Commenter Gypsy recently told me:
I recently discovered through the UK Govt that the number of students achieveing A*A*A or better, the typical grades required for an offer from Oxford or Cambrige, is 12,843, assuming a perfect correlation between IQ and Educational achievement the minimum IQ at Cambridge would be 132, given that there are around 738,757 17 year olds in the UK which I’m using as a proxy for 18 year olds and a ratio of 12,843 to 738,757 produces a rarity of 1/58. Interesting information, what do you speculate the average is before and after accounting for the imperfect relationship of IQ and Education?
If one in 58 UK teens achieves A*A*A or better, then this implies that the median teen who obtains A*A*A or better is at the one in 116 level in academic achievement. If there were a perfect correlation between IQ and academic success in the UK, we’d expect the median IQ of these academic superstars to be 36 points above the UK mean of 100 (white norms), but since the correlation is probably about 0.7 (using the correlation between IQ and GCSE as a proxy), their expected average IQ would be 0.7(36) points above 100, or IQ 125.
It’s interesting that the expected median IQ at Oxford/Cambridge is roughly the same as at Harvard, even though the latter school is much more selective. A likely reason for this is that academic selection in the UK is more meritocratic despite being less competitive. It’s also possible that GCSE qualifications used in the UK are more comprehensive than SAT scores used in the US and thus a better proxy for IQ.
I know of no data on actual IQ scores for students at elite UK universities but there is some data on the faculty at Cambridge circa 1967, as reported by Grady Towers.
Towers wrote:
One of the most outstanding groups of men that I was able to find was that of the faculty of the University of Cambridge. (Nature, 1967, 213, 442) These scores represent the Full Scale WAIS IQs of 148 faculty members in a variety of disciplines from one of the most distinguished Universities in the world.
The WAIS has a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15…
“The scores range from 110 to 141 with a mean of 126.5 and a standard deviation of 6.3 points. All the scores fall within three standard deviations of the mean. The distribution of the scores in terms of Wechsler’s classification show that all the scientists obtained scores above the seventieth percentile rank for the general population — 35.2 per cent are classified as “very superior”, 51.3 per cent as “superior”, and 13.5 per cent as “bright normal”. Approximate percentages of these three groups in a general population sample are 2.2, 6.7, and 16.1 respectively.”
It’s important to note however that the WAIS was normed on white Americans circa 1953.5 and the Cambridge data was published in 1967. Given that James Flynn estimates that Wechsler IQ norms become inflated at a rate of 0.3 points per year (I suspect it’s less), this suggests the WAIS may have overestimated the average IQ of Cambridge faculty by as much as 4.05 points, so their actual mean IQ was 122.45 (white norms) which is still pretty close to the IQ 125 I expect of Cambridge students today.
Commenter “Mug of Pee” has long claimed that the U.S. has one of the dumbest elites in the developed World because compared to other countries, U.S. elite schools select students based less on exam scores, and more on subjective and arbitrary criteria. While it’s certainly true that the correlation between IQ and academic success in the U.S. has been declining in recent decades, I think this is balanced by the fact that America’s Ivy League has become increasingly competitive.
Schools like Harvard, Oxford and Cambridge educate future leaders so an IQ of 125 is a good estimate not just of the students at these schools, but for the elites of Western countries in general.
Pumpkin Person 
Readers ought to be aware that A*A*A represents a typical Mathematics offer, a typical offer from Cambridge is A*AA and Oxford’s typical offer is AAA.
Actually, the AAA offer at oxford is only for arts and humanities. The standard science offer is A*AA. Some subjects such as mathematics, chemistry and engineering give offers of A*A*A.
Very nice campuses. Lots of asian students covet oxbridge.
Asians are not concerned with knowledge more than status. As oxbridge outside of some engineering disciplines and like most western academia is in a deep stagnation under our commissar friends.
The bizarre thing about uni is that most knowledge learned is not used in work, is made up (eg economics which i did), is lies or is out of date within a few years and yet we still use a degree as the main way to allocate labour.
Employers think its a proxy iq test.
A better idea would be just to have an iq test and save the money.
The ivy leagues are worse than oxbridge in that they are social clubs for elites to pay bireaceats to confer paper on their sons to reproduce the elite. In practice this means jews bribing people.
Just like politics.
Too right.
Ivy league is an overpraised caste system.
If you’re smart at Oxford you do PPE, it’s a gateway into politics or high finance, make connections get the relevant information in each field.
ppe or legal studies elitism ruins blighty. better to have phds in physical chemistry like merkel running your country. austria has the most educated politicians of any country in europe. blighty is like the US. its politicians are professionals and therefore very few practical people. just corrupt talkers. frauke petry also has a phd in chemistry i believe. gordon brown is blighty’s only pm with a phd. his was in history. typical and sad. because the uk can’t kick its class sytem it’s destined to get poorer and poorer compared to the rest of nw europe. sad!
iirc according to jeremy grantham the PRC’s 10 something or other (most powerful government officials) all of them have advanced degrees in technical subjects. it’s exactly what steve shoe says, makers and rulers are separate classes in blighty and the US. in china and germany they’re the same people.
Maggie Thatcher had a Chemistry degree.
Be careful what you wish for.
Merkel is doing a worse job than the vat majority of world political leaders in history.
Of course jews are most psychopathic.
Most of the major frauds of our time are jews. And thats not even mentioning how the jewish priesthood (the media) covers for them.
Depends on what you mean by psychopathic in the first place. Are you saying than if you take a random individual from every ethnic group, in average, the Jew will be the one with the lowest empathy ?
If that’s what you are meaning, I’m pretty sure you are absolutely wrong.
I agree the jewish community as a whole works as a sociopathic entity, parasiting a host population.
But that’s not the same thing as saying the average Jew is more psychopathic than the average individual from every living ethnic group, not sure you get that.
Philosopher might be confusing how much evil a race allegedly does, with how evil they are. All races are evil to some degree but those with higher IQs are going to do more evil, because high IQ people are better at advancing their goals.
100% I am saying that the average jew is more psychopathic than the average ukrainian or whatever.
Just wall to wall lies.
Also, a lot of Jews have European admixture, and Whites are the less sociopathic.
The Philosopher is absolutely wrong. Compare the typical Jew to the average Gypsy. When I was in Europe the Gyps were constantly trying to pickpocket or ripoff me and the people I was traveling with. I don’t think there’s a single Gypsy that engages primarily in an honest profession (no offense to Gypsymanangelo).
Gypsies and Jews probably both seem more psychopathic than they really are because they have extreme IQs. Jews seem more psychopathic in a manipulative way because they have the verbal IQ to be manipulative. Gypsies seem more psychopathic in a criminal way because low IQ culture causes petty crime. You really need to control for IQ and socioeconomic status to accurately tell if any group is psychopathic.
Gypsy’s not a Gypsy.
I don’t discuss my ethnic background heavily.
Also PP’s statement is correct.
If every group had the same average number of psycopaths, the group with the highest IQ would have the greatest number of successful psychopaths and the group with the lowest IQ would have the greatest number of psychopaths needing to resort to dishonest professions.
Basically jews are high IQ gypsies. Otherwise, there is no difference in preponderence of parasitism, duplicity, predation and complete lack of empathy. .
I was kind of being silly, Gypsyman. I didn’t really think you were gypsy.
Anyhow, I know Jewish librarians, physics professors, elementary teachers, accountants, store owners, musicians, etc. Most Jews are in honest professions. I now know the Philosopher is just pulling our leg. He’s so melodratic and persistent with his rants that he’s either Anime-kitty level trolling or losing his goddam mind.
He’s not trolling.
HYP bachelor are 1 person out of 1 000 in the USA whereas Oxford and Cambridge are 1 person out of 100 in the UK.
(I thought the difference in selection may have been partly explained by the fact that people could turn down HYP for Caltech/MIT/Stanford/Columbia/berkeley/Chicago/ But considering the Yield at Harvard being 84% and the top candidates applying generally to HYP because they can never be sure to be admitted to another university where they would rather go, attractivity of HYP is not more challenged that Oxbridge. So the UK system is 10 times less elitist than the USA one. If IQ is the same, it means american have other criteria (legacy + minorities) )
America does have other criteria.
UK has hard and fast minimum offers + high selectivity + entrance test + interview. It’s very much a ringer.
in the uk application is to a specific course of study.
Notice the way the UK and US nations have the same eco trajectory (ie down) despite different merit systems in the elite schools.
This leads me to think (a) these schools dont choose all elites (b) there is another sort mechanism (c) a prevailing free market/open border ideology is impoverishing these countries (d) the elites reproduce themselves indepedently of education.
not believable. math highest. highest scores in chemistry and biochemistry. haha.
my guess is oxbridge faculty and students are a lot more select than they were in 1967.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from all my years of studying IQ, it’s that high achievers are simply not as smart as people think they are.
People claim you need an IQ of 145 to win a Nobel Prize in science and yet the actual childhood IQ scores of the greatest scientists are sometimes in the 120s.
People claim the business world has been overtaken by the cognitive super elite, but a study of European CEOs finds an average IQ of 115.
Harvard SAT scores imply an average IQ of 143, but their Wechsler scores average in the 120s.
How many times are we going to have relearn the same lesson?
High IQs are rare no matter how special, selected or elite someone is.
You’ve taken a great step forward in publishing this key data.
It really gives us an idea of what it means to have any given IQ in real terms of application at the highest level.
Thanks.
One of the goals of this blog is to get people to think more realistically about IQ.
If a man find out he’s 6’1″ he jumps for joy over how tall he is, but if he finds out his IQ is 115, his self-esteem is damaged beyond repair. And yet both are around 1 SD above the mean for men in Western countries (85th percentile).
I think the main reason for these wildly different reactions is that we have a realistic view of what tall is, but a wildly inflated view of what smart is, thanks to decades of people fabricating, cherry picking and exaggerating not just their own IQs, but the IQs of people and schools they admire, in addition to old ratio IQs and ignorance of the Flynn effect further inflating scores.
sometimes peepee.
average of 145 and sometimes in the 120s is NOT a contradiction.
funny that my two subjects shine brightest.
as far as the US goes it’s true.
when my dad was admitted to harvard, harvard accepted 1 in 5 applicants.
now it accepts 1 in 20.
big difference.
it also explains why my dad is a retard.
Though the applicants were smarter in your dad’s day
the exact opposite of the truth as usual from peepee.
charles murray is a few years older than my dad.
charles murray is also mentally retarded.
QED.
Murray is the one who started the belief that harvard’s IQ has skyrocketed since the 1950s. I’ll be investigating this soon.
”One of the goals of this blog is to get people to think more realistically about IQ.”
It was a joke….
PP’s quite right that we’ve lost perpective on what it means to be smart relative to the norm because IQ is such an obscure concept relative to height, for example.
That being said the average IQ for Maths students at Oxbridge might be as high as 128.8 based on some rugged maths (Simply take all of PP’s reasoning, and use a correlation of .8 which is an extremely rough and probable overestimate of the correlation between Maths qualifications in the UK and IQ)
These people are no slouches at all.
A crude way of estimating it is that in the 1967 , math faculty were 3 IQ points smarter than the average Cambridge faculty, so perhaps a similar relationship applies to the students, and even today. Gives an estimate virtually identical to yours.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/iq-estimates-by-intended-college-major/
In other data I’ve seen, classical studies students have higher verbals than philosophy students. But they may have weaker math.
Classical studies was a mandatory requirement in most schools up until the 50s from what I can tell. Nietzsche was actually a classics professor and scholar, not philosophy.
Good point Philosopher. Classics and knowledge of Latin or Greek used to be an integral part of education. Most people I know who majored in Classics are a lot smarter than the run of the mill humanities student.
My friends’ wife majord in classics. She later turned out to have hidden her schizophrenia from him and mentioned she heard voices telling her to kill him every night.
You can imagine what those marriage counselling sessions were like.
It does support my theory that very high verbal is linked to schizophrenia in the same way aspergers is to high quantitative aptitude.
Enoch Powell immediately springs to mind.
My suspicion is that classics has a higher average and PPE has a greater range.
If you’re really ambitious and clever you realize the social advantages of the latter over the former.
As I reflect I would not have been able to tell she was schizophrenic from talking or looking at her.
Robert is right that sometimes, neurotic people can look like they have aspergers due to social anxiety or a disordered mind. For example, schizophrenics can be very blunt about social things as well.
Schizophrenics can get tunnel vision. Particularly paranoid types. This seems like ‘obsessive behaviour’ to normies. But its not the same as counting the amount of times a light at a train crossing goes on and off. Its more like analysing the amount of seconds a waiter moves in a person’s direction before the person moves their eyes to tell if such and such was liable to do such and such a thing. And then creating a list of stories that could explain what is going on in that person’s head and ruling them out while gritting your teeth and feeling a sharp panic/pain at the answer you dont want. And then moving on to the next issue in the room. People don’t pay attention.
I would like to ask, can a person with a 115 IQ, if they work hard and are curious, can win a Nobel Prize in Physics?
Where would you expect an average of IQ of a group to be around 145 (3 sds from the mean)? Software companies like Google? What about the most selective VC firms like Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers?
http://kpcbfellows.com/meet-the-fellows
The only group i know of that appears to average above +3 SD are U.S. self-made decabillionaires (though this is changing as they become more common and less computer geeky)
Also, Nobel prize science winners (with a lot of variance).
Or is 3 sd simply too sparse?
what’s the evidence regarding variance by race [redacted by pp, aug 21, 2017]
in the US the variance for blacks is a lot less than for whites.
but this could merely indicate that IQ tests are less valid for blacks in the US.
one reason why there aren’t more white racists is because there are so many really stupid white people.
On meticulously well normed high quality IQ tests like the wechsler blacks and whites have virtually the same SD. On some editions the white SD is bigger, on others the black SD bigger, but averages out to about the same
Wow did not know this.
listening to some more alt-right vids before they’re removed.
very surprised.
anglin seems to be smarter than spencer.
Sadly lion’s having another meltdown:
he’s joking peepee. besides that’s a statue of oprah not a monkey.
I’m talking about the comment i linked to, not the article
“There’s no reason to ever mention “Jews in the media” unless you are implying that there’s a Secret Jewish Mind Control Conspiracy, so damn right I’m sensitive to it. I’m sick and tired of this nonsense.”
I enjoy my comments on his blog supporting him. Hahaha.
Lion is a hack basically. If you showed him the numbers, he would say 100% jew ownership is irrelevant because he is a jew.
It makes no sense.
I bet he thinks the middle eastern lebensraum wars of Greater Israeli Supremacy are the work of oil companies and Rex Tillerson. Hahaha. Many liberals believe that one actually.
The division between you and Lion is a microcosm for the division between the Bannon and Kushner wing of Trump’s white house. You and Bannon want less U.S. involvement in the Middle East, while Lion and Kushner want more. Looks like Lion’s team is winning, as Bannon was fired and Trump is expanding the Afghanistan war, much to Lion’s approval (see his latest article).
My therapist told me today she has a masters degree. A masters degree is 120 and above. It is possible she could get a PhD. Therapist are qualified to give and analyse psychometric examinations. She seems better than my last therapist who seems to be in her 60’s. My new therapist seems to be in her 30’s. The therapist who gave me the wais 4 in 2015 was in her 40’s. It seems to me that if oxford and Cambridge student are in the range of 122. Then they are not really that special when it comes to intelligence. Many people in collage (a ton more) have the same or greater IQ as elite schools. The person I know who is 170 and said I was 118 probably did not go to an elite collage.
If I set my IQ at 120 and his at 170. Then by the scale of information doubling every 5 points. The amount of information that goes through his head in 60 seconds would take me 17 hours. (People think I am naive to assume he is 170 but suspend judgment on that, He is definitely a lot higher than 115 that pumpkin say his Prometheus friend says)
When I was 18. I developed a model for how A.I. would work. This year I discoverer that what I came up with was similar to what is called the perception action cycle. I had no idea what that was but my A.I. project in high school was based on it. Since I live in a small town and I had a very meek personality it was difficult to learn about the subjects I was interested in. I had no mentorship and the local library became very boring.
I think that because the perception action cycle is such a simple idea and that the intelligence agencies have highly intelligence people working there, that they could be using it in their A.I. systems. I found a website by CERN that use a model of humans that contains information, knowledge and preferences as a personiod. Each personiod in a node in a system where they are modeling the people on planet earth. Government Scientist that run supercomputers, especially scientist working for the intelligence agencies, understand how intelligence works. My ideas are small in comparison but I still work on them because I am trying to refine my understanding.
Where did you get this idea from that information ‘doubles’ every five IQ points.
The ‘170 IQ person’ is lying to you. There is no scenario in my mind I can think of that you would be talking to such a person.
I met the person with the highest IQ test score in my country last year and based on talking to him, I would say if you think a 170IQ can think 1020 times quicker/more accurate than you than you must be very gullible indeed.
KittyCat is oversimplifying PPs idea that intelligence doubles every 5 points.
Not my idea (it was a theory by a member of a super high IQ society)
The idea is that complex problem solving speed doubles every 5 IQ points because the human mind operates in parallel. That’s why some people grasp a concept immediately and other people never grasp it.
The idea might be right, but the prognostications and speculations of members of those upper-echelons of IQ get a degree of artifical credibility that they shouldn’t be allowed.
I have no doubt that problem-solving speed increases, but the rate at which it increases is anybody’s business.
I’ll say this: PP I think you’re at a point of self-actualization where you shouldn’t be dependent on the assertions of alleged superiors, even if you in principle agree with an idea I think you have the information, ability, and experience to add a great deal of nuance.
Thanks gypsy. Not trying to genuflect to others so much as give credit where it’s due.
I really like the theory but it’s never been scientifically tested so it could be complete BS. I will get around to testing it some day, unless I’m hit by a bus 🙂
I do not see any reason for them to lie to me. They may have taken an inferior test and got those results but Just from interacting with them I would definitely say they are above 140 so the other figure of 170 is possible. From what heard a person 30 IQ points above you, People about that, their intelligence level is impossible to detect. That would mean it is impossible for me to detect intelligence levels of people above 150.
(And I was only makings estimates based on the 5 point doubling, my mind is fucking slow and I do not expect what I say to be taken seriously, it is only a reference point for me to think about higher intelligence, My theories on A.I. benefit from it)
the 20 point charlottesville manifesto referred to by faith goldy as “well thought out”.
https://altright.com/2017/08/11/what-it-means-to-be-alt-right/
Points 15 thru 18 are my favorite. Points 16 and 17 I feel need to emphasized more in the alt-right-sphere. I only see a handful of bloggers discuss those topics but they’re so important.
Beautiful and concise document, except I wouldn’t be so hell-bent on excluding Jews from the definition of white. You might piss off the many good ones like Lion of the Blogosphere.
I wouldn’t be so hell-bent on excluding Jews from the definition of white. You might piss off the many good ones like Lion of the Blogosphere.
why exclude anyone? There are good people in every race.
I suspect Lion would have no problem excluding your people 🙂
I think Lion’s a very talented blogger but i find it completely hypocritical the way he goes ballistic anytime someone criticizes jews, yet he’s had countless posts criticizing other minorities
Liberal Jews are much more intellectually consistent than conservative Jews
I have no doubt that many alt-righters (and practically 100% of white nationalists) would want to exclude all blacks, regardless of their intelligence or accomplishments. But it seems if you’re trying to form a movement, from a practical perspective, the group you least want to piss off is Jews. Many of them identify as 100% white and don’t feel much affiliation with minorities.
That’s why I’m starting to think the alt-movement won’t last. Many Jews are pro-Trump but don’t wanna be associated with Neo-Nazis. Additionally mainstream whites as a whole are becoming resentful to changes in society, but not enough to have the anger and passion to sustain the movement. The few angry people angry enough are retard neo Nazi knuckleheads, it seems…
Well the alt-right believes jews are the root cause of all their problems in the first place, so including jews defeats the whole point of their movement.
^^ Exactly.
So all alt-righters believe that? There’s a number of Jews in the movement. If you include right-wing conspiracy theory, Alex Jones was pro-Israel until recently.
I thought the main opponents were the modern progressives/globalists/imternationalists/cosmopolitan elite, not Jews per se.
It’s not an explicitly anti-Jew movement, but the groups they oppose (i.e. globalists) include a lot of Jews, so the alt-right is a magnet for antisemites
I’m probably more of a national socialist than alt righter. The economics stuff I would be socialist on.
But to me its clear that jews are puppetmasters behind all these dyscivilisation phenomena were seeing. I would be shocked not to see a jew was behind an ad where a black man white woman couple are present, or an article saying Syria is going to gas babies. I am 100% certain the jews are the root cause of all the Wests problems. Every single problem. Talking about rich gentiles or other minorities is irrelevant. Even blacks are irrelevant. They are just trojan horses.
If we were to exile or send all jews to say, Madagascar, immediately people would be richer, nicer, less corrupted, less wars, more civilised etc etc. I sometimes think about the world if all jews were in madagascar:
Jews are responsible for a lot of good stuff too. The problem is as you’ve said, high IQ psychopaths, from any race. Ethnocentric people are also a problem and they come in every race.
“I thought the main opponents were the modern progressives/globalists/imternationalists/cosmopolitan elite, not Jews per se.”
Those terms are literally synonymous with jews for the last 150 years.
ethnocentric people are not a problem in a homogeneous ethno-state like japan post colonialism and wars of conquest.
Given the fact that we engaged in a nearly 50 year Cold War with the Soviet Union, it’s funny to me that so many alt-righters love Russia and want to include Slavs (particularly eastern Slavs) in their fold. The East Slavs are adapted to authoritarian government and collectivism in a way western Euros are not.
Even my 10-point psychopath scale told you the Slavs are no less psychopathic than the Jews!!!
Slavs are not more psychopathic than jews. Thats ridiculous. Splash some water in your face. You’re hysteric.
Agree with all of it. He should mention on race that all races of man differ on IQ/psychopathy/testosterone/conscientiousness/sexual dymorphics as this explains essentially all of world history and politics.
I would add intellectual curiosity to that also. That differs significantly from IQ. Otherwise, that’s pretty much the total list of traits that explain the history of human civilization.
So assuming a 125 IQ for faculty at Oxbridge, what would the students be? It seems strange that they would have the same IQ.
And does faculty just include fully-tenured professors? The average just seems 10 points too low.
What’s strange about the Cambridge data is how narrow the distribution is. All their IQs fall in a roughly 30 point range. In a random sample of 148 whites the range would be about 73 points
At first i thought this was evidence of ceiling bumping but given that the median is just as “low” as the mean, that’s unlikely
So maybe it’s evidence of some IQ threshold effect (no one below IQ 110 can hack it no matter how motivated) or maybe it’s evidence that super geniuses are somehow excluded
Of course people in the same occupation have a narrower IQ range, but the cambridge faculty range was ridiculously narrow
For the threshold theory, what if you are one point lower than the threshold?
Pumpkin, is the WAIS-IV normed with white people ? because I’ve just read a study of french education department where they tested with WAIS-IV 36 000 kids (educ psy did that) and considered their results on a compusary test given at 15 yo to almost all french kids (780 000 out of 820 000, most people with less than 70 IQ have to pass this test).
1) They tested 34 581 pupils at 11 yo. and found a correlation of 0.65 between this IQ and scores on the test (french, math, history, physics/chemistry) given at 15 (which is very high because IQ changes between 11 and 15).
2) But what is not underlined is that only 405 out of 34 581 had an IQ above 130 or 1.1% of the pupils and not 2.5%.
–> As the students came from a wide variety of schools I suppose it confirms that the average IQ of french people is much lower than 100 nowadays.
–> I guess that it means average IQ (of people born in 1992) in France is around 95/96 wich would confirm Lynn data but with a massive and reliable study (full WAIS-IV given to 34.581 students)
If you remove blacks and berbers, the IQ should go back to 100. This also explians why PISA results have been declining. It is an immigration phenomonenon. In my opinion, our elites know this and are purposely making the masses more divided and stupid because it is easier to control gentiles that way.
the WAIS-IV is normed on a representative sample of ALL Americans (excluding those with neurological/psychiatric/substance abuse problems).
I suspect they use a different version in France because the WAIS-IV is in English
I’ve very rarely met ivy grads in london who werent MBA alumni.
I believe I could tell within 1 or 2 hours of walking around campuses whether Oxbridge students are smarter than the Ivies.
What many people don’t understand is that scholastic tests and academic achivement more generally is also a conscientiousness test. The ability to learn as per spec, rather than feeling.
As a result, many high achieving students leave college more brainwashed and with lower creativity and novelty than before they went to a college. In some cases, particularly for those with a verbal IQ bent, it is much better that the individual never went to college at all and did pure pot luck discovery of knowledge. I would say people should go college purely for the employment requirements however. You need a piece of paper that infers you’re smart.
All professors are chosen on how much they kiss masters ring. Rare is the day, a professor will give a sociology lecture about mass media and mention it is completely and totally controlled by 1% of the population of a certain race.
In fact the professor will argue there is no such thing as race.
Contra Robert, I believe these people are chosen based asperger criteria. The more socially retarded a person is, the more he will be given opportunities to serve master in ‘middle management’ of extraction of surplus from gentiles.
That’s why I think higher education should be ended except for STEM and accounting. Everything else is prone to political bias and teaches you nothing about the real world. And even STEM should be shortened to 3 years at most at the undergrad level.
Of course I know that will never happen.
“Man” is not just a monk but also a robot… Lolz
Shut up Santo! Homos like the arts, I know, but people are looking for vocational training these days, not airy-fairy stuff. The humanities would be made more rigorous if such programs were made their own schools with a rigorous admissions process, and not put in with the regular university subjects so that any dopehead can major in them and get by regurgitating postmodernist bullshit……
Here’s an interesting article by the blogger Devin Helton about which fields require a college education (not many):
https://devinhelton.com/college-required
Arts is just part of humanities, read: inconvenient, because even they are inter-continuous, arts is a separated ”entity”.
People who think humanities are NATURALLY that-messy-place as today, tend to be stupid…
Try to think for yourself instead accept given reality, i swear there are more interesting things below this surface.
Humanities is the BASIS, represent the REASON/the MOTIVATION to
build houses or buildings,
study and apply economic principles,
to study science…
to do things, what culture is.
It’s not coincidence that, when the mind of western society was corrupted [and not in EASY ways you or many here may be thinking], it started a death spiral.
It was in humanities that civil rights started…
think AGAIN monk…
Speaking of Rex Tillerson, there was an interesting comment by the Unz columnist Paul Craig Roberts that jews are hostile to the oil industry due to texans being more nationalist and gentile.
Robert makes a good point that jews are basically absent from heavy industry and natural resources due to the engineering nature of these.
Jews don’t have that much interest in inanimate objects because their social IQ is much higher than equivalent asians/whites in my opinion.
I also suspect they are worse at applied math than gentiles/asians.
No, the % of african explains only a part of this 95 IQ average. In France, you have lots of social policies wich are very regressive in terms of genes. You have a big incentive to get lots of kids if you are on social welfare. I would said its 1/3 ethnic and 2/3 social.
It means in France, 1 kid out of 20 has an 115 IQ wich is as being 6 feet 2 inches for a french male …
Compare french upper middle class with of the european countries, like England… If the differences are little, so Degaulle France is likely to have similar general avg intelligence.
I have the impression that France and Sweden have the highest avg native intelligence, with Germany. But both countries seems over-valued.
Lion is not an alt righter.
I would say the dividing line between civic nationalist (milo, alex jones, cernovich) and alt righter is the jew Q.
And the dividing line between national socialist and those is economics.
To me libertarians are now de facto dead. Nobody can intellectually defend that now.
I’ll mostly agree with you here. Libertarianism is like the guy who used be a playa/start-athlete in high school but now he’s an overweight alcoholic in his 30s living by himself in bumblefuck, Alabama and he’s completely forgotten, used up and un-cool.
Many alt-righters are former libertarians, btw.
Libertarians are, characteristically speaking, on the extreme economic ”right wing” and on the extreme social ”left wing” or extreme capitalism with extreme cultural left/individuali…ty [and without parsimony become individualISM].
1) Pumpkin, could you give the reference of the study that stated that european CEO IQ is 115 on average ?
2) Philo, Sloan was jew. The entire auto industry, except Ford, was created by jews. The same for metallurgy. They left because the field was less interesting than Banking and professional services. Also, because they were expelled by webs of gentile i.e. Texans. The same for Pharma company;
3) I found this Harvard/Elsevier article about French secular loss of IQ which gives exactly the figure I guessed :
Click to access In-France-are-secular-IQ-losses-biologically-caused-A-comment-on-Dutton-and-Lynn-2015.pdf
4) Astronauts had an average IQ of 136, going from 130 to 145, and it is well documented. That’s a group in the top 1%. It is still very far from 3 sd yet.
5) It would be interesting, and easy for a psy professor, to get all living medal fields IQ since there were only 56 awardees and around 40 alive.
It is true that first astronauts had IQs going from 130 to 145, but it is not the case of all astronauts. The mean IQ of ALL astronauts is around 125, with lowest ones being close to 110.
Sloan was scottish. Autos were a pretty gentile industry.
CEO’s seems correlate more with opportunistic/capitalistic creativity, a kind of mix between practical/smart-street and analytical/”book-street” intelligence, even i dislike to conflate analytical skills with chrystallized, if this is more related with fluid skills.
Bruno, the source is here:
http://infoproc.blogspot.ca/2014/10/chief-executives-brainpower-personality.html
Thanks, le Pumpkin 🙂 .
Just had a quick look at it. Average is 115, but for swedish CEO of corporation with revenue above 10 billion, the average is higher, 125 IQ (top 5 centile of all swedish men) and is only 107 for CEO of firm with revenue under 100 million (or top 30 %). Average salary of big boss is 750 K dollars (6 million swedish Krona). The study gives interesting information but has plenty of inconsistencies (they mix up quartile, median etc. ) and I imagine there not able to identify the total package of a CEO.
You’re right Philo, i don’t know why Sloan sounded jewish to me.
Robespierre (terrifying name !), I’m astonished by the fact astronaut IQ hasn’t gone up, knowing the number of candidate they have for each position ! (When they started, they selected people only among test pilot people, so it was 1 in 10 among a small group of people selected on experience. Now, NASA opens the selection, and get 18000 candidates. But they reduce it to 120 by relying only on CV and not psychometrics (they could have done it even using an internet platform). So they select 1 in 10 at the end – as for the first group of astronaut – instead of 1 in 1500 if they had given a chance to all profiles. I guess the IQ should have staid the same (or even gone a bit higher). It would be good to ask them or show the data. )
Average is 115, but for swedish CEO of corporation with revenue above 10 billion, the average is higher, 125 IQ (top 5 centile of all swedish men) and is only 107 for CEO of firm with revenue under 100 million (or top 30 %).
Did the paper actually say that?
My suspicion is that many astronauts today are diversity aa hires.
The space missions today are basically oil refueling and pet rock minding missions and are nowhere near as daring or as technology lite as the early ones with the russians and americans in the 1960s.
They actually are selected on facts. If someone is a recognized engineer, and you find out his IQ is low, does it change anything in regards of his engineering skills ? ANd it’s what NASA wants, highly skilled individuals with an outstanding track ! We tend to overestimate overachievers’ IQ.
Hey Bruno,
Hahah Robespierre has a very bad reputation, but he was actually a humanist with plenty of moral ideals. He was much closer to a good guy caught by history at the wrong place at the wrong time, than to a psychopath.
Unfortunately i can’t show the datas since the person who provided it to me asked me to not share it. I would ask you to trust me, but common sense asks you to not trust me because i am just another random people on internet.
I am sorry about that since subsequently the few infos i gave are worthless hahah.
Table 1 and 2 give a median, average, and sd, but we have no gaussian there for >10b CEO, because there must be not that many. So the only detailed one for having an idea of this population data is table 5- panel A p45 that I read this way :
– the top 5% of population are dominated by 46.4% of big firm CEO , the top 50% of population are dominated by 82,7% of CEO . Wich I read like the median IQ is 95 centile or 125 IQ.
– But paper says : “Cognitive ability is more important for larger companies that are
more likely to hire their CEOs externally: the median large-firm CEO is in the top 17% of the population in cognitive ability.” p7.
– I think they misread this line wich means that only 17% of the bif firm CEO are dumber that the average population (the combination with the latter proposition shows it is not a gaussian).
For the small size CEO, you have 43%/25% and 66%/50%, so I guessed the median was 50%/30% wich gives a median IQ of 107 (1 out of 3.3 person).
So to answer your question, the paper does’nt say that median large firm CEO IQ is 125 and small size firm is 107 – (it suffers from many contradiction), I just extrapolated it quickly. If I misread, don’t hesitate to correct me Pumpkin.
https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=079089104119084108109096085122118002008008057008067026100071097124083022097087016092032006026040009032042068091123022104000088108018031000036115015080121115098092097056092038001024124018102102112090091100027066117093111091119102101028117004080083084105&EXT=pdf
If you agrees with me you can correct Hsu who writes : “It looks like large company CEOs are roughly +1, +1.5 and +0.5 SD on cognitive ability, non-cognitive ability (see below) and height, respectively. Apparently Swedish medical doctors are also only about +1 SD in cognitive ability (see article).”
The graph Hsu selected as an illustration shows for large CEO that more than 2/3 of them are above 7 . 7 being +1 sd , both the average and median IQ have to be above +1 sd.
I’d love you to comment on his site – if you agree with me – about his grapic reading, because it’s always amusing to correct a Caltech/Berkeley on common sense math.
In fact, I trust you Robespierre. Thanks for the information.
Pumpkin, can a 115 IQ person win a Nobel Prize in Physics?
I would never say never, but it would be unlikely. Kind of like a guy who is only 6’1″ being one of the best NBA players (though people much shorter have made the NBA).
It is possible though. Would it be possible if lower? 115 IQ is considered the threshold for being able to do anything.
This is a really interesting post and one that I have returned back to many times over the past few years. I have a few comments to make regarding the results and their validity and have my own results and experience to share that I believe to be more accurate.
In general, the statement that people doing very well in school is correlated at roughly 0.7 with their intelligence is valid and there has been much research to back this up. The claim that some people who have for example won the Nobel prize in Physics have IQ scores in the 120s is in my opinion absurd. I have a measured iq of 131 and took my Physics degree at Imperial College London (where the average iq of Physics students is probably slightly lower than those who study Physics at say Oxford but not by more than a few points in my opinion). I worked very hard during my degree and studied for a longer period of time than my friends and even made use of the best study techniques such as active recall and spaced repetition to be more efficient. I ended up being better than approximately 33% of people in my year group with maximum effort and a lot of stress and anxiety. This would seem to suggest that while probably slightly less than a third of my year group had IQ’s less than 130 the majority had IQ’s above this value. If I had to make an estimate, I would say that the average IQ of my year group was roughly 135-137, whilst I have 2 friends who were at the borderline of being in the top 10% of the year who both have measured IQ’s in the high 140’s. For students studying Physics at Oxford therefore I would expect a score close to 140 as being the average IQ score. Assuming that Oxford physicists have an IQ score a few points higher than the average Oxbridge student then my estimate would be that the average IQ of an Oxford student is around 135. This is a lot less than the percentile of their academic ability alone would suggest but higher than your estimate. Statistically, I am not sure how valid it is to assume the expected value of the IQ scores of a group can be found by multiplying a standardised score by its IQ correlation, although it does seem reasonable at first glance. The scores presented in this article are from a time when the average degree class at oxbridge was a 2.2 or a third and since then due to the much increased applicant to places ratio the standard can be assumed to be much higher with the average score now being close to 67%. Grade inflation may have occurred in the past 60 years, even at oxbridge, but I doubt it could have occurred at a level that means that an average student from 60 years ago who say would have achieved 50% in their exams would now get 67%. I am interested in knowing your thoughts on this Pumpkinperson and despite this being more ‘anecdotal’ evidence than your analysis whether you still think your prior analysis is correct.
I remember there are around 6 000 spots at Oxbridge for a bachelor degree and around 750 k persons born each year. You can neutralize the foreigners admitting an equivalent proportion of candidates and spots.
So if Oxbridge recruited on IQ only (let’s say, asking for people to get 3 Different IQ evaluation) and all the most able candidate applied, the average IQ would be 1 in 250 that is 140.
So has the recruitment is not based on IQ but grades and interviews and has a social aspect, it’s really not likely that the average IQ would be more than 130. And most desirable specialties are medicine and computer science, so probably a +5 for physics would be a great maximum.
I would put the real level somewhere between 125 and 135. In France, Normalien scientifique and Polytechnicien are considered genious and it’s far from the truth … They are still the most paid graduates as quant in the UK.
And even if they recruited ONLY based on IQ, they still would average well below IQ 140, because IQ does not correlate perfectly with IQ.