.:.:.:.:RTTP.Mobile:.:.:.:.
[<--back] [Home][Pics][News][Ads][Events][Forum][Band][Search]
full forum | bottom

jump pages:[all|1|2]

If we killed everyone under 120 IQ points, would life be (a) better or (b) worse?

[views:10894][posts:90]
 _________________________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:21pm - Conservationist ""]
Just askin'
 ______________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:25pm - Lamp ""]
There wouldn't be any reality TV, that's for god damn sure. Better.
 ______________________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:28pm - the_reverend ""]
GO WAY BATIN
 ______________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:32pm - ark  ""]
Who would clean your toilet after a steaming load sesh?
 ___________________________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:36pm - quintessence_nli  ""]
U SHUTT UP!
 _________________________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:43pm - Conservationist ""]

ark said:Who would clean your toilet after a steaming load sesh?


Same person who cleans it now... me. No one else needs to come into contact with this TOXIC DUMP.
 ______________________________
[Mar 4,2010 11:43pm - Lamp ""]

ark said:Who would clean your toilet after a steaming load sesh?


You have to be unintelligent to do your own menial chores.
 ____________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 1:01am - im thinkin slarbys  ""]
in general, it would be better, but i think you are dismissing the important roles dullards play in our society, and i'm not just talking about cleaning toilets. Also, you are gravely mistaken if you think getting rid of people below 120 IQ is going to solve all your problems. CASE STUDY: The tests i've taken have come out in the 145-155 range and I'm a walking waste of life by "conservative" standards (i.e. life = collecting unemployment, playing metal, fappage, rttp, that is all.)
and one more thing, i would have no problem with this plot except for, if you get rid of all the low IQ girls, who am i going to have sex with???
 _________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 4:04am - douchebag_patrol ""]
[img]
 _________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 4:06am - douchebag_patrol ""]
[img]
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:06am - ouchdrummer ""]
no, it would suck. Think of all the things in the world that you DON'T want to do... that wouldn't ever get done.


Slar - sorry buddy, but i just looked at what your supposed 145-155 IQ means, and you know that you're claiming to be a genus? (or near genus) Check out the chart a little down on this page.

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQBasics.aspx

If you admit right now that you were exaggerating, it will be funny, and you'd still be aces in my book. If you still claim to be a 145 - 155 then you get knocked down to probably full of shit.... with an outside possibility of being a genus.
 _____________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:09am - Lamp ""]
Why do you have to be unintelligent to work hard? I've tested over 120 my whole life and I prefer working hard and doings things that "nobody wants to do" over working in a shitty office any day.

And not only that, but all those shitty things would probably get done a hell of a lot better and faster. With less people on the planet, there would also be a lot less of it to worry about.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:13am - ouchdrummer ""]
I didn't say you have to be dumb to work hard. I said there are certain jobs that the VAST MAJORITY of smart people would not do. Working hard/cleaning toilets in schools aren't necessarily the same thing. So yes, i think my statement still applies.
 ___________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:15am - arilliusbm ""]
Alls I gotta say is those online / faceook / chain mail "IQ tests" aren't real tests. I hope people don't think those are accurate tests
 _____________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:19am - Lamp ""]

ouchdrummer said:I didn't say you have to be dumb to work hard. I said there are certain jobs that the VAST MAJORITY of smart people would not do. Working hard/cleaning toilets in schools aren't necessarily the same thing. So yes, i think my statement still applies.


If the world actually ran in an efficient manner, there would be a brush at every toilet and people would just clean it themselves after using it. Nobody would be dumb enough to steal the brush either. You wouldn't have to pay someone to do it.

Just a thought.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:23am - ouchdrummer ""]
You're not just talking about a society where everyone is smart, you're talking about a eutopian one. Even with the smartest people in the world left, the toilet wouldn't be cleaned everytime. I agree with your earlier statement to a point, that intelligence doesn't necessarily dictate employment.. but i do think there is some correlation between manual labor/crappy work conditions and intelligence.
 ___________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:24am - arilliusbm ""]
Intilligent people invent devices that can clean the toilet.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:24am - ouchdrummer ""]

arilliusbm said:Alls I gotta say is those online / faceook / chain mail "IQ tests" aren't real tests. I hope people don't think those are accurate tests

of course not, maybe slar was... (sorry slar, if you're really a genus, than you can understand why people would be apprehensive about your 145-155IQ, and you can rise above and transcend.)
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:38am - Conservationist ""]

Lamp said:Why do you have to be unintelligent to work hard? I've tested over 120 my whole life and I prefer working hard and doings things that "nobody wants to do" over working in a shitty office any day.

And not only that, but all those shitty things would probably get done a hell of a lot better and faster. With less people on the planet, there would also be a lot less of it to worry about.



I agree totally.

I like cleaning my own toilets, mowing my own lawn, fixing my own house, and so on.

No task is better done by stupid people and if a task is stupid, we owe it to our humanity to automate it.

The attitude of being "above" certain labors pisses me off, and I am a total and complete anti-egalitarian. It's not egalitarian to do what needs be done and not involve others. It's common sense.

Good post.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:41am - Conservationist ""]

im%20thinkin%20slarbys said:in general, it would be better, but i think you are dismissing the important roles dullards play in our society, and i'm not just talking about cleaning toilets. Also, you are gravely mistaken if you think getting rid of people below 120 IQ is going to solve all your problems. CASE STUDY: The tests i've taken have come out in the 145-155 range and I'm a walking waste of life by "conservative" standards (i.e. life = collecting unemployment, playing metal, fappage, rttp, that is all.)
and one more thing, i would have no problem with this plot except for, if you get rid of all the low IQ girls, who am i going to have sex with???



You've put a lot of issues into one post, so I'm going to break it out which will move more slowly but more accurately.

1. What tests are these? Are these administered by a psychologist with experience in intelligence testing?

2. 145-155 is not genius, and no reliable test will give you that broad of a range. 160 is genius.

3. That some high intelligence people are dysfunctional does not mean that on the whole, high intelligence people are more functional than low intelligence people.

4. This is a useful resource:

http://www.eugenics.net/papers/murray.html

5. "Conservative" standards aren't as uniform or kneejerk as you'd think, especially considering that "conservative" is a very wide definition -- actually far wider than liberal. If the metal music is good, most conservatives would be OK with what you're doing, unless offended for religious reasons. And even then, they will probably not urge for its censorship. It's a small minority that makes sites like BoycottHouston.org

 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:43am - Conservationist ""]

ouchdrummer said:i do think there is some correlation between manual labor/crappy work conditions and intelligence.


There is because lower intelligence people are limited in what they can do. You wouldn't want an idiot to be your doctor, but he might acceptably clean a toilet.

Of course, if we all cleaned our own toilets and chipped in to clean public toilets, we'd probably have a healthier society anyway. No more class warfare at least.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 8:43am - Conservationist ""]

douchebag_patrol said:[img]


This may ruin it for you, but most snake charmers yank out the teeth of their cobras.

 __________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:13am - arktouros ""]
if this happened i wouldn't be upset, but it really limits the pool of potential railing targets.

i'm assuming higher IQ correlates to a more peaceful person but it certainly wouldn't mean a utopia. if people had to get wiped out, sorting by IQ would be the way to do it though. look at us little RTTP hitlers!
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:20am - ouchdrummer ""]

Conservationist said:
Lamp said:Why do you have to be unintelligent to work hard? I've tested over 120 my whole life and I prefer working hard and doings things that "nobody wants to do" over working in a shitty office any day.

And not only that, but all those shitty things would probably get done a hell of a lot better and faster. With less people on the planet, there would also be a lot less of it to worry about.



I agree totally.

I like cleaning my own toilets, mowing my own lawn, fixing my own house, and so on.

No task is better done by stupid people and if a task is stupid, we owe it to our humanity to automate it.

The attitude of being "above" certain labors pisses me off, and I am a total and complete anti-egalitarian. It's not egalitarian to do what needs be done and not involve others. It's common sense.

Good post.



Just because you guys feel that way, and would act that way,does not make it true for the majority of the intelligent. Whether or not you "hate" that attitude, it exists. And it exists in what i would guess to be a large portion of the intelligent population. So whether or not you claim that you would "clean toilets" the majority of people smart enough to do a job that PAYS more, and that isn't so SHITTY(haha, pun) would get such a job.

 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:21am - ouchdrummer ""]

Conservationist said:
ouchdrummer said:i do think there is some correlation between manual labor/crappy work conditions and intelligence.


There is because lower intelligence people are limited in what they can do. You wouldn't want an idiot to be your doctor, but he might acceptably clean a toilet.

Of course, if we all cleaned our own toilets and chipped in to clean public toilets, we'd probably have a healthier society anyway. No more class warfare at least.


and "chipping in" to clean toilets? Again, you're referring to some peaceful Utopian society, NOT just the elimination of the intellectually inferior.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:22am - Conservationist ""]

ouchdrummer said:Just because you guys feel that way, and would act that way,does not make it true for the majority of the intelligent. Whether or not you "hate" that attitude, it exists. And it exists in what i would guess to be a large portion of the intelligent population. So whether or not you claim that you would "clean toilets" the majority of people smart enough to do a job that PAYS more, and that isn't so SHITTY(haha, pun) would get such a job.


So you're saying the majority is always right, and if they believe the world is flat, it must be so?


arktouros said:i'm assuming higher IQ correlates to a more peaceful person but it certainly wouldn't mean a utopia. if people had to get wiped out, sorting by IQ would be the way to do it though.


It's better than any other option. I doubt higher IQ people are more peaceful, but I question "more peaceful" as a goal. I think I prefer more competent/realistic to "more peaceful," and that's an anti-Utopian view -- we will never have peace, universal stability, etc. but at least we won't be incompetent.
 __________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:22am - arktouros ""]
they want everybody to clean public toilets after they use them with community brushes. some sort of Brown Army.
 ___________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:23am - arilliusbm ""]
I'm too lazy and tired to submit any intelligent responses this morning. Good luck with this -soon-to-be 700 views/50+ response thread, guys.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:24am - ouchdrummer ""]

Conservationist said:
ouchdrummer said:Just because you guys feel that way, and would act that way,does not make it true for the majority of the intelligent. Whether or not you "hate" that attitude, it exists. And it exists in what i would guess to be a large portion of the intelligent population. So whether or not you claim that you would "clean toilets" the majority of people smart enough to do a job that PAYS more, and that isn't so SHITTY(haha, pun) would get such a job.


So you're saying the majority is always right, and if they believe the world is flat, it must be so?


no we're not talking about right or wrong here, we're talking about what would happen if everyone below a certain intelligence died. Don't change the topic to match your argument.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:25am - Conservationist ""]

ouchdrummer said:we're talking about what would happen if everyone below a certain intelligence died.


OK, then what does what the majority wants to think about this have any relevance?

 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:25am - ouchdrummer ""]
The question stated was if it would be better or worse, not "what's the RIGHT way for everyone to live together after stupid people died?"
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:27am - ouchdrummer ""]

Conservationist said:
ouchdrummer said:we're talking about what would happen if everyone below a certain intelligence died.


OK, then what does what the majority wants to think about this have any relevance?




The relevance is the majority of SMART people (which is what i clearly referenced) would be the entire population. So what they WANTED would dictate how the world worked... therefor have a HUGE impact on whether or not it would be better.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:29am - Conservationist ""]

ouchdrummer said:The relevance is the majority of SMART people (which is what i clearly referenced) would be the entire population. So what they WANTED would dictate how the world worked...


Yes, but they'd also have to adapt to their reality. What happens now when you think, "I wish I had someone to do my homework/car repairs/etc for me?" and there's no one there.

You sigh and move on with it.

That's what would happen. And the benefits of not supporting 6.75 billion parasites would be readily apparent.

If everyone under 120 IQ points died, would life be better or worse? (Facebook group)
 ________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:30am - reimroc ""]
Just because someone has a high IQ doesn't make them a smart person.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:33am - ouchdrummer ""]

Conservationist said:
ouchdrummer said:The relevance is the majority of SMART people (which is what i clearly referenced) would be the entire population. So what they WANTED would dictate how the world worked...


Yes, but they'd also have to adapt to their reality. What happens now when you think, "I wish I had someone to do my homework/car repairs/etc for me?" and there's no one there.

You sigh and move on with it.

That's what would happen. And the benefits of not supporting 6.75 billion parasites would be readily apparent.

If everyone under 120 IQ points died, would life be better or worse? (Facebook group)




Sigh.
 ___________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 9:44am - arilliusbm ""]
The disire and thirst for knowledge supercedes any portential one may have for attaining such knowledge.
One could have a 160 IQ but sit around indulging themselves in various forms of entertainment, resulting in an idle mind.
if only society was at a renaissance-state right now...
We are blinded by our society and we are hindered by our surroundings.
The only answer should be a restructuring of society as we know it.
 _________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 10:04am - Conservationist ""]

reimroc said:Just because someone has a high IQ doesn't make them a smart person.


No, but a high IQ is required to be smart.

Not all people with two arms are great guitarists, but it requires two arms to be a guitarist.


arilliusbm said:One could have a 160 IQ but sit around indulging themselves in various forms of entertainment, resulting in an idle mind.


What percentage of 160s do you think do this, versus 105s?
 ___________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 10:06am - arktouros ""]

arilliusbm said:The desire and thirst for knowledge supersedes any potential one may have for attaining such knowledge.



:point:

I believe this is the most important trait an individual can have.
 __________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 10:09am - brian_dc ""]
Only problem I'd see would be the greater opportunity for inbreeding with such a lessened population, which would, in turn, start up the infiltration of the dumb folk again.

You can't give kids IQ tests right out of the womb, so you'd have kids ducking the test and parents using parental instincts to protect their dumb kids. Wouldn't work.
 __________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 10:10am - brian_dc ""]
I guess that's not really the "only problem" with it.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 10:20am - arilliusbm ""]
lol thanks for fixing my mispelling of desire and supersede, ark.

conservationist- I would still argue that the majority of them do. It's what society wants us to do these days. We are fed lies by the media, brainwashed by many, and reminded that Immediate gratification is the only way to attain things these days. The successors are those who choose to move beyond the boundaries society enforces and actively use their IQ for beneficial means.
Knowledge is a dead concept to some, and those who chose to use their brain instead of indulge it are the high IQ people that really matter.
we must reshape and reshuffle what is important to the human race. A society based on science, knowledge, and mathematics would be better for our race.
If we are to obtain that society, we would still have the lower IQ people on the planet.
We either chose to accept our scientific dictatorship, or we free ourselves and advance our species.
 _____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 10:36am - ouchdrummer ""]

arktouros said:
arilliusbm said:The desire and thirst for knowledge supersedes any potential one may have for attaining such knowledge.



:point:

I believe this is the most important trait an individual can have.



I agree. And i think it applies to musicians wholly as well. With drummers for instance, i don't think a natural musical ability is as important as being driven, focusing on bettering you're playing constantly, and always setting new goals.
 _________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 11:18am - Conservationist ""]

arilliusbm said:It's what society wants us to do these days. We are fed lies by the media, brainwashed by many, and reminded that Immediate gratification is the only way to attain things these days. The successors are those who choose to move beyond the boundaries society enforces and actively use their IQ for beneficial means.


True, but most high-IQ types see through that. Their invisibility is emblematic I think of something else: smart people hide from an insane world.


arktouros said:
arilliusbm said:The desire and thirst for knowledge supersedes any potential one may have for attaining such knowledge.



I believe this is the most important trait an individual can have.



If the individual isn't intelligent enough to make sense of that knowledge, they will just get it wrong.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 11:30am - arilliusbm ""]
True. I still think society is hindering our species to the point where high IQ people lack that lustful thirst for gaining and using knowledge.
We need a new awakening or some sort; then we shall kill all people less than 120. I love being part of Bilderberg's master plan.
 _____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 11:30am - ouchdrummer ""]

Conservationist said:
arilliusbm said:It's what society wants us to do these days. We are fed lies by the media, brainwashed by many, and reminded that Immediate gratification is the only way to attain things these days. The successors are those who choose to move beyond the boundaries society enforces and actively use their IQ for beneficial means.


True, but most high-IQ types see through that. Their invisibility is emblematic I think of something else: smart people hide from an insane world.


arktouros said:
arilliusbm said:The desire and thirst for knowledge supersedes any potential one may have for attaining such knowledge.



I believe this is the most important trait an individual can have.



If the individual isn't intelligent enough to make sense of that knowledge, they will just get it wrong.



thanks for this insight.
 _________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 11:36am - Martins ""]
lol @ this thread
I wish I were smart enough to understand it.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 11:48am - arilliusbm ""]
Your braincells have had too much grass.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 11:59am - DestroyYouAlot ""]
We should just trick everyone under 120 into killing themselves if we're so smart.



Just sayin'.
 ________________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 12:01pm - DestroyYouAlot ""]
For the record, my answer to the OP would be "undoubtedly," but the same could be said for any mass depopulation of the planet, so that may not prove much.
 ____________________________________
[Mar 5,2010 12:09pm - arilliusbm ""]
Georgia Guidestones say it all!!1!1!

jump pages:[all|1|2]


Reply
[login ]
SPAM Filter: re-type this (values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
message

top [Vers. 0.12][ 0.007 secs/8 queries][refresh][