IQ matters

[Saint_Ann]

Have any savvy entrepreneurs exploited the book's findings to build commercial empires? If the conclusions can't be monetized, how valid and useful are they?

If the bell curve is what I think it is, it's a graphical representation of every aspect of human-ness. Those on one end always exploit those in the middle and the other end.


The real world doesn't present participation trophies.

 

[Rightguide]

Neither are the Luke alts.

At least the one I addressed admits to being a pinko.

 

[Rightguide]

Neither is The Bell Curve, dipshit.

How could you possibly know, you can't read.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

You're full of shit.

You mean like you were full of shit about that incipient "bloodbath" in South Africa? Ain't see it happenin', Zoltar.

You went mum on that bricked three-pointer real quick. Guess that genetical IQ cowcake does matter for would-be Nostradamusses!

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxpj6grFIe1qcaomb.gif

 

[beew]

Hi Libsam. I answered here because I didn't want to interrupt the flow of that thread.
Plus you already commented on this topic somewhere in this thread.

Starting by putting together the posts that drew me in:

Interesting... so are you one of those people who think Jesus was just a Jew spreading Jewish propaganda to pacify the poor?

I might agree with you if I heard some argument.
If that perception is true, then I say thank God for the Council of Nicaea.

I totally disagree with your interpretation that Jesus was an end of the world preacher. I think he got his best ideas from Greek Philosophy and was trying to elevate people out of a flawed state of mind with his teachings. However, one of the most important things he added to Western Philosophy was the idea of separation of church and state.

From the wiki link you obviously didn't even skim:

Jesus's religious teachings were separate from earthly political activity. This reflects a traditional division in Christian thought by which state and church have separate spheres of influence.

And I believe this one idea is one of the greatest ideas that separates The USA from European prototypes of Western Civilization.

I don't deny Jesus was a Jew, people called him King of the Jews.

But I think he was preaching against the Old Traditions of Judaism, and trying to elevate their state of mind to the New Traditions.

Judaism is monotheistic, I believe they were on the right track, but they didn't quite get it right, and Jesus introduced them to some new philosophy that taught an Inner Divine Voice to help guide them to the truth.

Inner Divine Voice is the heresy that Socrates was sentenced to death for. That inner divine voice is Logic and Reason, because I believe the most just actions will result in the most just outcome. Same concept as Karma.

 

[beew]

The motivation behind my post:

I was always puzzled by this drive to dethrone Christianity, that one finds in certain atheist Anglo-Saxon online venues.
As a non-practicing Christian Orthodox, I can say that l haven't come across this phenomenon on my side of the fence. We might have made fun of the Institution or of those who personalize God too much, but we always respected our traditions and faith.

Why do Your atheists have this Sam Harris type of anti-Christian group within their midst?

Is it because of the marriage between their Church and State? On an overreaction to a few fanatic militant Christians Western Organizations?
Or because historically, Religion in powerful Western nations was hijacked by powerholders into an instrument of colonialism and Oppression? Unlike Christian Orthodox countries in which Religion had always Served as a crutch against tyranny or invaders.
Or is it because Protestant and Catholics put much more emphasis on sin and repentance, so people they perceive it as being more people blaming than other religious?
I keep wondering, hence I keep speculating.

I'm sorry I'm not quite following what you are saying, so I'm just gonna start typing and maybe we can get on the same page.


The Greeks and the Romans are the ancestors of Western Civilization. We can see the ideas that influenced their civilization are the basis on which modern day western civ was built. They learned some really hard lessons for us, but the fact that people didn't give up on the idea for over 2000 years is enough proof for me to believe that Western Civilization is a good idea.

I agree that Rome was more evolved than the Greeks. The Greeks were polytheists, where the gods are external to the people, which I believe is not a good recipe for teaching people how to take responsibility for their actions and it suppresses free will. I think monotheism is a superior system because it allows for more individuality. I think the Big 3 Greeks symbolize when western civ started to evolve out of polytheism.

The Greeks gave us math, science, philosophy, art. The most important Roman contributions were law, government, politics, but of course they also evolved many other areas of science and such. I do see a connection now between Rome and Judaism, because Judaism is very, uh, lawyer like. The philosophy focuses a lot on making contracts with God and bargaining with him.

I don't think the central tenant in Christianity is redemption, it's God.
To explain my view of what God is, I'll borrow a phrase from the Deists. God gave us reason, not religion. Nietzsche even said Christianity is Platonism for the masses. I agree with him.

I finally understood the difference between Protestants and Catholics when I read Berkeley's Idealism, and Descartes Dualism. Catholics follow a more Idealistic philosophy, and Protestants a more Dualistic philosophy. Once I made that connection of knowledge, it all just fired off and made sense.

Anyway. That was just to explain the reasoning behind my post. Many thanks for answering, Sam.

My knowledge of Religions in general is quite limited so I probably got some things wrong.
I'm quite fascinated by the things that you have to say - you gave me some good stuff to read about and come back to tomorrow.

 

[bellisarius]

Wrong.

"The Bell Curve" is full of mistakes ranging from sloppy reasoning to miscitations of sources to outright mathematical errors. Unsurprisingly, all the mistakes are in the direction of supporting the authors' thesis.

http://www.slate.com/articles/briefing/articles/1997/01/the_bell_curve_flattened.html

Funny how the author of that article makes mention of scholarly studies tearing the Bell Curve apart yet cites none of them? Curious.

 

[ishtat]

As a non-practicing Christian Orthodox,

Or because historically, Religion in powerful Western nations was hijacked by powerholders into an instrument of colonialism and Oppression? Unlike Christian Orthodox countries in which Religion had always Served as a crutch against tyranny or invaders.

My knowledge of Religions in general is quite limited so I probably got some things wrong.
.

Well, your last point quoted above is right enough.

The Russian and Ukranian Orthodox churches have always been much more a tool of the State, far more than the RC or Protestant Churches. Peter the Great booted them into line to conform with Greek Liturgy - just ask the "Old Believers."

The situation of the Greek Orthodox Church was even worse. The Patriarch of Constantinople was head of the Church and was only allowed to hold office if the Sultan (a Moslem) agreed. They did the sultan's bidding for 500 years and when the Ottoman Empire fell the Patriarch thought he could be more independent. The Turks hanged him from the door of his own Cathedral for his presumptuousness.

All religions rely on strong secular rulers for their initial establishment.

If you wanna know more read "Christianity the first 3000 years" by Diarmaid McCulloch

 

[beew]

Yes, you're right. I'll try to read around these issues because what you guys said are fascinating; and it would be great if the discussion carried on.

Well, your last point quoted above is right enough.

The Russian and Ukranian Orthodox churches have always been much more a tool of the State, far more than the RC or Protestant Churches. Peter the Great booted them into line to conform with Greek Liturgy - just ask the "Old Believers."

The situation of the Greek Orthodox Church was even worse. The Patriarch of Constantinople was head of the Church and was only allowed to hold office if the Sultan (a Moslem) agreed. They did the sultan's bidding for 500 years and when the Ottoman Empire fell the Patriarch thought he could be more independent. The Turks hanged him from the door of his own Cathedral for his presumptuousness.

All religions rely on strong secular rulers for their initial establishment.

If you wanna know more read "Christianity the first 3000 years" by Diarmaid McCulloch

RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY VERSUS STATE AUTHORITY .

1. At an institutional level,
Religion too has been susceptible to being turned by the State and other powerholders into an instrument of control or manipulation. Like you said.

2. On a personal level,
the reverse often happened: Internalized Religious authority superceding State authority has often led to resistance and independent personal existence. Moreover, it provides an alternate source of meaning in our nihilistoc and egotistic consummeristic era.

Both Solzhenitsyn and Viktor Frankl said that those who survived -mentally¬- the concentration camps had one element in common: Faith or a source of meaning (Christianity, Judaism, existentialism) independent of the external world.


Interesting also that Religion has either been hijacked by dictators (Islamic countries like Iran, Christianity in the past) or was seen as a endangering them thus attacked (Communism, current Neoliberal globalist leaders.