![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Eclogite » August 15th, 2017, 4:37 pm wrote:My in depth examination of society suggests that at least some of them could become politicians.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
wolfhnd » August 16th, 2017, 8:46 am wrote:Big problem but it is worse than most people think. Many lawyers, engineers, research and medical technicians, accountants, teachers, sales representatives, and others in the 110 to 130 IQ range can easily be replaced by AI.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
BadgerJelly » August 15th, 2017, 8:54 pm wrote:How do you justify this statement? I think Peterson pointed out that people still need to man the tills in McDonalds because the job is too complex for robots.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
wolfhnd » August 16th, 2017, 11:26 am wrote:https://hbr.org/2016/10/robots-will-replace-doctors-lawyers-and-other-professionals
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
BadgerJelly » Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:50 am wrote:wolfhnd » August 16th, 2017, 11:26 am wrote:https://hbr.org/2016/10/robots-will-replace-doctors-lawyers-and-other-professionals
He mentions this. The thing he pointed out that stuck me was that the very low end of the spectrum do nothing in their free time. It is a question of fulfilling your sense of purpose. For me or you, or anyone of 100-130 IQ if we're not working we can pursue other activity and think about things. The low end of the spectrum just get bored and feel worthless.
I have a lot of free time and I try and use it to further my intellect and general understanding. As he says in the vid he could explain a task to me in 10 minutes that I would be able to do no problem without further instruction, whereas someone with an IQ of around 85 or lower it would, and has, taken him 10 hours to get them to understand and complete only part of the task.
People of low IQ need simple jobs to fit into society. If this is extended up to IQ of 130 then I don't see it as being as a big a problem the higher we go because we'd effectively be freeing up people to improve themselves and have sense of self worth.
People need something to do.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
BadgerJelly » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:03 am wrote:wolf -
I don't think that's fair. Intelligence does not make someone "good". I would say they would be unhappy if they felt worthless, as anyone would. This could turn them to drugs and crime, but if it didn't I am more concerned about the human being not the problem they pose to society but the problem society poses to the individual human (smart or not).
The smarter just happen to have more ways and means to cope I imagine? Although that could be argued too. I would hardly say being smart makes you happier and more fulfilled it is simply a case of fulfilling your own potential, or rather striving to do so. If you have a limited potential and that is taken away from you what is left? The higher the ceiling of potential (in this case of value to society) is much higher for the people with higher IQ it would seem?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Serpent » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:56 am wrote:The only advantage intelligence gives you is finding creative things to do with your free time. Bright people are more likely to invent something, or play complex games, or write how-to-be-happy-even-though-Jesus-doesn't-really-like-you-all-that-much books, while stupid people are more likely to attend gladiatorial contests, gather around stalled cars, or shoot innocent bunnies.
As for work, there are skills of the body and hand and eye that don't rely on intelligence; there is caring and nurturing that doesn't need higher education; there are talents and emotional capacities; there are still areas of service and art where thinking may even be a hindrance.
We've known since quite early in the 20th century that most work will eventually be done by machines, but we kept right on making too many people as well as machines. We'll adjust to less work and more diverse activities - at all intellectual levels.
If we survive the next 20 years. Or days.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Granted but even if they are employed they still have plenty of time to cause havoc, mess up their kids, abuse drugs, and disturb the peace.
Same old I'm better than you because I live in a gated community line? The problem with "stupid" people is they have been abandoned by the bourgeoisie liberal middle class that used to set an example of how to live a non chaotic life.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
wolfhnd » August 16th, 2017, 12:56 am wrote:Same old I'm better than you because I live in a gated community line?
The problem with "stupid" people is they have been abandoned by the bourgeoisie liberal middle class
that used to set an example of how to live a non chaotic life.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
BadgerJelly » August 16th, 2017, 2:18 am wrote:... cause havoc, mess up their kids, abuse drugs, and disturb the peace....
I think if people are occupied and have a sense of purpose they won't turn to these things. That is all I was saying. Some, at every level of society (regardless of intelligence, wealth, creativity or a number of other factors that don't spring immediately to my mind), will loose their sense of worth or purpose due to personal circumstances and turn to drugs, violence and such.
The main issue I am looking at here is what can society do? You mention the "middle class" disregarding the "lower class".
Anyway, the main theme for this thread is the lack of possible jobs in the future and what the unemployed will do. How have the "middle class" failed and what can they do?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
BadgerJelly » August 16th, 2017, 1:06 pm wrote:Serpent -
You've made an error regarding the first quote. You seem to have read the exact opposite of what I've written. I said that people will fall into those cycles regardless of social standing due to problems.
y "worth" I meant sense of personal value to society, the feeling of being useful for something not "profit" but certainly a kind of "economic"
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
BadgerJelly » August 16th, 2017, 2:39 pm wrote:Peterson refers to people with very low IQ (83 and below, which is 10% of population) having problems finding employment not lower classes.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Serpent » Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:50 pm wrote:Dawkins doesn't deserve any credit for killing God. Lots of people before him had a hand in that assassination.
Anyway, how many no-longer-working people are familiar with Dawkins, as anything but a demonic icon in creationist propaganda? The people who actually read his work already didn't believe in God when they opened the book. I very much doubt he's changed anyone's belief or world-view in any appreciable way.
That's nothing to do with the robotization of societies, most of which was done by industrial and political leaders who were pillars of their church and moved their lips in all the right places in the service.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
wolfhnd » August 16th, 2017, 3:51 pm wrote:That is a pretty shallow analysis of what Peterson is saying.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Serpent » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:12 pm wrote:wolfhnd » August 16th, 2017, 3:51 pm wrote:That is a pretty shallow analysis of what Peterson is saying.
I wasn't trying to analyze it. I didn't get that far in the video - technical glitch. I may try it again.
I'm not much inclined to drag mythology into the current socio-economic crisis, but I realize that many people are, so it may be unavoidable.
![]() |
![]() |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests