A member of a super high IQ society once stated that the Rubik’s cube would make a good measure of extremely high IQ if no one had ever seen it before. If only cube inventor Ernő Rubik had cared as much about psychometrics as he cared about making money, instead of releasing the cube as a mass market game for billions of kids to play with, it could have been a top secret subtest on a professionally administered IQ test, only witnessed by psychologists and those exceptional individuals referred for individual testing.
Actually there is a subtest on the Wechsler intelligence scales involving blocks that measures the same type of spatial reasoning that the cube measures, though at a lower level of difficulty. The day I took that test was the day I fell in love with the Wechsler, because for the first time in my life I was taking a standardized test that I felt was measuring real intelligence as opposed to acquired knowledge and skill.
The distinction between tests measuring intelligence and those measuring knowledge have a lot of different names in psychology: Aptitude vs achievement, fluid vs crystalized, culture reduced vs culture loaded.
However the distinction is far less clear than we’d like. Crystalized Knowledge achievement tests like vocabulary often turn out to be more heritable than so-called culture reduced fluid aptitude tests which is ironic, given that the former seems more removed from the underlying physiology. So-called culture reduced tests like the Raven Progressive Matrices often show the biggest improvements as countries complete the industrial revolution; something you wouldn’t expect if these tests measured abilities unaffected by culture.
The Raven fails as a culture reduced test in my opinion, because although the content includes little knowledge and language, understanding the instructions and being motivated and confident enough to concentrate on such abstract patterns is culturally loaded.
The Rubik’s cube and other more hands on pure performance tests are different. They are considered fun, interesting and understandable by virtually all cultures. Even if you went back in time 40,000 years, you could probably interest a Neanderthal in doing the Rubik’s cube. He might get frustrated after he failed to make progress after a couple minutes though, which is why time limits of about 2 minutes are essential for culture reduced testing.
Of course virtually no human in history would have been smart enough to solve the whole Rubik’s cube on first try in just two minutes, but many could have solved at least one side so partial credit would be given if it were an IQ test.
But even though I think the Rubik’s cube would have made a great high level culture reduced spatial IQ test, there are many brilliant people who would do poorly on culture reduced tests because they excel on the very abilities so related to culture and intelligence itself: language, concepts, abstractions.
And while a culture reduced test of vocabulary is a contradiction in terms, I am working on a culture reduced test that measures the abstract conceptual ability of language, without requiring the person to know a single word. Of course the Raven tried to measure conceptual ability but failed as a culture reduced test because it requires certain cultural habits, but I’m hoping my test will not fall into the same trap.
Pumpkin Person 
I think rubiks cube measures visio- spatial intelligence.
When I was a child, I saw in the lobby of a palace the wife of an asian businessmen presented with a Rubik’s cube and she solved it in her mind in 2 or 3 minutes and then implemented her solution like a thunder. It has made a lifetime impression on me.
At that time, I didn’t know that people were able to form images in their head, so it was all the more « magic » to me as I was always reasoning abstractly. I was always good at a math, having a master in pure math alongside with a law degree, but I know my spatial reasoning is fairly limited by this handicap. It would have been great to marry a women like that to see what kind of children would have come out of it 😊
Interesting. As a kid i had an East Asian cleaning lady who could do the cube with lightning speed, but she likely practiced for years.
I wonder how much practice the woman you saw had.
I supposed she had known. First her husband met a Scandinavian guy in the lobby. I thought there were chinese from Hongkong or Singapour. The guy tried to solve the Rubik’s cube as it was his first time. He got one side straight. Then, as if he said my wife is a genious at those kind of thing, he called her with those extremely heavy cellphones that look like talkie walkie for ultra rich people. When she came, she took it inspector all the faces colours and was very concentrated, for 2 minutes. Then like a thunder she did it. The other two were as stoned as I was from that performance. Nobody else was paying attention. I was 5 and it was the mid eighties. You ll be happy to know that I noticed the women had a enormous head (because I was aware from people telling me About mine) but a tiny little mouse traits, glasses and curled black hair. She was like 50/60 yo conservative women.
Fascinating!
Bruno its no use saying a persons head size as that may or may not relate to brain size. [redacted by pp, nov 18, 2018]
pill is right. my brain is twice the size of my head.
Measure is similar to estimate… no
No more new ”inteligence TESTS”
Rubiks cubes are socially constructed.
Well… it was constructed by a male, embodied in one language and culture. Not wrong at all to state this.
Use another gravitar please
You will lose me forever, i have alergy to gravitar, it’s just like my soul…
I was talking to puppy person (philosopher)
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTucLLLyBs8p1CIq517F7a3kWwnFYPwYoGcox7eDhxWzJSinBbc
Who is ‘philosopher’? I am a reliable and highly motivated young blogger.
Puppy in order to design a culture reduced test you need to measure the size of peoples brains. Everyone knows this. [redacted by pp, nov 18, 2018]
You have an odd sense of humour
Biological intelligence tests are intrinsically culture-fair but are typically low in construct validity
Psychometric tests have high construct validity within cultures, but are seldom culture-fair
So you admit measuring peoples brains are less biased than rubiks cubes?
the most culture loaded tests are the most g loaded too.
there is no biological measure of IQ. only [redacted by pp, nov 18, 2018] would think that.
So you see no distinction between intelligence and acquired knowledge? The more you know, the smarter you are?
that’s obvious to all [redacted by pp, nov 19, 2018] people like rr and afro.
lesson #1 in not being autistic: a verbal distinction does not necessarily correspond to a real world distinction.
any biological IQ test can only be validated with a non-biological test.
If intelligence were simply knowledge, then we’d expect people with different IQs to be roughly equal at novel problem solving. And yet one of the primary characteristics of high IQ people is their ability to solve problems they have little experience with. High IQ people with little chess training will solve truly novel chess problems much faster than grand masters with decades of daily practice, even though the latter are much better at conventional chess. Not only are intelligence and knowledge two different things, but some psychologists define intelligence as what you use when you don’t know what to do.
“truly novel problem solving” is a pseudoscientific concept.
psychologists define things which don’t exist.
High IQ people with little chess training will solve truly novel chess problems much faster than grand masters with decades of daily practice, even though the latter are much better at conventional chess.
you just made that up and it’s FALSE. do you even know when you’re lying? or is it part of your autism?
an italian american may be the next world chess champion.
I did not make it up, you just lack the social IQ to tell truth from fiction. I’ve mentioned it many times before, but you forgot.
Your dementia is getting worse!
Has anyone here solved the Rubics cube by themself without looking up formulas from the internet? I read about a man who spent 20 years to solve it.
Yes, some have, but it takes an extremely high spatial IQ. Maybe one in a thousand American young adults could solve it by themselves if they spent the whole weekend doing nothing else. That’s just a guess.
I never even cared about Rubik’s cube until my freshman year of college, when I saw a dorm mate solve one in 1 minute. This guy was a Jewish math major and very smart. I never really had any interest in them, and still really don’t. Although I’ve always wondered what kind of math (set theory?, combinatorics?) you could use to solve them.
Figuring out how to solve it yourself takes extremely high spatial IQ, but I’m told even double digit IQs can be taught how to solve it, though even when you’re taught, it might take a high IQ to do it with lightening speed, simply because that requires a fast nervous system.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/feliks-zemdegs-rubiks-cube-interview_us_55afe97ce4b08f57d5d35fc6?guccounter=1
“I’m always very impressed by people who’ve figured out how to solve it by themselves, and I think that’s ridiculously difficult. I couldn’t even imagine it … That’s one of the most impressive things.”
Didnt former commenter ”philosopher” solve one withouht support from others?
No current commenter puppy person did nothing of the sort.
I think he said so. He talked about finding it Hard and Then start to systematize the process. But maybe that was an analogy for rakning more success.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2017/05/29/dark-matter-2007/#comment-60976
I’m pretty sure the Philosopher is too schizo to solve the Rubik’s cube.
The Philosopher also said I was an illegal immigrant despite my parents living here for several decades prior to my birth. I think he’s a great con-man, probably not very spatially gifted, though.
Well it sold a lot of books to nerds on how to solve it.
Real geniuses used a screwdriver and reassembled it.
Good point. Intelligence can not be broken down to one subset of cognition. Rubik’s cubes select for high visuo spatial memory. You’d have to test for abstract conceptualization as well and then reduce them to a common denominator. Which is why biological IQ tests would actually have the most construct validity(contra Pumpkin)
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/17/europe/merkel-speech-chemnitz-legacy-intl/index.html
CNN fawning about Merkel calling for a pan-european army [redacted by pp, Nov 18, 2018]
why is pill allowed to comment, but ian smith isn’t?
All joking aside, even people that are geniuses in some areas, like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet will have impaired reasoning on some issues that most people would get correct.
Theres a very good story in the Snowball biography by Alice Shroeder where she describes how Buffet basically allowed his wife to have an open marriage while convincing him it wasn’t one. In her will she left some money to her tennis coach…
If you even hypotethetically asked someone what they would do if they had 60bn, I would say even the most brainwashed blue haired trans-lesbian bionic woman from Berkeley would not say ‘give it all to africa’. Shed/he/qwee would probably donate it to feminist groups or rape victim charities which is basically a tribal consideration.
Anyone who is smart enough to build a multibillion dollar business is likely smart enough to act in their tribal interests. I don’t think Buffett’s issue is a lack of intelligence or even a lack of social intelligence, but rather a lack of tribal motivation. When you’re not motivated by genetic interests, you just do what’s objectively moral, which I assume means you give to the least fortunate, regardless of whose tribe they belong to. There are even more extreme cases, like people leaving money to save an endangered species of birds. That’s even further removed from their genetic interests.
If Buffett were leaving money to a population richer than his own like Trump is doing, then you could argue he’s a useful idiot, but helping the least fortunate has always been the morally correct answer, regardless of whether he chose it through moral logic or was brainwashed into doing it by the media/academia.
Why do you keep calling giving money to africa ‘morally correct’? You never actually proved it was ‘morally correct’ or even more correct than giving it to the american bald eagle society. There are people in Bill Gates home town ‘less fortunate’ than many africans. We call these people ‘homeless people’.
you get more bang for your buck eliminating a disease in Africa than you do from helping the first world.
Puppypersons view on morality is following EGI in an way were the group succeeding can keep good conscience. [redacted by pp, nov 18, 2018]. Evil people cant keep an good conscience so they and their EGI dont count, or at least count to an lesser degree. Good conscience is meassured by imagination and the flavours of pain an genetic cluster can experience. He also thinks pain is inversely related to happiness, so there’s an diversity of happiness in morality to. Is that correct PP2.0?
So youre saying curing a disease in africa is more morally correct than ending homelessness in america or preserving endangered species? Elaborate on ‘bang for your buck’.
If I were Buffett I would probably give most of my money to charitable causes in Omaha, Nebraska, the city so close to his heart, but Buffett probably feels his dollar can be stretched a lot further in Africa and he can do the most good there.
You get more bang for your buck solving Third World problems because there’s a lot of low hanging fruit. Simple problems that can be permanently solved by investing money, like providing basic sanitation, electricity, clean drinking waters, basic literacy, vaccines that eradicate diseases.
By contrast most of the simple problems have already been solved in America, and tens of billions of dollars has already been thrown at them, so throwing another ten billion at them has diminishing returns. While Buffett’s $30 billion cheque might save 100 million lives in Africa and improve quality of lives 1000%, it would likely save only one million in America. and improve quality of lives only 100%.
He’s thinking like an economist and asking “how do I maximize my utility?”
How is it morally correct to give money to a black hole at the expense of your own people who would make better use of it?
I dont think you understood the concept of morality. I think youre confusing it with utility or basically number of lives saved.
If Bill gates spent 60bn campaigning for environmental regulations like that hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer and that saves the entire planet/improves peoples lives by your logic that is more moral than saving africans then.
Puppy would you consider loyalty to be a part of morality? How much loyalty is bill gates showing to the community and infrastructure that made him rich?
It’s possible others are doing much more good than Gates but that doesn’t negate the good that Gates is doing.
But Gates’s philanthropy makes sense not just from a moral perspective, but from an opportunistic one as well. Think of all the goodwill and social status he’s buying by helping children in Africa. I doubt he’s as naive as you think. I think he knows what he’s doing, both from a moral and social status perspective.
I agree people should be loyal to the people who made him rich, but he might feel America’s already so rich that they don’t need his help.
Gates main reason for helping africa and not bangladesh or Cambodia is virtue signalling to the (((western)))) media which has deified blacks as magical creatures akin to flying ponies and fairies.
Finally you’re starting to get it. Gates is not a brainwashed dupe, he’s shrewdly using his wealth to buy status.
katherine graham said buffett had autism.
George Will said Trump has autism, and Lion thinks his youngest son does
When one of the greatest politicians of our time can be dismissed as socially impaired, the label begins to lose its meaning.
no. it’s just misused by autistic people. the american system selects for obedience and docility in addition to amorality and IQ.
george will is the poster child for autism. his son is mentally retarded too. george will himself said so.
tucker carlson said trump’s offensive questions were autistic too.
none of them get that trump is deliberately offensive, because he sees what offends as offensive only to autistic people and evil people.
in the story of the emperor’s new clothes half the american elite would claim the boy is autistic, when he’s the opposite.
if autistic is a spectrum, trump is the opposite of autistic.
a gentleman is never rude unintentionally.
the documentary American Chaos shows the autistic trump haters vs the non-autistic trump supporters in the run up to the election. it includes a female mensa member and trump supporter.
Pumpkin these guys are venture capitalists they are not doing anything on a moral basis. They are investing (donating) in Africa because they expect a return. [redacted by pp, nov 19, 2018]
Quantum computer scientist Scott Aaronson made a post inspired by Tao’s where he presents his Top 10 reasons Trump is unfit:
He’s shown contempt for the First Amendment, by saying “libel laws should be opened up” to let him sue journalists who criticize him.
He’s shown contempt for an independent judiciary, and even lack of comprehension of the judiciary’s role in the US legal system.
He’s proposed a “temporary ban” on Muslims entering the US. Even setting aside the moral and utilitarian costs, such a plan couldn’t possibly be implemented without giving religion an explicit role in the US legal system that the Constitution was largely written to prevent it from having.
He’s advocated ordering the military to murder the families of terrorists—the sort of thing that could precipitate a coup d’état if the military followed its own rules and refused.
He’s refused to rule out the tactical first use of nuclear weapons against ISIS.
He’s proposed walking away from the US’s defense alliances, which would probably force Japan, South Korea, and other countries to develop their own nuclear arsenals and set off a new round of nuclear proliferation.
He says that the national debt could be “paid back at a discount”—implicitly treating the US government like a failed casino project, and reneging on Alexander Hamilton’s principle (which has stood since the Revolutionary War, and helps maintain the world’s economic stability) that US credit is ironclad.
He’s repeatedly expressed admiration for autocrats, including Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un, as well as for the Chinese government’s decision to suppress the Tiananmen Square protests by arresting and killing thousands of people.
He’s expressed the desire to see people who protest his rallies “roughed up.”
He said that, not only would he walk away from the Paris accords, but the entire concept of global warming is a hoax invented by the Chinese.
Is this person a smart person? Answer Yes or No. Would you want him managing your money/career/education/survival in a plane crash etc etc
geeni
scott aaronson has autism. trump is smart.
trump is dumb. He just use his average joey profile to conquer another bros.
Everytime I see Demi Moore I keep thinking about those juicy rumours saying she regularly enjoyed menaged a trois with Ashton Kutcher and some other female just to keep him,.
the unparalleled elite opposition to trump and the form it has taken demonstrate how common autism is in america. [redacted by pp, nov 18, 2018]
sell the march april spread in ng stat. it’s easy money.
If the opposition were as strong as you think, he’d never have been elected in the first place. A lot of the opposition he brings on himself by constantly telling obvious lies and attacking his critics. He should just act presidential and do what he was elected to do: fix the border, bring jobs to the rust belt, and end neocon wars. Instead he gives a tax cut to the rich, brings neocon puppets like John Bolton into his cabinet and moves the U.S. closer to war with Iran.
wrong. the elite are not monolithic peepee. not all members of the elite oppose trump.
Yes that’s my point
career and academic success as a result of specialization requires inter alia the autistic trait of never get bored with a very narrow field of endeavor. even if it’s [redacted by pp, nov 19, 2018]. after a year a genuinely smart person would dread coming to work no matter how much he was paid because it would be so boring.
think about what it takes to become a CEO or a tax lawyer. a genuinely smart person would just say, “fuck this. it’s too boring. i’m sick of it.”
1. blind obedience
2. docility
3. no sense of right and wrong beyond what one has been told is right and wrong or what it is convenient to think is right and wrong,
4. the ability to work 72 hours a week at something extremely narrow and specialized for years on end.
1, 2, 3, and 4 are all autistic traits which are selected for in contemporary america.
Yes, autism is so selected by America that over 70% of autistics are unemployed. Of course the employed ones are probably less likely to be diagnosed, but you’re ignoring another possibility:
We evolved to be sheep. The social brain evolved to follow the orders and morality of the group and be interested in whatever the group tells them to be interested (i.e. boring jobs). As Lion argued, it’s autistics who lack the social instinct to mimic group-think, and thus develop bizarre interests and viewpoints that are seldom rewarded financially.
More bizarre than to be interested by irrelevant celebs i don’t know.
“We evolved to be sheep. The social brain evolved to follow the orders and morality of the group and be interested in whatever the group tells them to be interested (i.e. boring jobs). As Lion argued, it’s autistics who lack the social instinct to mimic group-think, and thus develop bizarre interests and viewpoints that are seldom rewarded financially.”
I like that statement Pumpkin! Thats actually very insightful. However not all humans evolved to be sheep. It depends on where your ancestors lived and the time period. Can you go in deeper on your statement? im thinking people became sheep when their group switched to agriculture right? Personally I wouldn’t say that people ARE sheep (metaphorically) just sheep like. I think saying that people are sheep downplays the human ability everyone has of being able to develop independent thought.
I suspect it started long before agriculture. Even in hunter-gatherer societies, humans can’t survive without the group, so those who didn’t mindlessly follow the group would have been kicked out and their genes would have perished, leaving sheep as the survivors.
There’s a theory that humans domesticated ourselves. Even the way our bodies and faces changed over the last 200,000 years fits the domestication syndrome. Some say modern humans are to domesticated dogs as prehistoric humans are to wild wolves.
You’re just trying desperately to define autism as everything you’re not because you’re terrified that you have it.
”You’re just trying desperately to define autism as everything you’re not because you’re terrified that you have it.”
Touché.
a unemployed guy who never try nothing against the system is talking about dociity…
And about what is right or wrong, the same bullshit debate ever and ever i already won thousand times but as you’re a child you can’t accept your defeat.
Conserfs are CRUDE esthetes, just like ALMOST another nonhuman animals because natural selection. They are biological beauty-seekers but they also rationalize their personal choices because it’s not all human beings who are biologically beautiful.
Leftoids pogreysisters are ELEMENTAR esthetes, partially speaking, because they choice for what is behind or underlying of material beauty = the behavior of beauty//balance. The meaning of beauty is love, so love is more important itself than beauty, the meaning or feeling matter more than material end.
They also love to generalize words meaning… in correct way, because many abstract words are generalizable in its origins. For example, they say: everything is ideological or political. It’s wrong*
No, it’s right. Conserfs, on ther hand, like to say: ”ideology is a word only used to define leftist socio-political-economic theories”.
Interestingly, when leftilts want to impose themselves, ideologically and truly, against others and specially against rightilts, they like to use the same strategy: reduce or hyper-specialize given concept to reduce its own generalization potential, even to be used for ”opposites”, for example, racism and the stupid idea of ”nonexistence of reverse racism”.
Why is this banned? [redacted by pp, nov 20, 2018]
He gets very annoyed when you guys talk to him about that.
george will says trump suffers from “social autism”, which is redundant. then he says it’s part of trump’s “genetic make up”.
george will is just a piece of shit. he quit the GOP after trump was nominated.
another example of will’s autism: once he said, “poverty doesn’t cause crime, because not all poor people are criminals.” how fucking socially retarded do you have to be to say something like that.
what trump has exposed among many things is that the socially retarded think of the socially brilliant as socially retarded. they don’t see that people can deliberately violate social taboos.
”another example of will’s autism: once he said, “poverty doesn’t cause crime, because not all poor people are criminals.” how fucking socially retarded do you have to be to say something like that.”
I read ”pILL… he think in this way, 😉
Me too, but not only based on this simple sentence.
Enlight us why poverty always cause violence…
peepee thinks that if one defines a word x as one eyed one horned flying purple people eater then there are one eyed one horned flying purple people eaters.
this is autism.
Yawn. You’ve been repeating that same argument for 4 straight years:
Words are not things!
Words are not things!
As Afro noted, alcohol’s ruined your brain. You have early onset dementia.
you still don’t understand it. therefore, i have to repeat it.
I undertood it long before you. Gould made the argument in his book: reification
But when there’s evidence that the word really is a thing, the argument flops.
and afro never said that. you don’t even know when you’re lying. it’s part of your mental illness.
Yes he did. It was after you got confused about his wedding date.
strike and mike theorize that trump has given the jews a lot of what they want so they’ll leave him alone to do important things.
peepee finds quote of afro “noting” may alcoholic brain damage, and peepee doesn’t understand it’s a joke, because she has autism.
Sadly he wasn’t joking. You genuinely come across as brain damaged at times. Some people find it funny because we’re not used to being around impaired people. Pincher Martin & even Pill have said the same thing Afro did.
I am glad almost everyone is back . I won’t have much internet though during 2 weeks.
there’s a new movie about “gay conversion therapy” iiuc, and the arab guy on Radio Lab is doing a multi-part podcast on “gay conversion therapy”. very weird. he’s not even gay.
what is never mentioned in all this gay propaganda is how the gay liberation movement likely led to the premature deaths of at least 500,000 americans…including many iv drug users and straight women who would never have been infected if it hadn’t been for this “liberation”.
the young Suzanne Pleshette is another example of a super sexy jewess.
No the time lines don’t match
yes they do!
AIDS can take 10 years to develop after infection with HIV.
the early cases in 1981 were likely either infected early or developed early. sometimes AIDS can develop in less than 3 years.
robert rayford died in 1966 iirc and he couldn’t have been infected for 10 years.
the gays mark the beginning of their “movement” by the stonewall riots in 1969.
the counterculture was motivated by the same thing the alt-right is motivated by.
in the case of the counterculture:
the ruling elite who sent poor people to die in vietnam must be wrong about everything.
but then these hippies became the elite and failed spectacularly in so many ways.
hence the alt-right.
Hippies get no credit for liberating gays
It was the daytime talk shows of the 1980s & 90s
no.
rayford died may 15, 1969. the stonewall riots started june 28, 1969.
the haemophiliacs may have been damned regardless as lots of their clotting factor was “sourced” from haiti.
but i should have included all the people who died from blood transfusions and the children of infected mothers…
all because of gay liberation…lesbians had nothing to do with it.
peepee just making up shit again.
peepee thinks no one was alive before she was born.
Loser cannot avoid talk about homossexuality, one of his special interests. next is to provide new photos of musculous men he fantasize by big posters in his bedroom.
Supposedly you care about gay people…
peepee is just making shit up as usual. i recall a female doctor on some tv show saying how until “gay liberation” gay sex was just fellatio in public restrooms. even if you swallow, fellatio is a very inefficient means of transmission.
Doctor Oz enlighted you about one of your OBSESSIONS…
within a homogeneous society like iceland, there is an ideal.
there is an ideal which all may look toward or aim for.
in a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society there is no ideal.
what’s the ideal mixed race person?
it’s impossible to imagine.
so the ideal becomes “make as much money as you can irrespective of how much good you actually do.”
that is, the ideal becomes [redacted by pp, nov 19, 2018]
Please provide empirical evidence for this. Try to controllers for variables. What are the ”dreams” of russia, Korea and Ukraine?
the cube just requires that one recognize some “routine” which makes the changes one wants and no others. repeat this over and over and you solve it.
my adviser in the chem dept said something like, “you’re the smartest person i’ve ever met.” maybe he was gay. i said, “yeah. but i can’t do the rubic’s cube.” he said, “i couldn’t either until i read a book on how to do it.” and prof was 6’3″ and half asian.
it’s 8 games and 8 draws in the caruana carlsen match.
btw, caruana is so good that if he won it would NOT be much of an upset.
although caruana looks like a young john turturro.
whereas carlsen has a weird head shape like his skull isn’t big enough for his brain.
caruana may be jewish. Read his wiki. Puppy banned my comment where i copied and pasted a part of his wiki.
Puppy person has to be Philosopher.
Yes he is. I already mentioned that a few days ago. I un-banned him after you complained about the lack of comments.
peepee is a woman who no man wants.
and she will die childless and loveless.
this is sad.
but deserved!
and she will die childless and loveless.
So will you, sir
all the races of man dumped their garbage into peepee’s genome.
hence her mental problems and weight problem and ugly problem.
peepee hates trump talking about “shithole” countries but she loves [redacted by pp, nov 19, 2018]
this is a contradiction.
What do you think of the board game Dr. Eureka for measuring Iq?
https://engineering.purdue.edu/INSPIRE/Reviews/games/dr-eureka
Seems to measure logical reasoning and spatial ability and is a kids game.
I would have to play it myself to give a meaningful opinion.
The other viewpoint would be that george will isn’t even a conservative. If you polled me on a number of topics and him, i guarantee i would be considered more ‘conservative’ by the average voter even though im marxist on economics and borderline anarchist on civil liberties.
The original conservative viewpoint on foreign wars was isolationist. [redacted by pp, nov 20, 2018]
Puppy thinks whatever jews say is conservative or ‘moral’ is actually conservative or ‘moral’. Thats his biggest problem.
First of all, stop talking about Jews as if they’re a monolith. I am a liberal in the sense that I support the underdogs,. That’s my morality. So I agree with the Jews when they support blacks and gays. But I disagree with the subset of Jews (and non-Jews) who are globalist, pro-neocon, or anti-Palestinian.
Your morality is whatever’s good for whites, which is fine. I support working class whites because they’re underdogs which is why I oppose mass immigration, but unlike you, I also support blacks and gays because they’re underdogs too.
I’ve never seen you say once that you were against open borders or pro-palestinian despite the 500 times ive brought these topics up since ive been here.
The fact that you support the Palestinians while worshiping Trump shows you have a low social IQ. Looks like your new psychologist is right.
[redacted by pp, nov 20, 2018] how come you side with the establishment vs them?
Was JK rowling the first billionaire author?
Think she was.
Yes, first and only.
Puppy main criteria for whether a group should get sympathy or not is basically what theyre presented as in the media. For example, the KKK is an underdog group but Puppy would never endorse them.
[redacted by pp, nov 20, 2018]
More confusion on your part. I have sympathy for the Palestinians, even though the media portrays them as savages. I have sympathy for working class whites, even though the media portrays them as racists. Just because I’m not racist against blacks or homophobic against gays like you are, does not mean I’m brainwashed by the media, it just means that unlike you, I’m not a sociopath.
So in puppys mind. Nelson Mandela = good.
Apartheid people = bad.
It never fucking occurs to puppy that if the blacks were in charge they would do the same things to whites as whites did in charge. And lo, we see a mass exodus of whites from south africa is an empirical fact.
The distinguishing insight is not to say one group = good. Other group therefore bad.
Logically that doesn’t hold anyway.
But wisdom would show, that in this world there always has to be a leader group and a subservient group. This is basic evolution. Empires rise and fall. By definition that always meant someone was going to be ruled over.
Even today when jews say they are ruling on behalf of the oppressed basic common sense when looking at the media would suggest they are being extremely tribal and ruling to whites detriment. Puppy for some bizarre reason can’t even conceptually put ‘jews’ in the ‘establishment’ bucket in his mind. So its like a weird blank space exists in his intellect if you query who is the elite to him.
No i fully agree jews are the establishment & have been for the last few decades, replacing the WASPs who were the previous elite. What in the world made you think i thought otherwise?
And i fully agree that if blacks were in charge they would not be any better than whites. But that doesn’t mean we can’t have compassion for powerless people, regardless of race.
But i guess trying to explain compassion to a sociopath makes as much sense as trying to explain the color red to a blind person
Puppy has it ever occured to you, that if jews really cared about blacks, why are gentiles the ones helping them in africa? How many jewish billionaires are donating money to non-jews? Answer: ZERO.
Jews are the elite. They control the financial, media and education systems in the West.
Why dont they help blacks if, as you say, they are ‘concerned’ about blacks. There is probably more charity being given to blacks via the catholic church today than every single jewish ‘social justice’ outfit put together. Logically if they are in charge, why havent they done anything to help blacks, beyond make them appear not violent or banning people from saying they have lower IQs?
When did i ever say or imply jews truly care about blacks. Blacks and Jews are political allies. That’s it, that’s all, as swank would say. I never even implied jews were morally superior.
You have trouble understanding the perspectives of others & thus completely misinterpret my arguments.
No wonder your new psychologist thinks you’re autistic. You struggle to correctly model the view pont of other people, which shows impaired Theory of Mind.
Guardian is now letting the likes of Mikael Khordovsky make op eds about why putin must be stopped. Starting to think guardian is a long way away from the populism that made them support Snowden.
The guys in the manosphere called it ‘the cathedral’. I think the guardian is sadly no longer a useful idiot, and is purposefully part of ^^^ now.
I would imagine that as populism rises, the establishment will try to subvert as much alternative media as possible.
Someday, we will see a a ‘cathedral’ type article on Unz by this line of thinking.
Chanda Chisala?
l learned from strike and mike that shep smith is an out homo.
he’s the only anti-trump person on fox. why? because he thinks trump is “vulgar”. but somehow what he does with his boyfriend is NOT vulgar.
We train young men to drop fire on
people, but their commanders won’t
allow them to write [redacted by pp, nov 20, 2018] on their
airplanes because it’s obscene.
Up until the early 90s, most professionals in the psychiatric community were taught that homosexuality was a mental illness as per the DSM.
yeah. that was just as wrong as most of the DSM. no more. no less.
according to misdreavus gay males do have lots of issues which can’t be explained by “homophobia”.
but the fact remains that if tolerated homos can be productive citizens. it’s not like they’re hard at work and start hearing voices telling them to go to the bathhouse.
notice peepee won’t even let the transcript from Apocalypse Now through without “redacting” it.
the autists’ days are numbered. it’s sad.
the autists’ days are numbered.
Then you better live it up now.
SANTO CRISTO!!!!!!!!!
THE SAME FUCKING SHIT!!!!!!
Intelligence
having an internal representation of the world and use it to imagine possibilities, selecting actions that will maximize one’s preferences.
Process
———-
Analysis
understanding the causal relations in information.
Synthesis
creating new information by experimental association.
———-
Solving the Rubix Cube requires “Parallelism”.
Solving it you must hold information about the object and then arrange the information in such a way that implementing it with have a particular result.
A highly parallelized system has a higher capacity to rearrange information into useful causal procedures.
(take what you know, put it together, get something new)
hold information, rearrange it till is you get something with potential
every subtest of IQ is actually just a measurement of a subset of working memory.
working memory is distributed in the brain by how the subnetworks connect and cooperate. a subnetwork can be abnormally efficient at holding and rearranging its local information as compared to other networks.
solving a Rubix cube is just an increased working memory in the networks involved in the process.
having an internal representation of the world and use it to imagine possibilities, selecting actions that will maximize one’s preferences
Nice definition. Is that your own or are you quoting someone?
I just now came up with that definition but is it similar to a blog post I wrote December 2016.
https://illuminaticatblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/16/machine-thought/
I have just read Plomin’s book Bluerpint how dnamakes us who we are.
The guy as Peterson or Pinker is a really good writer : easy reading and engaging.
The only problem is that he repeats himself like crazy. If instead we admitted repeating each idea a maximum of three times, I would summarize the book from 180 pages to 30 without loosing any idea. It’s not that there is a low density of information (I would increase it by 50%) but that he repeats over and over the same …
I am starting to read enlightment now. Only read first 30 pages. Instead of repeating the main idea, he does it by giving new arguments and ideas. The density of information is almost 4 times higher.
I would say the ideal (reading without any pain) reader for Plomin format has a 115-125 IQ but Pinker book has an ideal reader who is 130-140. That’s bizarre because he seems to be much more successful.
Yuval Harari has the same loading of information than Plomin but with progression dynamic like Pinker. So my guess is that lots of Plomin readers will be bored and most of Pinkerton readers will be drawn. They pretend to read it or like it only because it’s a external sign of brightness maybe like Proust.
Bruno why do you have to rub our faces in your arrogance? We understand both books. You don’t need to explain how intelligent you are to have read both.
This is a blog full of people who are interested in IQ, so Bruno’s comment makes sense in this environment. Stop trolling please.
Philo, it’s because I am French.
Boy was I wrong ! The two first chapters which summarize Pinker reflection are completely different to – at least – the 9 following. They are just small summary of all topics were Pinker thinks things are better. he doesn’t even relate the topics between his 3 themes : entropy, information and evolution. His book is like articles of the Atlantic, The économist or the New Yorker in less profound and more general. It would fit in an encyclopedia for teens.
So the real IQ for the book is the level 4 of Pisa test : understanding main operations and proportions. That’s 35% of white people on average or 106. The writing being very both simple and informative, it’s a rare instance were someone with 110, 120, 130 etc are in the same position. You can’t read it faster. That would explain why the book can be very popular, its enjoyable equally – except for the two first chapters – by all people.
I am a bit disappointed by Pinker. It’s the first book I read from him and, having heard many lectures and interviews from him, I thought it would be mind opening and challenging. Au contraire !
if there are any cubers so very good just ’cause then they’re freaks like untrained human calculators.
but with training anyone can become a human calculator. one trains on an abacus enough, and the physical abacus becomes unnecessary.
IQ tests test acquired ability, or what peepee calls “knowledge”. but in this sense “knowledge” is A LOT more than verbal memory.
peepee still can’t distinguish between words and things or between the many senses on one word, so she doesn’t see this.
…the many senses of one word…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polysemy
I’m aware that acquired knowledge can come in many forms, and much of our knowledge is implicit knowhow that we can’t articulate. But if all IQ is just acquired knowledge, why are some people much faster at solving problems they’ve never seen before than others? Because they’ve seen similar problems? The literature is pretty clear that exposure and practice solving one type of problem, has limited transfer to solving similar problems.
Maybe I’m reading the wrong literature and better studies have debunked it, but in my own life I’ve seen and heard about people becoming experts at certain skills, but the knowledge not transferring to even very similar skills (i.e. chess grand masters who are suddenly mediocre at chess when the board size and number of pieces is changed) though perhaps some of these anecdotes have been exaggerated.
I do agree that all IQ is acquired knowledge in the sense that if a person has no exposure to sensory input of any kind, they will never score high on an IQ test, but I think once a minimum threshold of environmental experience is met, additional experience has diminishing returns when it comes to solving puzzles one has never seen before.
Some human calculators have bigger memory buffers than others to work with.
IQ tests test ONLY acquired ability.
un-acquired ability should be the same for toddlers and offensive linemen.
psychology is a pseudo-science ONLY BECAUSE psychologists have low IQs.
in Flowers for Algernon, after charlie has brain surgery he isn;t automatically smarter. he is then put through a boot camp of learning.
in peepee’s non-existent world, high IQ new born babies occasionally beat magnus calrsen at chess.
when is peepee graduating from the 8th grade?
Yes because fiction is always scientifically accurate (eye roll)
Science is always fictional because it’s a horizontal transcendence above human perceptive scale, specially with technology artificializing pieces of reality.
You don’t actually believe newborn high IQ babies can beat carlsen?!!! Hahahahahaha Good ol puppy.
Of course not. But I do believe a few super high IQ children could beat him at a NOVEL variant of chess (i.e. 25 squares instead of 64, 4 queens instead of 2, etc)
peepee deletes all comments which disprove her theories.
peepee is an olf jewish woman.
You haven’t even attempted to disprove my theory. You’re attacking a straw man of my theory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
What’s the explanation for a 40 point gap between verbal and performance/non-verbal IQ? If someone has a verbal IQ of 130 but a performance IQ of 90, making his g 110, is this person still considered “smart”?
Smart compared to the general U.S. population but average compared to university grads, and dumb compared to PhDs & graduates of elite schools. It’s unclear what causes large gaps in ability. Many would say we get good at what we practice (neuroplasticity) but I suspect genetic and prenatal factors are more important.
Pumpkin, would you rather have a high verbal low performance IQ, or the other wa6 around?
I’d rather have low performance IQ, because in modern society symbolic ability (words, numbers) is more important.
Pumpkin, would studying for a test similar to the SAT a year before carry over to the SAT. Let’s assume that you made huge gains on the the test you studied for, SAT equivalent of 1500 points, starting from baseline of 1000.
Please answer this question pumpkin.
Pumpkin, I kindly request that you answer this question.