Democracy doesn’t work.

[Lemmingwise]

Also, .65 correlation with genetics means that slightly over 36% of the variation in IQ between people is due to genetics, I wouldn't say that's an amazing correlation.

What are you talking about? .65 correlation with genetics means that 65% of the variation has a relationship to genetics, which might be causal.

That's how high it is for twins adopted by different parents.

 

[maalikthefakemuzzie]

In my personal opinion I think knowledge is superior to mental cognition. When you have real principles that will always be true they would be more reliable than the vague concept of “intelligence”.

 

[wylfım]

What are you talking about? .65 correlation with genetics means that 65% of the variation has a relationship to genetics, which might be causal.

That's how high it is for twins adopted by different parents.

I always mess this up since I only had an introductory statistics class, so correct me if I'm wrong, but here's my understanding:
r=.65
r² ~= .36 = variation in the trait explained by the variable
Did I mess up on terminology? Because I've always used (and heard used) correlation as synonymous for correlation coefficient

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

You're avoiding the fact that you outed yourself as being completely scientifically illiterate and unwilling to try to actually be rigorous in your thinking. I'm not going to reply to any more of your posts because we are just shitting up this thread at this point.

This isn't your debate club nigger, people can phrase things however they want. @Lemmingwise actually addressed the point instead of trying to "win" by a formal technicality.

In my personal opinion I think knowledge is superior to mental cognition. When you have real principles that will always be true they would be more reliable than the vague concept of “intelligence”.

Literally impossible.

 

[wylfım]

This isn't your debate club nigger, people can phrase things however they want. @Lemmingwise actually addressed the point instead of trying to "win" by a formal technicality.


Literally impossible.

How does a theorem about the natural numbers relate to the existence of true knowledge?

 

[Jeb-sama]

Democracy is a bunch of kids voting on what's for dinner, and to no ones surprise, they all choose candy. Not just any candy though, but "free" candy that leaves their countries trillions in debt.

 

[Vecr]

Democracy is a bunch of kids voting on what's for dinner, and to no ones surprise, they all choose candy. Not just any candy though, but "free" candy that leaves their countries trillions in debt.

Do you have anything better though?

 

[Get_your_kicks_with_30-06]

Do you have anything better though?

Yeah a constitutional republic but they also suck. The only "society" (we live in one after all) that works and keeps the freedom is one with an armed citizenry who isn't afraid to use them.

This concludes the daily PSA that if you advocate for gun confiscation or willingly give them up you are a cuck beta slave aka European.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

How does a theorem about the natural numbers relate to the existence of true knowledge?

The axiom also applies to logic, the basis of every moral system beyond moral nihilism. There is no flawless moral system which lacks a contradiction.

 

[wylfım]

The axiom also applies to logic, the basis of every moral system beyond moral nihilism. There is no flawless moral system which lacks a contradiction.

You're waaaaaaay overextending. I haven't gone through set theory yet, but I highly doubt the theorem can generalize beyond what it already proves— that there is no complete axiomatic mathematical system describing arithmetic.
The existence of logical support for a moral system is different from saying that the moral system arises from logic, and hence logic does not necessarily have bearing on the truth-value of any moral proposition. Example, natural law.

 

[Shoggoth]

This study was in kids, but it found that while verbal IQs stabilized around 4th grade, non-verbal remained highly variable from year to year. I couldn't find a similar study for adults, but lack of evidence is not proof, and it's still very unclear whether IQ remains stable over a lifetime. Also, keep in mind that even if IQ scores remain constant, the raw scores consistently go up with age (and are subsequently adjusted to a standardized scale); so that it is very likely that a middle aged person of low-medium IQ can be more intelligent than a young person with high IQ. IQ also doesn't account for experience or knowledge (I would trust a low-IQ economist more than a high-IQ layman, for instance, in economic policy [assuming the education system is unbiased which is false in reality but the point stands]).
Also, .65 correlation with genetics means that slightly over 36% of the variation in IQ between people is due to genetics, I wouldn't say that's an amazing correlation.

you think it's time to make an IQ megathread to contain this debate?

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

You're waaaaaaay overextending. I haven't gone through set theory yet, but I highly doubt the theorem can generalize beyond what it already proves— that there is no complete axiomatic mathematical system describing arithmetic.
The existence of logical support for a moral system is different from saying that the moral system arises from logic, and hence logic does not necessarily have bearing on the truth-value of any moral proposition. Example, natural law.

Those are actually fair points: I should have brought up Hume's ought-is problem instead.

 

[Positron]

A large group of people living together begets problems. Democracy does not promise to solve these problems. Democracy is merely the system that allow people to coexist while bringing the least amount of problem on the table.

In fact these faults are so common I can explain how they occur. During political campaigns, hard facts tend to be ugly and repulsive, so if you want to get into power you need to make sweet and pleasant lies to the public. And since the public don’t know any better they will accept it.

Even Socrotes-Plato was aware of that.

I always mess this up since I only had an introductory statistics class, so correct me if I'm wrong, but here's my understanding:
r=.65
r² ~= .36 = variation in the trait explained by the variable
Did I mess up on terminology? Because I've always used (and heard used) correlation as synonymous for correlation coefficient

You are right.

 

[ConfederateIrishman]

Pure Democracy almost never works unless the population is small enough; A mixed government such as the Roman Republic or the one adopted by these United States after the articles of confederation are the closest you get to the ideal.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I always mess this up since I only had an introductory statistics class, so correct me if I'm wrong, but here's my understanding:
r=.65
r² ~= .36 = variation in the trait explained by the variable
Did I mess up on terminology? Because I've always used (and heard used) correlation as synonymous for correlation coefficient

You are right.

I thought you guys were mad. Looking it up, I learned a lot about statistics today. I thought 10% relationship and r = .10 were identitical.

The studies themselves refference %, not correlation.

For example: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/250/4978/223.abstract

70%


That one is a particularly high result. Different studies show between 40 - 80% heritability of intelligence, with most close to 60%

Thanks for teaching me something new, and apologies for the confusion.

 

[Trappy]

Democracy: The God That Failed by Hoppe is a good read on the history, failures and inherent dysgenic flaws of democracy.

 

[HunterHearstHelmsley]

One of the Austrians (Mises or Hayek) wrote that on a long enough timeline a state run contrary to the will of the people will be overthrown in rebellion. A small group can not oppress a larger group forever. Democracy serves merely to stop civil wars.

As others have noted it has many flaws.

 

[byuu]

That one is a particularly high result. Different studies show between 40 - 80% heritability of intelligence, with most close to 60%

How can you even properly isolate that?
How do you know lower IQ comes from the genetics or come from shared environmental factors, like an alcoholic mom that drinks during pregnancy, environment contaminated with substances that are known to lower IQ like lead, malnutrition, etc.?

 

[QI 541]

Imagine being this libtarded.

*shrugs* It's no skin off my back if you're so intent on cucking out. History will look back and wonder how such a self-destructive delusional ideology ever survived this long.

 

[ICametoLurk]

Democracy is pretty cucked, I mean you willingly allow the majority to decide your fate. Bit better than some King to decide your fate but in a purest democracy people can vote to kill you and you would have to go along with it to keep the system going.