An IQ number adds nothing legible to that social proof.
Indeed, they have very good reasons to be biased against IQ. Fittingly, one of the smartest people in my network, who easily maxed out any test, was also the most dismissive of the idea. A pure math student. The notion that your intelligence is measurable at all is insulting on its face to people who have built careers in highly competitive cognitive fields. Do those mere psychologists assert to comprehend dimensions of my mind? Moreover, using some two-bit puzzles? And putting a single number on it?! One who has spent months to decades mastering challenging problems, crossing inferential distances, is naturally incredulous. And is not hard to just memorize patterns in a typical IQ test – why assume others have not, if that is something ostensibly prestigious?
Such people also inhabit filter bubbles, where understanding the idiocy of the average does not bring any benefit – you can go your whole life humblebragging that any poor schmuck could be in your place, you just were lucky and worked hard. It even sounds encouraging, egalitarian. IQ realism is, of course, anything but.
And finally, if one takes implications of IQ reality seriously, then there is a question: are those credentialized people truly the best of the bunch? No matter how much improvement training brings, it stands to reason that a higher-IQ type would be able to wrangle ideas that lesser people are cognitively closed to; see farther; dodge easy mistakes. So, perhaps, there is some fault in the criteria of success in their institutions? So perhaps their status, too, is not quite merited?
People who don't score highly are biased against IQ for obvious reasons.
More options
Context Copy link