Wokeness or Something

[Thebestoftherest]

So in other words, your using opinion as facts. Frustration.

[Frustration]

I am concerned that you're arguing against facts that are both common knowledge and easily accessible.

[Thebestoftherest]

Hey I am the one that got an actual source against your point, YOU need to provide a counterpoint source and not your opinion.

[hammerofglass]

My completely unsupported guess is that Frustration's source is a half-remembered Jordan Peterson rant that vaguely referenced The Bell Curve.

So easy to show I'm wrong.

[McAvoy]

Hey I am the one that got an actual source against your point, YOU need to provide a counterpoint source and not your opinion.

Yeah... I am always skeptical of the 'do your own research' or 'I am not looking it up for you' types when confronted about a claim they have made.

[Thebestoftherest]

Agree, since I actually measured up to that standard.

[Draco Dracul]

A source? The point is so widely known that a casual search will quickly lead to countless articles acknowledging it.

>Earlier I said that at it's best IQ is largely a measure of wealth,

And that is wrong.

> The belief in IQ as a mostly fundamental part of the psyche caused by DNA is basically modern day phrenology.

And THAT is wrong.

I am concerned that you're arguing against facts that are both common knowledge and easily accessible.

You've literally been provided a source that IQ is largely environmental.

"Common Knowledge" is quite often wrong or even active propaganda. For instance the idea that rabbits love carrots stems almost entirely from Bug Bunny cartoons and the idea that carrots improve your eyesight comes from a british disinformation campaign meant to hide the invention of radar.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The idea that IQ is reliable for deterministically innate intelligence isn't commonly understood knowledge.

Common knowledge is already stipulated and under the sun. That doesn't really apply to how IQ testing is administered and pertinent to understanding intelligence on a purely quantitative level.

[McAvoy]

A source? The point is so widely known that a casual search will quickly lead to countless articles acknowledging it.

>Earlier I said that at it's best IQ is largely a measure of wealth,

And that is wrong.

> The belief in IQ as a mostly fundamental part of the psyche caused by DNA is basically modern day phrenology.

And THAT is wrong.

I am concerned that you're arguing against facts that are both common knowledge and easily accessible.

You've literally been provided a source that IQ is largely environmental.

"Common Knowledge" is quite often wrong or even active propaganda. For instance the idea that rabbits love carrots stems almost entirely from Bug Bunny cartoons and the idea that carrots improve your eyesight comes from a british disinformation campaign meant to hide the invention of radar.

There is a ton of these 'Common Knowledge' examples. You could call them myths too.

My brother who is otherwise very intelligent still thinks sugar makes kids hyper. He uses his own kids as an example and that I have none. It's one of those things where something colors your views of things.

Kids acting bad. Must be that juice they drank. Kids acting bad. Must be the candy they ate. But entirely ignoring or forgetting that the other eight times the kids behaved normally.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

That's not common knowledge, that's just things people say.