Intelligence is overrated

I wonder to what extent most of that actually makes you better at absorbing and processing information. For example, playing Sudoku will make you skilled at solving similar puzzles, which will cause you to score higher, but does it actually increase your general ability to process things?

I think that this discussion is about to turn into a semantics argument, though. There are certain things you can do to gain similar results to having a higher intelligence. Due to this, it wouldn't be possible to measure whether it actually increases general intelligence or if it lets you better use what you have.

High T = focused on sex and violence, and therefor not on more useful things.
Not going to say that there aren't advantages to high T leaders, but you mostly want them in times of crisis.

>Being intelligent just means one is able to absorb information at a high rate
No it doesn't, that's not what intelligence means. Broadly speaking intelligence is the ability to abstract information and manipulate the abstractions accurately. Information and knowledge have nothing to do with intelligence. Contemplating ethical/moral questions has nothing to do with intelligence, those are subjective standards.

Free thought is not well defined in this conversation.

Catalog thumbnail made me think she had no arms

Truly intelligent people would be able to discern the real from the bullshit using logical thinking.

Globalists are smart and they push it because it benefits them monetarily. They don't care about you or your interests. It may not benefit you as a white middle class person so it may not seem like the intelligent way of thinking to you, but it benefits the ruling class and business owners wanting cheap labor.

None of this is well defined. But our main measure of intelligence (IQ) was based on the amount of skills a person picked up in life. It just ended up correlating with ability in logic puzzles for some reason.

IQ stands for Intelligence Quotient. The division implied by the use of the word "Quotient" is a person's mental age divided by their physical age. the mental age was determined by what skills a child had learned.

Of course, modern IQs have been jewed into uselessness now that the results have been "standardized" into only saying how rare a given intelligence is.

You think Bill Gates has spooned Melinda's hips, thighs, and buttocks?

>but does it actually increase your general ability to process things?
It doesn't, also chess players are autistic

>>Being intelligent just means one is able to absorb information at a high rate
>No it doesn't, that's not what intelligence means. Broadly speaking intelligence is the ability to abstract information and manipulate the abstractions

An interesting place to see this is in the game World of Warcraft (or any game for that matter). Intelligent people will think about which stats they need from gear and then pick which gear they want. People who are fucking morons will look up guides on the internet and memorize which gear is the best. The second best item in the game could drop, and stupid people will pass on it because it doesn't perfectly match the #1 item they read on some website.

The face mask thing for covid is a good example of how intelligence plays out. Smart people will improvise masks in ways that might actually work, such as breathing through a piece of cloth. Stupid people will make a mask from beads that look like a mask because they fundamentally do not understand what a mask does or how it works.

>not sure if male NPR bot or over weight lesbian pretending to be male

Thanks for the clarification but isn't it a stretch to say the rate of processing information has no bearing on ability to consider it abstractly? I mean, I get that the highest intelligence would be like contemplating the workings of the universe ala Newton or Einstein, but their ability to abstractly think would be of little use if they couldn't absorb the information about optics or whatever that they used in their abstract thought?

In politics, I was thinking it would be like a person who is highly educated on something like income inequality data, but is not free enough to imagine how the addition of people through immigration affects supply and demand and workforce wages. I don't believe that person is by default "stupid" because if you look at Bernie types they can be in fields where abstract thought is used in software development or whatever, but they don't apply those skills to social issues they have decided are "unethical" to question (like mass immigration).

Smartest post in this thread

>Able to discern the real from the bullshit using logical thinking
Logic isnt required, disproving false dichotomies isnt as difficult as coming up with the philosophical framework to utilize said logic.
Truly intellgent people dont need to take on the wire-frame foundations of others and will instead appreciate the epiphany that is coming to your own conclusions from the ground up.
99% of the human population takes on the realities of another, innovation has stagnated as a result.

It’s called “thinking skills”, user.
Critical thought
Analytical thinking skills

>You have a point, but think about it: absorbing information is essential to coming to accurate conclusions.
Absorb though your anus? Think about it. You have a point, information goes in, conclusion comes out, accurately, think about it
>mind blown

Ah, the ad hominum arguments start. Nothing left worth reading in this thread. Good night, all.

Be sure to brag to your friends about how you won this argument with an internet stranger.

I love how now it's a whole culture of retards trying to pretend their tardness is actually better than intelligence. I suppose it's a natural late stage product of the participation trophy culture.

Lol.

That's just part of the culture of this site. Another big problem in politics is everyone be so thin skinned. It used to be you could call you best friend a fat sack of shit and it was a sign of endearment. Thanks for your contributions regardless.

white skin is not a detriment in hot weather... it's an ever so slight detriment in the sun near the tropics. The blackest black guy can only stay in the sun for double the whitest white guy. The whitest white can only last 5mins in peak summer sun... so a black guy can only last 10mins. Not that much of an advantage. Thats why african tribes cover themselves in mud. On the other hand, dark skin is a huge detriment in northern latitudes where they cant get enough vitamind d. They literally cannot make any vit d for 6 months in the UK. Where as light skin only has 2-3 months where tehy cant make any.

High IQ allows you to see what is garbage and what is useful and logically sound information. There is no garbage in for geniuses.

You're so smart
>mic drop

Perhaps, witherto, extrapolate intelligence gain, absorb science, climate restriction, please wear a mask, bask in my high IQ gains plebs, I'll see myself some out it appears a balanced hormone brute has arrived

>The whitest white can only last 5mins in peak summer sun... so a black guy can only last 10mins
Peak summer where I live is 38C (100F) but spring is about 24C (75F). I don't know the proportional length of time each could last with a 25% drop in temperature, but I doubt it's evenly proportional. The hottest weather in Canada is in Vancouver/Victoria that averages 20C for the year. I know in Central America that Costa Rica is on a high plateau that makes it much more palatable for white people whereas neighboring countries have way more non-whites. Seems like if white skin weren't a detriment in hot weather, whites wouldn't purposely avoid the heat.

Nothing more cringe than people and bots dissecting intelligence. You're born with it or not. It also gets knocked, aged, drank, and pilled out of you. Soduku and doin nuthin for u

>garbage in garbage out