The IQ problem and jobs

[Serpent]

Mythology is perhaps an unfortunate term, try the abstract representation of the cultural paradigm from an evolutionary perspective.

That presents a new set of difficulties. I usually avoid 'models', diagrams and abstract representations of things that can be discussed of and for themselves, as they really are, what they really do, what processes are actually taking place; I actively dislike the word "paradigm"; and I don't think cultures and societies conform well to the concept of biological evolution.

Never mind. I was wrong to jump in with incomplete information. Got carried away by the subject; neglected the assigned reading.

[wolfhnd]

Mythology is perhaps an unfortunate term, try the abstract representation of the cultural paradigm from an evolutionary perspective.

That presents a new set of difficulties. I usually avoid 'models', diagrams and abstract representations of things that can be discussed of and for themselves, as they really are, what they really do, what processes are actually taking place; I actively dislike the word "paradigm"; and I don't think cultures and societies conform well to the concept of biological evolution.

Never mind. I was wrong to jump in with incomplete information. Got carried away by the subject; neglected the assigned reading.

Abstract representations is the nature of culture. The point Peterson is trying to make is that it isn't just language that requires a biological substrate it is all of consciousness. Culture and biology are inseparable until independent artificial intelligence reproduces itself. Even then since life is so poorly defined the distinction between artificial and biological intelligence may be artificial. Books for example are a form of inanimate artificial intelligence as is much of culture.

Few people are able to see it seems how "artificial" they are. People raised without language have brains that are structurally different from those raised under normal circumstances. Perfectly illustrating the interplay of culture and biology. Your consciousness is not a purely biological process. You are to a large extent what culture has made you.

Here we get to one of the main points Peterson is making. The lack of respect that people have for the culture that created them. No matter how well formed the mind it is a product not of individual but swarm intelligence. Einstein did not invent relativity, the abstract cultural representations that had developed since life emerged coalesced in Einstein. Let Einstein was very stingy with sharing credit. Just as most people fail to acknowledge the debt they owe to culture preferring to think they are their own author and sustenance.

How many times have you stopped to appreciate that your existence is dependent on a military that in it's madness creates order out of chaos. The same is true of all the other "deplorables". The police who keep anarchy at bay, the utility workers who keep your computer on so you can read this, the transportation workers who insure distribution of essential commodities, the farmers who distribute the risk of starvation over vast areas making it an almost unheard of problem in modern societies, the sanitation workers who make your world safe from diseases, the energy workers who make modern society possible, the factory workers who remove all forms of drudgery and multiply your efficiency, the laborers who construct your shelter that keep you warm and dry, The list goes on and the fact that it all works transparently in the back ground is miraculous.

How out of touch with reality the bourgeoisie classes have become to tell the essential people in there lives that they are deplorable. The intelligentsia are like Marie Antoinette telling the peasants they can eat cake because there is no bread. Did anyone miss the petty nobility when the guillotine removed their heads? Didn't society go on without hardly a hiccup?

Peterson's primary message is that you need to make yourself useful first to yourself and through that effort the people around you. That is how you save the soul of a civilization and in the process your own soul. You cannot do that by collectivist rhetoric because life is about the value of individuals not groups.

[BadgerJelly]

Peterson refers to people with very low IQ (83 and below, which is 10% of population) having problems finding employment not lower classes.

He starts the lecture by subdividing IQ levels into job categories - so you can't avoid the class question.

Inaccurate from the get-go, because most people don't end up with the job they're best suited for, or have the appropriate cognitive aptitude for, or would most enjoy doing. They take whatever jobs they can get. And the children of wealthier families, with more access to education for a longer period, are more likely to get into the professions, whether they're intelligent enough or not, while poor kids, no matter how intelligent, may never get a shot at a degree, unless they can also play basketball or something.

He is talking about IQ not class. He just presents the list of jobs to show where IQ levels fit into certain jobs taken from data gathered. Someone with an IQ of 83 is highly unlikely to be running a successful company. You are mistaking the content as saying something it is not saying and focusing on something that is not the focus of this topic.

[wolfhnd]

Peterson refers to people with very low IQ (83 and below, which is 10% of population) having problems finding employment not lower classes.

He starts the lecture by subdividing IQ levels into job categories - so you can't avoid the class question.

Inaccurate from the get-go, because most people don't end up with the job they're best suited for, or have the appropriate cognitive aptitude for, or would most enjoy doing. They take whatever jobs they can get. And the children of wealthier families, with more access to education for a longer period, are more likely to get into the professions, whether they're intelligent enough or not, while poor kids, no matter how intelligent, may never get a shot at a degree, unless they can also play basketball or something.

He is talking about IQ not class. He just presents the list of jobs to show where IQ levels fit into certain jobs taken from data gathered. Someone with an IQ of 83 is highly unlikely to be running a successful company. You are mistaking the content as saying something it is not saying and focusing on something that is not the focus of this topic.

Yes we got a little side tracked but it is almost impossible to separate the issue of IQ and employment from the broader issue of self worth and motivation. There are things society can do and things the individual must do.

[Serpent]

Abstract representations is the nature of culture.

Okay, but I haven't been back to see what that has to do with intelligence and job markets.

...Just as most people fail to acknowledge the debt they owe to culture preferring to think they are their own author and sustenance.

Do most people? Not sure I believe that.

How many times have you stopped to appreciate that your existence is dependent on a military that in it's madness creates order out of chaos.

Never. Not once. Not even right now, when you say so, do I feel tempted to subscribe to the notion that an insane military created order out of chaos. Or even that there was "chaos" before standing armies were constituted.

The same is true of all the other "deplorables".

Let's not sloganize anybody tonight.

The police who keep anarchy at bay,

I think about the police, in several ways and from several perspectives, fairly often. Not convinced that anarchy would instantly break out if they didn't have tanks, though. Not even convinced that anarchy is standing by, waiting for a chance to break out when the cops aren't shooting or kicking somebody.

the utility workers who keep your computer on so you can read this,

Approve, on the whole, of utility workers; not satisfied with "the grid" (my compy is running on a solar panel) or how energy is produced and distributed. Really not pleased with nuclear generators, coal or the huge amount of wattage wasted on keeping office towers lit up all night and the crazy-making advertising neon jungles.

the transportation workers who insure distribution of essential commodities,

Again, problematic. Urban public transport is vital; some goods haulage is important, if not essential - but also, a good deal of it is lugging stuff around the world to cajole people out of money they can't afford for things they don't need, or could produce in better quality locally.

the farmers who distribute the risk of starvation over vast areas making it an almost unheard of problem in modern societies,

I'm slightly confused by the sentence construction, but I do think about farmers. I also think about large-scale, subsidized agri-business. The second put a lot of the first out of commission and made the specter of starvation a little more credible in the west and very much in evidence in the east... so... let's keep thinking about them.

the sanitation workers who make your world safe from diseases,

I think we should value them above commodities traders. Maybe even pay them better. What d'you say?

the energy workers who make modern society possible,

Couple holdouts there. Not a fan of oily cormorants and flammable tapwater.

the factory workers who remove all forms of drudgery and multiply your efficiency, the laborers who construct your shelter that keep you warm and dry,

I thought their increasing and accelerating redundancy was a major problem in society right now.

The list goes on and the fact that it all works transparently in the back ground is miraculous.

No, it's not miraculous. It's damn hard work, organizing, co-operation, government regulation, tax collecting and allocating, and it needs a great deal of thought. Even so, it's not working nearly as well as it should.

How out of touch with reality the bourgeoisie classes have become

I don't know who's included in that, if it excludes the planners, administrators and regulators of energy production, home construction, transportation, public utilities, infrastructure, law enforcement and sanitation. Shopkeepers? Teachers? Sports announcers? Beef inspectors? Who?

to tell the essential people in there lives that they are deplorable.

Who has done that? Might you not be projecting one person's one campaign statement regarding a (as it turns out really, really, really deplorable) political enthusiasm into the long-held attitude of one poorly-defined class toward another poorly defined class?
I'm not saying there is no truth in your statement. I'm saying it needs a lot more scrutiny and contemplation to make sense of what's happened, what the relationships of different groups are and how best to improve them.

Did anyone miss the petty nobility when the guillotine removed their heads? Didn't society go on without hardly a hiccup?

I'd call the reign of terror and the collapse of the economy at least a hiccup. Mass beheadings are not the most stable form of governance. I recommend you consider more carefully than Robespierre did which heads are surplus to requirement.

Peterson's primary message is that you need to make yourself useful first to yourself and through that effort the people around you.

Well, that's fine. If the system will let you.

[-1-]

There was talk earlier in the thread for automation of cooking and serving in restaurants. Someone said our robotics of today is not advanced enough to do those jobs.

I think they are. In fact, if cooking is not an art but a reduction to following recipes, then cooking is most likely afforded to be done by robots.

Service -- well, a bit different, there is some self-serve interaction that must be needed to be done, and that assumes the customer knows what he or she is ordering. In most cases it's not a problem, but try going for the first time to a restaurant in Zimbabwe. Roasted centipedes, fried grassroots with sauteed rhinoceros antler powder, with honey-laden beestingers for dessert. ETC.

In fact, automation of cooking would open up a lot of restaurants to open up, because they could open up to serving literally 2000's types of dishes, now that the recipes have been programmed. Cooks and chefs need not memorize the recipes.

[davidm]

How many times have you stopped to appreciate that your existence is dependent on a military that in it's madness creates order out of chaos. The same is true of all the other "deplorables". The police who keep anarchy at bay, the utility workers who keep your computer on so you can read this, the transportation workers who insure distribution of essential commodities, the farmers who distribute the risk of starvation over vast areas making it an almost unheard of problem in modern societies, the sanitation workers who make your world safe from diseases, the energy workers who make modern society possible, the factory workers who remove all forms of drudgery and multiply your efficiency, the laborers who construct your shelter that keep you warm and dry, The list goes on and the fact that it all works transparently in the back ground is miraculous.

Who in the world ever called these people "deplorables"? Who? Name that person, please.

Although some of the police who "keep anarchy at bay," lol, might be deplorable -- specifically the white cops who murder innocent and defenseless black people at traffic stops and the like.

[davidm]

How out of touch with reality the bourgeoisie classes have become to tell the essential people in there lives that they are deplorable.

Who said this, please? Name that person/s. You can't, of course. This is just nothing but a big Trumpian lie.

[-1-]

How the IQ problem and jobs deteriorated to Trump and police brutality.

I think the IQ problem with jobs is that the presidents of the United States have no minimum IQ requirement for the job. A guy with an IQ of 39 could come along, his daddy could buy the college votes, or whatever they are called (Like Ms. Hillary did), and then bang, a person with Dawn's (sp?) Syndrome will lead the free world.

Which could only be an improvement after the barrage of grabbers we've been experiencing who were vying for the throne, so to speak. People with Dawn's (sp?) syndrome, in my experience, very much stick to the rules, they are conscientious about ethical and legal issues. THAT'S what most if not all politicians lack, aside the debatable IQ insufficiency or oversufficiency.

[-1-]

How out of touch with reality the bourgeoisie classes have become to tell the essential people in there lives that they are deplorable.

Who said this, please? Name that person/s. You can't, of course. This is just nothing but a big Trumpian lie.

Humbug. This ain't no Trumpian lie. 'Tis straight out of the Kommunist Manifesto by Karl Marx. We studied it in Kommunist Hungary back in 1952.

Except, of course, the original was not replete with spelling errors, like "there" for "their".

[TheVat]

Just for a little context for the sake of non-U.S. members:

"Deplorable" refers to a quote from Hilary Clinton which is often taken out of context and therefore its meaning altered. Clinton, in the complete quote from an interview taken during her 2016 campaign, specifically said that she felt that bigots, homophobes, and racists were a deplorable group of people. By taking one phrase out of context, the opposition turned this into her dismissing all working class Americans who supported Trump as "a basket of deplorables." Clinton, in fact, often expressed great respect for the working class people who keep our civilization running and had specific policy proposals to promote practical vocational programs for people in shrinking industries, as well as trade agreements to ensure the stability of markets that would help the working class.

I think this illlustrates why trustworthy and unbiased journalism is so vital to democracy. The misappropriation of a phrase, the insertion of prejudicial spin by means of incomplete quotes, is a powerful tool of propagandists. Once you have roused the ignorant mob with emotion, any future attempt at correction, at retraction of a false allegation, goes unheard.

[davidm]

Notice how here, it’s not just that Hillary Clinton allegedly characterized working-class people as “deplorable,” when she most certainly did not, it’s that, under the metastasizing Big Lie being promoted right here in this thread, it’s the bourgeoisie classes “telling” this, no less, to the essential people in their lives. (!) When, of course, only Clinton used this word, and NOT in reference to "essential people."

I don’t know about anyone else, but racists, misogynists, the transphobic and other bigoted deplorables are not in any way “essential” to my life. Note also the casually (deliberately?) undefined use of the word bourgeoisie. Whatever could the poster mean, hmm?

[davidm]

Jordan Peterson’s impenetrable gobbledygook.

:-D

[BadgerJelly]

Jordan Peterson’s impenetrable gobbledygook.

:-D

That’s a pretty damn awful critique. He assumes “power” is meant as “domination.” Pererson expresses some reasonable ideas and even I could do a better critique his views than that nonsense “article.”

Anyway, I don’t see how that has much to do with the OP? Is it a case of he said one thing I disagree with so therefore everything he says must be “goggledegook”? Seems strange to rage about something like this because it does nothing to address the problem outlined in the OP - that is people below a certain IQ struggle to find paid work. Given that corporations out to make profits are more likely to use robots to do their labour than people I think it is a problem that needs considerable thought if the state of world education remains as it is.

I do think that give a better understanding of education and human intelligence would lead to the average human population’s intelligence rising - nutrition and living standards as well as method of education having an effect. Hopefully we’ll learn more about how to get the best from ourselves before this issue becomes a bigger problem (if it does at all.)

[davidm]

I stopped viewing the video you linked after just a minute or so, for reasons like these.

Earlier, wolfhbnd invoked Peterson’s concept of “hierarchies.” In a comprehensive video, the afore-linked P.Z. Myers completely takes this apart, as well as Peterson’s other misconceptions about evolution and culture.

[BadgerJelly]

Davidm -

So you are arguing that someone with an IQ of 80 can be trained to do tasks as quickly and efficiently as someone with an IQ of say 90-100? Or did you not get to that part of the video you decided not to watch based on someone with an obvious axe to grind against someone with “religious” views?

That’s just plain silly. If you want to take this seriously (I’m going out on a limb here) then start at 7 mins; that was the part I was referring to. If you have issues with his “religious” ideas and views about the influence of Christianity on western civilization I’m with you (in part at least.) That is not the point here though.

Address the OP or complain about Peterson someone else - I’d be happy to join in in the that department.

[Katrin]

stupid people can not judge and work in jobs like the arms industry

[-1-]

Stoopid peephole kent rite posts on internet filosopfi phoroums.

[-1-]

I apologize to those who were offended by my above post. I did not direct it (the intention was not at all to direct it) at any particular individual; I don't even know the other people on this board.

My post was simply intended as a self-deprecating joke, as in juxtaposing the fact that philosophers are not stupid per se as a rule, but on the other hand philosophers do not need to be smart, either, since there is no harm done by false or illogical thoughts, as long as they stay in the realm of opinions--opposed to the military where if some machinery is operated by dilettantes, then entire continents may blow up.

Again, I regret if my previous post upset people here.

[TheVat]

We all figured out what you meant, and that it wasn't directed at anyone. Just another SNAFU at the forum. And your comment on philosophers reminds me of a joke (which you may have heard)....

Several university department heads are trying to convince the budget director how frugal their department is.

Physics dean: We saved lots of money by renting out our particle accelerator to private businesses when we're not using it.

Math dean: Pffft. All we spend money on is pencils, paper, and wastebaskets!

Philosophy dean: That's nice. Our department just uses pencils and paper. We haven't used wastebaskets for years!

[-1-]

Haha! I haven't heard that one.

But I bet you haven't heard this one:

Several department heads are vying for larger fund allocation for their departments. They are meeting in the dean's office. The chair of the Palko Erdos School of Math: "Well, we need at least two new Craig computers. Otherwise we might as well close down the department." The chair of the Ede Teller School of Physics: "Oy, with the price of Hadron Colliders these days... we need a lot more money than the math department." The chair of the Kostas Plato School of Philosophy: "Well, if you think about at what price tag logical thoughts come these days..."