Study: Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives?

[tinylittlegnat]

There is a study being published that says they are. Im not going C&P the whole thing but I do think it is pretty interesting. Here are a few parts.

So are liberals smarter? Kanazawa quotes from two surveys that support the hypothesis that liberals are more intelligent. One is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which is often called Add Health. The other is the General Social Survey (GSS). The Add Health study shows that the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as "very liberal" is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves "very conservative." The Add Health study is huge — more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant.

But self-identification is often misleading; do kids really know what it means to be liberal? The GSS data are instructive here: Kanazawa found that more-intelligent GSS respondents (as measured by a quick but highly reliable synonym test) were less likely to agree that the government has a responsibility to reduce income and wealth differences. In other words, intelligent people might like to portray themselves as liberal. But in the end, they know that it's good to be the king.

The jury may be out on whether conservatives are less intelligent than liberals, but there's evidence that they may be physically stronger. Last year, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a fascinating paper by Aaron Sell, John Tooby and Leda Cosmides of the Center for Evolutionary Psychology at the University of California at Santa Barbara. The authors measured the strength of 343 students using weight-lifting machines at a gym. The participating students completed questionnaires designed to measure, among other things, their proneness to anger, their history of fighting and their fondness for aggression as a way to solve both individual and geopolitical problems.

Sell, Tooby and Cosmides found that men (but not women) with the most physical strength were the most likely to feel entitled to good treatment, anger easily, view themselves as successful in winning conflicts and believe in physical force as a tool for resolving interpersonal and international conflicts. Women who thought of themselves as pretty showed the same pattern of greater aggression. All of which means that if you are a liberal who believes you're smarter than conservatives, you probably shouldn't bring that up around them. You might not like them when they're angry.

The study also suggests that besides liberals being smarter so are atheists and some other groups(in the study not the article provided)


Article

 

[JohnnySavage]

There is a study being published that says they are. Im not going C&P the whole thing but I do think it is pretty interesting. Here are a few parts.



The study also suggests that besides liberals being smarter so are atheists and some other groups(in the study not the article provided)


Article

"Self Identified" interesting. I self identify as a genuis!

Define "conservative" and "liberal"

Since when do liberals think IQ equals intelligence?


Disclaimer: This poster has a M.Sc. from the LSE.

 

[Songcatcher]

Bullshit.

And you know it.

 

[tinylittlegnat]

"Self Identified" interesting. I self identify as a genuis!

Define "conservative" and "liberal"

Since when to liberals think IQ equals intelligence?


Disclaimer: This poster has a B.Sc. from the LSE.

Thats why I left that part in there.

 

[KRCummings]

Yeah this is only like the third thread so far on this and it's about a week old. Way to stay on top of things.

Also, it's kind of a worthless study.

 

[tinylittlegnat]

Yeah this is only like the third thread so far on this and it's about a week old. Way to stay on top of things.

Also, it's kind of a worthless study.

Yeah I should be like you and live on this board and memorize what everyone else has posted about

 

[kamuikamui]

what kind of corporate whore proudly publish this kind of nonesense?

 

[Songcatcher]

what kind of corporate whore proudly publish this kind of nonesense?

It's worring that people may believe this shit.

 

[tinylittlegnat]

what kind of corporate whore proudly publish this kind of nonesense?

The study is being published in Social Psychology Quarterly. Im sure the magazine is full of corporate slop.

I find it funny how you talk about corporate whores and have a youtube link in your sig and a picture of a megadeth album. Both of which are corporations.

 

[kamuikamui]

The study is being published in Social Psychology Quarterly. Im sure the magazine is full of corporate slop.

I find it funny how you talk about corporate whores and have a youtube link in your sig and a picture of a megadeth album. Both of which are corporations.

your sigline says kill yourself.

 

[tinylittlegnat]

your sigline says kill yourself.

I was hoping you would see it and take a hint.

 

[kamuikamui]

I was hoping you would see it and take a hint.

hahaha

 

[Guest]

Silly, silly people. I thought it was fairly obvious even to liberals and conservatives that it is the moderates who posses superior intelligence.

 

[Angeline]

Since most researchers recognize that IQ is a measure of cultural intelligence--that after all is the reason everyone recommends that IQ never be counted alone; one must look at other variables, too--it may indeed indicate that self-identified liberals read and focus more on cultural issues than their conservative counterparts, and therefore perform better on instruments (like an iq test) that measures this knowledge.

But to take it out of context and suggest it means anything in terms of overall intelligence is stupid. And that's even without my knowing who the sample was or what size it was. Statistical significance is not that hard to achieve.

 

[BigGator5]

*dribble*

IQ is a measurement of learning ability, not what we know*.

*(what I meant)

 

[Songcatcher]

The government uses IQ test results to pin-point kids for MK Ultra/Manchurian Candidate programs.


Wakey-wakey!

 

[Angeline]

IQ is a measurement of learning ability, not intelligence.

Well that's basically a semantic argument. IQ stands for Intelligence Quotient. It is the closest measure of what we have learned, yes, but what we have been also capable of learning as measured by the test.

 

[KRCummings]

IQ is a measurement of learning ability, not intelligence.

That's what intelligence is you fucking idiot.

 

[bronzeage]

IQ is a measurement of learning ability, not intelligence.

Which is why IQ is the acronym for what?

 

[BigGator5]

*even more dribble*

And by your post, I can tell you are a complete moron.

Intelligence is not what we know, it is if we can learn. If we can't learn, then how can we know anything?

 

[Angeline]

And by your post, I can tell you are a complete moron.

Intelligence is not what we know, it is if we can learn. If we can't learn, then how can we know anything?

Yeah you'd better iggie me now. I mean I only have a degree in this shit and worked in educational assessment for 25 years. But I'm sure you know best.

 

[JamesSD]

"But self-identification is often misleading; do kids really know what it means to be liberal? The GSS data are instructive here: Kanazawa found that more-intelligent GSS respondents (as measured by a quick but highly reliable synonym test) were less likely to agree that the government has a responsibility to reduce income and wealth differences. In other words, intelligent people might like to portray themselves as liberal. But in the end, they know that it's good to be the king."

To me this suggests Social liberals are more intelligent than Social conservatives, but the same may not be true for fiscal liberals/conservatives.

Especially for adolescents, "Conservative" means GW Bush/Dick Cheney and John McCain, and also perhaps Sarah Palin. The Bush regime was anti-science, pro-religion/creationism far more than the first Bush or even Ronald Reagan. John McCain is a bright guy who did a lot of pandering to the religious right during the campaign. Sarah Palin has been discussed far too much around here, but suffice it so say she is not pro-science nor is she a friend of intellectuals.

The modern republican caucus is a compromise where social conservatives say "Ok, we'll buy your lies about tax cuts for the rich helping poor people and global warming denial as long as you help us against gays and abortion." Your Karl Rove/Dick Cheney Republicans have been glad to make that compromise, selling out reason and science for votes and what they believe is the greater good (more concentration of wealth in the hands of the very few).

Basically, in 2010 if you support gay rights, believe in science and women's rights, it's pretty much impossible to vote republican, even if you agree with them on fiscal issues. Sadly, Barry Goldwater is gone, and no one has yet arisen to take his place.

 

[JohnnySavage]

That's what intelligence is you fucking idiot.

But he's funny.

Unintentional, but funny.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Yeah you'd better iggie me now. I mean I only have a degree in this shit and worked in educational assessment for 25 years. But I'm sure you know best.

This supreme bitch slap has now been officially

http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/17850235/Lady+GaGa.png

GAGA APPROVED

 

[Angeline]

But he's funny.

Unintentional, but funny.

Funny but sad. He oversimplifies everything I guess because it's the only way he can understand it. His kind of ignorance is probably why we're doomed as a species.