The IQ test was invented by Alfred Binet (French, so you don't get to hear about this) to measure mental retardation in young children, preparatory to allocating them loving and caring foster parents. When the Eugenics Society, now named American Psychiartrists Association, requested to adopt his system, Binet was angry. You cannot measure intelligence, he spat, because it is not linnear.
Binet, like I, considered intelligence to be global (if one insists upon providing a shape for the unmeasurable) and expands with life experience. Ergo, I maintan there are 8 billion types of intelligence. And for the record, manifestly, I am not intelligent.
Anyway, the Yank Shrinks ignored his advice and used their own cerebral profile as the model for superior human intelligence. This was then applied globally to school class streaming and employment grading. The outcome is that the world is now run by idiots and psychopaths. (For details, read "Why academia is the new stupid" on substack oziz4oziz).
Your article is valuable reading; I'm recommending it to my readers; our two essays nicely complement each other.
I added a few of my thoughts in its comment section, too, but I am posting them here as well:
The ability of solving problems and handling situations is a survival skill for some, and entertainment for others, so measuring such efficiency is also limited by the subject's involvement and motivation, which cannot be measured or compared with someone else's. Productivity/creativity cannot be quantified, either.
Modern Satanism is actually not a religious, but an elitist movement, and much in the footsteps of the Masonic "enlightenment," rationality is revered and valued most of all, dehumanizing those, who are not members of the club.
Only one comment on this post, What do people think of Dr Shiva regarding point 3? I saw an interview with Jim Lee of climateviewer.com on YouTube with and there was something about him that smacked of a controlller even though he talked of freedom, beware of wolves in sheeps clothing
Wisdom is what makes intelligent people smart. You can be the smartest person in the world but if you don't have the wisdom to know how to use all that intelligence, you're not that smart at all.
can of worms you opened there: 'Happiness doesn’t require much “intelligence,” yet happy people rarely prove to be particularly smart....' << there's no reason to assume that happy people 'rarely prove to be particularly smart' and one can easily argue the opposite to be true: when one's happy, one's more balanced, one's thinking's clear(er) and one might therefore be better equipped to make smarter decisions. all depending on context, of course. also: would unhappy people be less smart than happy ones? and: how many smart people are happy? nice mental exercise though :-))
It's laughable to me that people believe in measuring intelligence. I consider it like measuring talent, there is no reasonable way or even reason to do so. No matter 'how high' it is, there will be deficiences in some other area or another. I like to remember, no matter our 'apparent worth' or lack thereof, we only add up to 1 person. 1 vote (ideally), 1 soul, 1 chance at life per birth. The rest is a pissing contest.
Intelligence only matters to arrogant humans. The soul and heart don't care about it. I imagine the psychologist porn experts will take all 8 billion humans on the planet and rank them according to some intelligence test they dream up.
The IQ test was invented by Alfred Binet (French, so you don't get to hear about this) to measure mental retardation in young children, preparatory to allocating them loving and caring foster parents. When the Eugenics Society, now named American Psychiartrists Association, requested to adopt his system, Binet was angry. You cannot measure intelligence, he spat, because it is not linnear.
Binet, like I, considered intelligence to be global (if one insists upon providing a shape for the unmeasurable) and expands with life experience. Ergo, I maintan there are 8 billion types of intelligence. And for the record, manifestly, I am not intelligent.
Anyway, the Yank Shrinks ignored his advice and used their own cerebral profile as the model for superior human intelligence. This was then applied globally to school class streaming and employment grading. The outcome is that the world is now run by idiots and psychopaths. (For details, read "Why academia is the new stupid" on substack oziz4oziz).
Your article is valuable reading; I'm recommending it to my readers; our two essays nicely complement each other.
I added a few of my thoughts in its comment section, too, but I am posting them here as well:
The ability of solving problems and handling situations is a survival skill for some, and entertainment for others, so measuring such efficiency is also limited by the subject's involvement and motivation, which cannot be measured or compared with someone else's. Productivity/creativity cannot be quantified, either.
Modern Satanism is actually not a religious, but an elitist movement, and much in the footsteps of the Masonic "enlightenment," rationality is revered and valued most of all, dehumanizing those, who are not members of the club.
Sounds like an honorable manifesto! And thank you for the link. Reading it now.
Only one comment on this post, What do people think of Dr Shiva regarding point 3? I saw an interview with Jim Lee of climateviewer.com on YouTube with and there was something about him that smacked of a controlller even though he talked of freedom, beware of wolves in sheeps clothing
Wisdom is what makes intelligent people smart. You can be the smartest person in the world but if you don't have the wisdom to know how to use all that intelligence, you're not that smart at all.
👍🏽👍👍🏿 Good stuff, Ray.
Until a couple years ago, the US and Japan seemed to be the only people obsessed with IQ.
The Japanese continually raised their scores through "practice".
I think that says it all.
I am a TI and this is the precise script and game that they are playing with me. Thank you for this.
In high school, 1968, I was told that intelligence is the ability to adapt to your environment. A K.I.S.S. viewpoint. I like it!
I think there are two kinds of smart: Book smart, and common sense smart.
I value the latter....MUCH more than book smart. Because I don't have much common sense.
I can read and remember...that's all, but it's not enough. I'd rather have common sense anyday.
can of worms you opened there: 'Happiness doesn’t require much “intelligence,” yet happy people rarely prove to be particularly smart....' << there's no reason to assume that happy people 'rarely prove to be particularly smart' and one can easily argue the opposite to be true: when one's happy, one's more balanced, one's thinking's clear(er) and one might therefore be better equipped to make smarter decisions. all depending on context, of course. also: would unhappy people be less smart than happy ones? and: how many smart people are happy? nice mental exercise though :-))
It's laughable to me that people believe in measuring intelligence. I consider it like measuring talent, there is no reasonable way or even reason to do so. No matter 'how high' it is, there will be deficiences in some other area or another. I like to remember, no matter our 'apparent worth' or lack thereof, we only add up to 1 person. 1 vote (ideally), 1 soul, 1 chance at life per birth. The rest is a pissing contest.
Intelligence only matters to arrogant humans. The soul and heart don't care about it. I imagine the psychologist porn experts will take all 8 billion humans on the planet and rank them according to some intelligence test they dream up.