The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
why is there such a wide IQ gap across "humanity"?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 10th, 2025 9:46 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt the gap between someone like Gauss and an 80 IQ is enormous. doesn't make sense. if you look at other species across biology each organism generally has comparable abilities, at least within a reasonable range. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416621) |
Date: November 10th, 2025 9:47 AM Author: vigorous pungent private investor there are retarded dogs and cats and shit too imo (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416625) |
 |
Date: November 10th, 2025 9:50 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt yeah the gap between something like a top tier Egyptian Mau and some dumb mutt can be pretty wide but its nowhere close to the diff between Gauss and an 80 iq. even the diff between gaus and a 97th or 98th percentile IQ is fucking massive (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416630) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 9:51 AM Author: twinkling charismatic property brethren the answer is there really isn't much of a gap, compared to the I'sQ of (eg) slime molds, rocks, mesohippus, etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416634) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 9:57 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt the spectrum is bigger from rock to slime mold to worm to human sure. but within a species there isn't a big gap apart from what you see in humans. in most animals the standard deviation in cognitive performance is relatively small--roughly a factor of 1.5-2 between the best and worst performers. in humans that gap can span orders of magnitude. and the question is why would *one* species have such wide *internal* spread (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416645) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:02 AM Author: twinkling charismatic property brethren this is your biased human pov. if you were a horse, all humans would seem equally smart from your perspective but you could easily winnow out the smart & dumb horses (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416655) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:03 AM Author: twinkling charismatic property brethren this is like looking at a newspaper with a scanning electron microscope and asking how come there's so much space between each letter. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416656) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:12 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt you are confusing perceptual compression with actual variance. humans would collapse into a smear to the horse because its cognitive sensors lack the bandwidth to distinguish the subtler gradations. thats an epistemic limitation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416689) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:17 AM Author: primrose school cafeteria (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416700) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 9:58 AM Author: Olive arousing spot prole Because there are many evolutionary survival strategies that work. Intelligence is just one and it’s actually one of the less effective ones. That’s why you don’t see it much in the animal kingdom and those species do just fine. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416647) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:17 AM Author: primrose school cafeteria cr. that's why where food is abundant you find the dumbest people. what matters there is physically taking the resources. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416699) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:35 PM Author: Olive arousing spot prole counterpoint: polar bears are retarded (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417230) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 11:42 PM Author: grizzly old irish cottage feces more importantly, so are inuit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419431) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:19 AM Author: primrose school cafeteria we have the same morphological spectrum in physique too. a dindu isn't gonna split the atom and more than you're gonna beat one in a footrace. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416704) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:31 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt yeah or beat one at fucking a female to completion (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49416726) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:11 PM Author: primrose school cafeteria (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417118) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:12 PM Author: electric mad-dog skullcap roommate Are you familiar with the concept of a "normal distribution"? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417130) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:20 PM Author: adulterous double fault newt are you familiar with the concept of "variance" among that normal distribution? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417166) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:24 PM Author: electric mad-dog skullcap roommate no (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417177) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:27 PM Author: adulterous double fault newt apparently not. normal distribution is the shape (bell curve). thats the form or symmetry not the spread. you can have a narrow bell curve or a wide one depending on the standard deviation. two populations can both have normal distributions but radically diff gaps between their least and most capable members (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417186) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:21 PM Author: Talented crotch cuck I think you’re taxing the poor guy beyond his limits, squabbling about boner pills is more his wheelhouse (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419248) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 12:53 AM Author: narrow-minded ultramarine half-breed parlor it's embarrassing that he came trying to poast about "normal distribution" acting all cocky without even understanding the basics. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419520) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 10:54 AM Author: smoky dog poop range (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420247) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:13 PM Author: outnumbered boltzmann What benefit in most environments does an IQ beyond subsistence provide? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417136) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:15 PM Author: electric mad-dog skullcap roommate Oh I can think of a few *greedily rubs palms together* |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 12:16 PM Author: outnumbered boltzmann Chill with the antisemitism brah (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49417143) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 11:36 PM Author: High-end Lake Whorehouse Masturbator If you’re suggesting that high iq havers get better jobs that are more likely to lead to reproducing, lol, just lol brother. Proles far outbreed richers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419428) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 5:58 PM Author: abusive bawdyhouse This is ironically a low IQ post.
Look at fucking penguins. They all look exactly the same.
But if you're a penguin, i'm sure you're like, wow look at how crazy different penguins look like!
Someone with a 90 IQ can basically do almost every single thing someone with an IQ of 130 can. The only differentiator is maybe the ability to do some math that the 130 IQ person never uses in real life. |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 7:29 PM Author: adulterous double fault newt I answered a similar point earlier. you are conflating phenomenological similarity ("penguins all look the same to us") and structural variance. basically you're mistaking coarse perceptual categories for objective equivalence.
also you are a literal retard if you think the only diff between 90 and 130 iq is some math noone uses. |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:14 PM Author: abusive bawdyhouse Your responses earlier seemed to rely on the assumption that (i) we can measure IQ accurately, (ii) we can measure IQ accurately in animals, and (iii) you can extrapolate the deviations of animal IQ and measure it against human deviations.
Maybe you're right, but personally i have no clue if dogs have more or less variance in intelligence and not sure i trust any scientist who wastes his time studying it. |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 12:05 AM Author: bossy kitty cat hell (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419460) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 12:54 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt no not really. the structural argument against variance vs. perception itself doesn't require animal psychometrics or even precise human psychometrics. there are observable functional discontinuities in human cognition that are too large to be explained by social labeling or perspective bias. Gauss reconstructing number theory from first principles in childhood isn't a matter of perception (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419522) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:40 PM Author: seedy costumed ticket booth keepsake machete I’m not sure penguins really see much difference in each other. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419312) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 10:56 AM Author: smoky dog poop range someone with a 90IQ can’t even understand things like hypotheticals (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420251) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 10:41 PM Author: Appetizing box office Whats the iq gap between a shrimp and a a tuna (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419316) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 11:38 PM Author: High-end Lake Whorehouse Masturbator I ain’t got no quarrel with no shrimp. No shrimp ever winked at me while I was burned alive in a shrimp oven! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419429) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 1:34 PM Author: smoky dog poop range (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420662) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 3:50 AM Author: sienna odious heaven wrinkle There's no reason to believe that cognitive capabilities are any less varied outside of humanity. If you've ever worked with dogs, for example, you would know that there is a huge range of intellect. The famous one that recognized 1,000 toys by name and could perform implicit reasoning wasn't about equal to your average Shar Pei. Several factors are at play that are causing you to fuck this up:
1. In absolute terms, the spread is going to be smaller in dumber creatures to have the same overall variance.
2. We don't spend nearly as much effort studying animal intelligence as we do with human intelligence. We already assume they're dumb and tend to disbelieve evidence to the contrary.
3. We understand animal intelligence much less and bias it with human values and interpretation. It was only recently, for example, that scientists realized the mirror test may be a poor test for dogs whose primary sense is smell, and when they used tests based on smell, there was indication of self recognition. But our bias towards sight kept us from realizing this for decades.
4. Without the ability to speak to animals, it is hard to properly calibrate intellectual ranges based on the mundane things we are able to test for. If you couldn't speak to people, and had to simply rely on retarded tests like aroma recognition, would you really recognize the difference between Einstein and your average 100 IQ person? Almost surely not. |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 4:04 AM Author: Transparent Godawful Lodge Gunner - (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419663) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 6:54 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt I actually agree with you that humans systematically underestimate animal cognition and that our tests are anthropocentric and that communication barriers flatten perceived variance. But I already thought all that before I made the argument and it doesn't undermine the structural argument about variance.
Its trivially true that some variance exists within any cognitive species--dogs differ in attentiveness, memory, flexibility, learning etc. But my point wasn't that animals have zero variance, it was about relative cognitive dispersion under fixed physiological constraints. Humans exhibit an unusually large spread in abstract problem solving and metarepresentational ability.
Your point that "spread is smaller in dumber creatures to have the same overall variance" -- is actually close to my original argument stated backwards. Variance measured in absolute cognitive terms does compress in simpler systems, precisely because their architectures saturate early. A small difference in cortical column density or working memory in a human can produce enormous downstream consequences (mathematics, toolmaking, theory building) while equivalent variation in a dog mostly affects trainability or task retention. That's because the effective dimensionality of the system is lower. There are fewer interacting subsystems to diverge along.
On bias and calibration-- yes our tools for measuring animal intelligence are crude. But even accounting for that, there's no evidence of anywhere near the logarithmic spread humans display between median and extreme outliers like Gauss or Von Neumann.
|
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 8:02 AM Author: Clear Fighting National Rigor We don’t even check how smart most animal individuals are. The dog Einstein might be living with Arkansas proles chasing a stick because doing so pleases its retarded owners. You’ve imagined a dataset and are backing into explanations for it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49419890) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 8:26 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt meh but you can put an upper bound on canine abstraction based on brain architecture. if we are talking strictly about biophysical and architectural ceiling for earthdogs, you can set the upper bound with just three constraints: total neuron count, cortical composition and metabolic throughput. Googling the stats, I'm getting a count of about 530 million cortical neurons for a typical dog. Comparatively a human has around 16 billion in its cortex. That difference alone caps how much hierarchal recursion and long term integration a canine can sustain before running out of working memory and temporal context for sustained abstraction and problem solving.
Dogs do have impressive sensory and social circuitry. Their olfactory cortex is enormous--far denser than ours. And they have top tier associative learning tied to smell, gesture and tone. Where they fall short is in symbolic abstraction. Their cognition is concrete and relational. It is great for pattern generalization within familiar domains, poor at cross domain analogical reasoning |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 10:49 AM Author: Clear Fighting National Rigor You’ve now resorted to quoting facts about average neuron counts by species - totally unrelated to your original point about variance within species.
Wow dogs are worse at reading than humans? Holy shit, let’s discuss further! |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 11:18 AM Author: adulterous double fault newt This misrepresents the function of the neuron count quote in relation to my argument. My point was that variance has a ceiling that depends on architecture. if a system has only a certain number of interacting cortical units and metabolic throughput, then variance in higher order abstraction is likely bounded. It was a response to your "we don't test every animal" objection. The argument is that even if unmeasured, variance cannot pass physical capacity. If dogs had a hidden Von Neumann you'd expect to see some sort of signatures of abstract recombination or tool invention escaping through their sensory motor channels. We don't, across millions of cases and thousands of years of close observation (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420303) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 10:57 AM Author: bossy kitty cat hell (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420252) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 10:57 AM Author: motley theater cumskin inbreeding and arranged marriages lower our fitness (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420254) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 1:41 PM Author: Impressive site liquid oxygen there isn't, outside niggaland and like semi niggas like abos and papuans and irish it seems everywhere wld avg at least arnd 100 once they have full nutrition
|
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 1:43 PM Author: Impressive site liquid oxygen somethings birdshits are too retarded to comprehend:
there's never been a nationwide IQ sample in most of these countries, the "stats" u idiots recite are based off limited samples and in many cases the idiots literally just guesstimated GDP off per capita GDP and neighboring countries
u morons just ignore stuff like GMAT and GRE scores, or intl online IQ tests with tens of thousands of samples where everyone takes the same test, or furking asian american test scores vs birdshits in US/UK/everywhere
eat shit |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 1:46 PM Author: adulterous double fault newt lol did you even read the thread nigga? you are the only one here even posting about race and iq (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420699) |
|
Date: November 11th, 2025 1:48 PM Author: Impressive site liquid oxygen i dont know how to read (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5795591&forum_id=2most#49420708) |