My new social theory - opinions?

[MK20]

I would like to propose my new social theory and get your feedback on it. This is based on 20 years of dealing with groups of people.

THEORY: The collective IQ of a group can be determined by taking the average IQ of the group, and then subtracting from that number 1/3 of the difference in IQ between the average, and the average of the lower 50 percent of the group.

As an example, if the average IQ is 100, and the lowest half of the people in the group had an average IQ of 70, then this theory says that the group collective IQ will be 90.

This theory reflects the fact that the intelligent people in a group who are above the average are hindered from solving problems rapidly and correctly by the influence and disturbance caused by the people with intelligence below average. In other words they cancel each other out, but intrinsic survival instinct and work drive progress slowly forward. The theory also accounts for the disproportionate influence of those who are truly mentally disabled in society. They take a large percentage of the time of the most intelligent because the severely disabled constantly create problems they are not able to solve themselves. It is much easier to destroy than to build. This reflects the laws of thermodynamics.

True genius is occasionally recognized and the survival instinct drives everyone to adopt a more efficient form of living once the truly intelligent have figured it out. This drives society forward long term. However, in the immediate term, the group IQ can be approximately calculated using this theory.

 

[The D]

You’re grossly overestimating the IQ of the crowd. Crowds are very easily manipulated to do some really stupid shit

 

[Redlion]

 

[John?]

@MK20

I appreciate your logic. Your arithmetic is indefensible. Average is not generally useful in population statistics, including muzzle velocity and POI variance.

A more reliable and simple approach is to look at the distribution in terms of median, mode, and standard deviation. You can use 8th grade arithmetic to assess data in quartile scales (or decile if you like finer resolution). From these you can determine appropriate weighting factors to arrive at a defensible solution.

That said, your logic is on the right track. A mass of dull or frightened people limit the influence of calm, intelligent people.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

Let's say you're social theory is dead on, perfectly accurate and lives up to any scrutiny..

Now...... what are we going to do with this information?

 

[Maser]

 

[kl3309]

The collective IQ will always be 13% of the average IQ.

 

[Maser]

Now for the question that everyone wants to ask in this thread. Of all the Hide members, who's the most intelligent and who's the least intelligent? Go!

 

[kl3309]

Now for the question that everyone wants to ask in this thread. Of all the Hide members, who's the most intelligent and who's the least intelligent? Go!

You are.

 

[KYAggie]

Interesting theory, but I agree with @The D on this one. Either you are grossly overestimating the IQ of the crowd or there’s another variable to consider. Example. Take the average IQ of certain areas surrounding Chicago for instance or the 2 square miles around the top 10 academicly ranked universities. The average IQ in these areas would test to be high, possibly higher than the whole, but 80% plus voted for Kamala, which is not a very smart move. So how much does IQ even matter in being able to think and make good decisions?

In other words, these people have high IQ’s, but their inability to critically think causes far more problems than they fix and keeps others, with possibly lower IQ’s, but the ability to critically think and make sound decisions, from being able to fix all the problems they cause.

It’s a backwards world. Logic wise.

 

[mosin46]

don't think you can determine group "intelligence" the same way you can for individuals. if that even exists,it is for sure lower than individual "averages".

 

[Maser]

don't think you can determine group "intelligence" the same way you can for individuals. if that even exists,it is for sure lower than individual "averages".

 

[lonegunman762x51]

Decades ago I refused to waste my time in a "group" meeting. Boss asked why? I told him that a concensus can only be reached when it is reasonable to the lowest IQ dipshit in the room. I was not seeking the dumbest answer to our question.

He couldn't disagree.

 

[DocRDS]

IQ is not a catch all.

For instance
I am VERY VERY good at math,science and multidimensional spatial awareness.

My spelling is for shit.
I can't stand being in or interacting in groups (my social IQ is very very low).
I am terrible boss because I'm too nice (people need to be told no).
People can have high social IQs and still be dumb as shit.

 

[Maser]

IQ is not a catch all.

Exactly! All an IQ score dictates is how good someone is at problem solving. There are plenty of Americans that can solve a Rubik's Cube in 10 seconds, but yet don't know shit about the Constitution.

 

[Darryle]

You’re grossly overestimating the IQ of the crowd. Crowds are very easily manipulated to do some really stupid shit

Take the Pit for example, we've taken one upmanship to a new level, lower, but a new level just the same

 

[KYAggie]

All an IQ score dictates is how good someone is at problem solving.

There’s also plenty of Americans with high IQ’s who create far more problems than they solve……case in point: Rhodes Scholars.

 

[The D]

Take the Pit for example, we've taken one upmanship to a new level, lower, but a new level just the same

The Pit is an industrial grade drilling operation to and through the bottom looking for new lows

Sorta reminds me of this song

 

[Ronws]

I agree with the principle idea of the smart are bogged down by the stupid. Even if I don't exactly accept the math involving the IQ scores.

From what I have read, IQ is meant to be the middle mark. For example, have 3 guys take the same test. One gets a low score, one gets a high score. The guy who scores in between is the "average" IQ.

I have a measured IQ of 121. and I have done some stupid shit. I have said some stupid things. And I am constantly updated as to how much I don't know and I don't mean the jousting and ribbing from here.

My SAT scores were 580 math 550 verbal. Math is usually kind of easy for me and I sometimes see interactions of people and events as equations. So, my SAT scores were average to possibly below average.

As for carrying the load of lesser people, I was taking physics at Richland College in Dallas. I was the highest scoring student with an absolute asshole teacher who would take the hardest problems from the back of the book that he never worked on. I averaged an 85 after the scores were curved. Two aggie (Texas A & M) students barely passed, thanks to me (I had formerly gone to UT @ Arlington.)

I also see it at work. Problem is, as a smart guy, I can be responsible for the work of those not quite so smart. But it still falls on me. I am supposed to guide them without being an asshole and anticipate what they might do wrong.

 

[Darryle]

There’s also plenty of Americans with high IQ’s who create far more problems than they solve……case in point: Rhodes Scholars.

Except for Kris Kristofferson

 

[DocRDS]

Don't forget a lot of the "high IQ" people really are just Blue Bloods running in the same circles. Slight thread drift but the reason to go Ivy League isn't the professors/education--its the connections.

And then power.

Power Corrupts.

 

[Bullfrog08]

I think most people confuse IQ and common sense. Some of the smartest people I know struggle with very simple common sense items. I bet they would score high in an IQ test.

Im guessing, but most people here have mid-level IQ, but most seem to have higher common sense.

I know very few with high IQ and high common sense.

 

[Darryle]

I would probably suck at an IQ test, I am dumber than a dirt clod

 

[Makinchips208]

…..

This theory reflects the fact that the intelligent people in a group who are above the average are hindered from solving problems rapidly and correctly by the influence and disturbance caused by the people with intelligence below average.
….

Thats a long sentence! When they are that long i gotta back up and re read it about 4.5 times to try and get whats being said.

I think yer saying im a low intelligence disturbance to the group?

 

[6.5SH]

I think most people confuse IQ and common sense. Some of the smartest people I know struggle with very simple common sense items. I bet they would score high in an IQ test.

Im guessing, but most people here have mid-level IQ, but most seem to have higher common sense.

I know very few with high IQ and high common sense.

I think it goes beyond just common sense. Many of the high IQ Mensa types are frankly bat-shit insane.

 

[6.5SH]

I would like to propose my new social theory and get your feedback on it. This is based on 20 years of dealing with groups of people.

THEORY: The collective IQ of a group can be determined by taking the average IQ of the group, and then subtracting from that number 1/3 of the difference in IQ between the average, and the average of the lower 50 percent of the group.

As an example, if the average IQ is 100, and the lowest half of the people in the group had an average IQ of 70, then this theory says that the group collective IQ will be 90.

This theory reflects the fact that the intelligent people in a group who are above the average are hindered from solving problems rapidly and correctly by the influence and disturbance caused by the people with intelligence below average. In other words they cancel each other out, but intrinsic survival instinct and work drive progress slowly forward. The theory also accounts for the disproportionate influence of those who are truly mentally disabled in society. They take a large percentage of the time of the most intelligent because the severely disabled constantly create problems they are not able to solve themselves. It is much easier to destroy than to build. This reflects the laws of thermodynamics.

True genius is occasionally recognized and the survival instinct drives everyone to adopt a more efficient form of living once the truly intelligent have figured it out. This drives society forward long term. However, in the immediate term, the group IQ can be approximately calculated using this theory.

Not exactly new. Look up "Crabs in a bucket"

 

[jrassy]

I think most people confuse IQ and common sense. Some of the smartest people I know struggle with very simple common sense items. I bet they would score high in an IQ test.

Im guessing, but most people here have mid-level IQ, but most seem to have higher common sense.

I know very few with high IQ and high common sense.

You nailed it.

 

[clcustom1911]

Now for the question that everyone wants to ask in this thread. Of all the Hide members, who's the most intelligent and who's the least intelligent? Go!

I'm on the lower end.

Paper IQ divided by the square root of the number of divorces based on the Pareto distribution multiplied by the inverse Dunning-Kruger maths.

 

[eastexsteve]

I would like to propose my new social theory and get your feedback on it. This is based on 20 years of dealing with groups of people.

Keep in mind that a 100 IQ is considered the average IQ. This means that half the population is below average.

 

[D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷]

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Buy more ammo

 

[Maser]

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Guess that explains why BARFCUM have such a huge membership.

 

[D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷]

Guess that explains why BARFCUM have such a huge membership.

Think bigger. And dumber. And if feelings are involved it’s anyone’s guess what will unfold.

 

[DarnYankeeUSMC]

 

[roostercogburn98]

View attachment 8656340

 

[JoshPutman]

I've heard there is a fine line between genius and insanity.

That, and the difference between genius and stupidity is genius has limits.

 

[DocRDS]

Been thinking on this today and there is also the "group acceptance" Many (or most) people want to be accepted by the group or are heavily influenced by the group. That desire effects their thinking. Its tough to be "different" or espouse different ideas as the mob turns against you.

I think its men in black: "A person is smart, People are dumb panicky dangerous animals and you know it"

 

[Milspec Longhorn]

I would like to propose my new social theory and get your feedback on it. This is based on 20 years of dealing with groups of people.

THEORY: The collective IQ of a group can be determined by taking the average IQ of the group, and then subtracting from that number 1/3 of the difference in IQ between the average, and the average of the lower 50 percent of the group.

As an example, if the average IQ is 100, and the lowest half of the people in the group had an average IQ of 70, then this theory says that the group collective IQ will be 90.

This theory reflects the fact that the intelligent people in a group who are above the average are hindered from solving problems rapidly and correctly by the influence and disturbance caused by the people with intelligence below average. In other words they cancel each other out, but intrinsic survival instinct and work drive progress slowly forward. The theory also accounts for the disproportionate influence of those who are truly mentally disabled in society. They take a large percentage of the time of the most intelligent because the severely disabled constantly create problems they are not able to solve themselves. It is much easier to destroy than to build. This reflects the laws of thermodynamics.

True genius is occasionally recognized and the survival instinct drives everyone to adopt a more efficient form of living once the truly intelligent have figured it out. This drives society forward long term. However, in the immediate term, the group IQ can be approximately calculated using this theory.

From years of work in the mil in studying the successful vs failures in high failure rate jobs and training (many of them special ops) - social/emotional intelligence was 5 times more powerful predictor of success than IQ because it is tactical -applied-how you apply what you know to real world problems at hand to improvise, adapt, and overcome.

 

[Eostech]

As an example, if the average IQ is 100, and the lowest half of the people in the group had an average IQ of 70, then this theory says that the group collective IQ will be 90.

Way too generous.
I think you need to look more into the unproportional effect of the truly stupid.

 

[Snipe260]

IQ is not a catch all.

For instance
I am VERY VERY good at math,science and multidimensional spatial awareness.

My spelling is for shit.
I can't stand being in or interacting in groups (my social IQ is very very low).
I am terrible boss because I'm too nice (people need to be told no).
People can have high social IQs and still be dumb as shit.

I’ll take good old common sense any day! But if you add high IQ, you have something!