Are smarter people more moral?
I think they are automatically because
bacteria = no morality
human = morality
The closer you are to bacteria, (less intelligence) the more immoral you are.
Do you see this pattern when you compare black and white societies?
nazis were pretty smart user
you're not a nazi are you?
jk
I don't consider the Nazi regime intelligently guided at all.
Everyone was 141 IQ or less.
That's dumb in my book.
I mean, it failed.
It crashed and burned and imploded on itself.
There's nothing that says stupid more than failure.
dang I guess I am defending nazi now. They came up with a bunch engineering marvels. I think we only broke the sound barrier cause of WW2.
Probably only got rockets and such from technology developed for war. that part is just speculation on my part.
It only took the power of the world to bring it down
But that's retarded to fight the world in the first place. Why place yourself in that situation?
It's like pointing a gun at the police and getting shot to death.
Not exactly more moral, since morality is subjetive to an extent, but yes they have the capacity to minimize suffering they cause and just make correct decisions. My opinion I guess.
completely incorrect. bacteria and other life forms alike, do not posses the idea of moral or immoral, meaning anything they do is not moral nor is it immoral, because they can not grasp the idea of it. ignorance is bliss user.
Morality is biological and placed inside of a biological computer (You) so that it doesn't hurt its genetic next of kin.
Any other answer is wrong.
I think you're right to say that it is subjective though. There are 80 IQ people that are more "moral" because they can't think to hurt you than people with an IQ of 145
morality and intelligence are both subjective and relative to a number of external factors.
I dont see how the fact that our moral compass exists in the brain is relevant here. Animals dont posess morals and they dont hurt their kin. And inability to be evil doesnt make one moral. Having the power to hurt, aquiring currency and females through violence or other means, but choosing to protect is still a free choice, biological or whatever, doesnt matter really. You gotta know the ways of the samurai on the famous basket weaving forum king. Also if youre OP blacks in africa, Chad being my favorite example, have such low IQ that it can be considered a handicap so seeing the pattern is a no brainer. Pun intended.
No, smarter people are not more moral.
If that was the case things would be a lot different.
I've known intelligent people who are complete pieces of shit and I've known dumb people who are just the same. Morality is separate from intelligence, it's another measure entirely.
I can't agree.
I think they're connected, or else I wouldn't feel guilt over hurting living beings.
I think there may be an inherent tendency for smarter people to be more moral, but our current society reverses the trend.
Bacteria -> no women
Humans -> women
Therefore bacteria are based af. Fuck you op, you're retarded.
Morality is subjective so no, it's actually the opposite, the smarter you are, the clearer you see through the illusion of society's structure.
>animals don't have morals
Under what standards? Ours?
I feel like Killer Whales are extremely moral and fair. I get that feeling just from watching their behavior.
There's no rape gang like there is in dolphins, who are dumber than humans
>bacteria = no morality
>human = morality
Ah yes, the famous bacteria scale for morality.
goes both ways mate. Smart is also a subjective term cause to me smart would be able to understand the inherent value in morality. Both groups can be ethical and moral simlly out of convenience or being a brainless zombie. I've also met arragoant immoral "intellectual" people and kind and moral idiots. They each follow their beliefs because of their upbringing and reactions to it. But yeah i agree because having no morality makes you fucking stupid and having a good sense of it makes you smart in my eyes. reguardless of an academic or social status.
Well, you never see anything more evolved than Eagle tearing its prey apart while it's still living.
There's a certain degree of instant death even between animal species
I've heard there's no correlation between intelligence and morality, but I honestly find it hard to believe, since there's definitely a correlation between IQ and crime.
But then again, morality is implicit biases, while intelligence allows you to learn explicit biases, and these are liable to clash. If you think about, the capacity to supersede your feelings is immoral.
But at the end of the day, I think morality tends to be what works and intelligent people are the best at figuring out what works, and so if you think of it like that, then they are the most moral.
Anecdotally, I'd say yes. Among my friends and family there is a clear, linear correlation between IQ and morality. The kind of shitty ones are also dumb and the really nice ones are smart.
Why does everyone waste their fucking time with morals and shit. Live your life with risk all the time you only live one life might as well make the most of it
Because, even though that sounds pleasurable and pleasing, most people with an IQ above 120 have elevated moral controls planted in their brain against their will.
Animals possess morals. Rats show empathy, monkeys understand fairness (and care about it a lot), even dogs know how to apologize. Morality is an emergent property of social and eusocial animals that need to survive in groups, and therefore need traffic rules for managing internal conflict. The distinction we draw between morality and instinctual behavior is a false one. Most human morality is found in the lizard brain, well below conscious thought. It's often at odds with the stated morality we all pretend to share.
I guess it kinda depends on what you mean by "moral." If you just mean "engages in socially constructive behavior," then smarter people are definitely more moral. Success in modern civilization is built around delayed gratification, impulse control and long-term planning. Criminality is characterized by poor planning, a lack of impulse control and a lack of abstract thinking.
But if you mean moral in some kind of magical sense like "wants to do good," I'd be surprised if there's much difference. A smart person ends up being altruistic because that's where the incentives are. A dumb person ends up committing murder because he believes the killing was justified.
People were saturated in bacteria for millions of years, by that logic they never would have grown.There is good bacteria and there is bad bacteria, one that helps you biologically and one that helps you biologically. Sanitary societies are more successful than unsanitary ones because the mortality rate is higher and thus, survival is a more pressing concern than efficiency and you end up in a seemingly endless cycle, therefore unable to grow. The point is, being smart would indicate seeking life, and moral people would be more likely to be smart, because they seek life. Logistically the smart thing to do would be to live rather than die, and thus smarter people would do things that promote life as opposed to things that promote death, because being moral is the smart decision.
can go either way in my opinion
you can be intelligent enough to value life, but you could also be intelligent enough to realise an abundance of something causes something to lose value
>human morality is in the lizard brain
but don't humans have bigger lizard brains than lizards/birds?
Yes, and more importantly we have non-lizard brain on top of the lizard brain which promotes things like long-term planning and impulse control.
The lizard brain is stupid, but it came first. That's the limbic system, the instincts, and those instincts decide what you want out of this life. The forebrain came much later, and the benefit of having one is that it allows to better pursue your instinctual desires. You still want to eat and fuck the same way a monkey does, but because you're smarter than a monkey, you understand more complex ways to do those things.
You can imagine it like your consciousness is the lawyer for your limbic system. The lawyer doesn't decide what plea to enter, he just decides how best to defend his client. Your limbic system wants to rape, kill and steal, but you advise your limbic system not to do those things, and to instead channel those urges into more advantageous means. That's the basis of "impulse control," you feel an urge to do something but then you don't do it. Many less complex animals display little ability to control their impulses, and stupid people generally have less of it than smarter people. Mastering yourself is perfecting the balance between impulse and restraint.
No.
t. Smart enough to know that by virtue of calling myself smart I'm indulging in egotistical masturbation and exposing my moral failings
There are some men of lesser intellect who feel that way also. Some men of higher intellect don't feel as you do as well. It's another measure separate from intellect. Retards with below 70 IQ feel bad for hurting animals but niggers with about equal IQ torture cats for fun.
You feel empathy but sociopaths equal to your intellect feel nothing.
Maybe. It all depends on their intentions and character. They could be smart but psychopathic.
Smart people like hanging around other smart people so it becomes the norm for them to not act autistic. They simply don't know how to be immoral because they've never done it. Kind of like an antisocial person not knowing how to talk to be people becuse they've never tried it before.