Communists average IQ

Holla Forums and a number of FB / Twitter/ various other leftist social media platforms are about the only venues I'd describe as alt left, whereas alt right seems to be way more common and pervasive but just as tethered to the meme medium and digital location. Is alt right ideology just more prone to self-parody and reproduction through these forms and spaces? Like, I know.plenty of people irl who I'd describe as alt right, but approximately none as alt left.

There's nothing "alt" about socialism. It is the left. You don't get to just redefine words as you like.

Does the prefix alt hold some hallowed, immutable place in language? As far as I can tell it just means various political ideologies (proto fascism vs. leftism, mainly Marxist-Lenisim) being adopted by people less than 26 - 30 years old and mediated through and on online mediums with corresponding humor.

IQ is a heuristic thing. Of course intelligence isn't some one-dimensional banach space, and it's hard to say, for instance, whether or not Einstein was "smarter" than Witten in the absolute sense. Intelligence is a context-dependent thing, as hints.
View it more as a type of general topological space.

Biased towards the most relevant cognitive tasks in building or advancing a society - abstract logical reasoning, pattern recognition, inference, processing speed, etc.

It's empirically valid for the most part if by "worth" you mean "utility." However care must be taken to decouple it from the alternative meaning of "this person deserves less comfort and more suffering than this other person because of the abilities they do vs do not have"

dropped.

this.

Also lmao

There's no coherent left movement to speak of at the moment and it's enormously fractured between idpol Tumlbrites, a much smaller number of Holla Forums types, and older academic leftists who don't engage in the online sphere, among others.

If there's no left than why call us the alt-left

checkm8

yeah, that's why we call ourselves to be the "true left" or "alt left"; because we are less reactionary.

It's shorthand for a specific type of leftist, or group of leftists. Useful in a referential capacity and little else.

That doesn't make it any less inaccurate.

I have never met a person who was obsessed with IQ who was not also incredibly autismal

…… Wait, why is the Pope meeting Evo Morales there? What's wrong with that?

Stop this fucking shit.

We have always been the New Old Left.

And nothing more than that.

Lol I forgot about that one.

Can we please just be autismopol?

Please no.

New Old-Left is cute.

By the way, has anyone noticed how Holla Forumsups are seemingly afraid to refer to this place as Holla Forums? It's always got to be some general "lefties" or "alt-left" shit, or something like left/pol/. Does it trigger them so much that we exist?

lefty/pol/ is not a Holla Forumsyp thing, it's been called that for a long, long time.

This.

If ever there was a more meaningless description of a political position.

Yeah I have to admit New Old Left fits us. It's kinda self-deprecating.

For Holla Forums, anyything more left wing than NSDAP is an amorphous blob called leftism.

IQ as a metric is flawed as fuck. There already exists a further devide in IQ, including linguistic, logical and spacial intelligence.

All of this is basically psychology and testing in the moment. Its pretty retarded.

I dont really give a damn about intelligence, people need to do the job they are most fit to do and receive adequate compensation for filling one of the many roles in society.

Both hawkins and einstein are socialists.

That is almost ensured to drag up the average IQ higher than any other ideology.

Oh, also curie.

Holla Forums is left. Like, actual left.
It's not our fault morons think people in power are left.
"Alt-left" is a meme.

good morning xexizy

I once scored 116 in some IQ test when I was an edgy teenager around 17 or somethig.

I could have easily scored over 120 if I wasn't bored by the end of it. And I even could have scored much higher if I wasn't so absolutely worthless at math.

Iq tests a shit.

It makes you sound like a retarded edgelord when used with political ideologies.

That makes me think…
Everybody knows about the No true Scotsman fallacy

Let's imagine something a bit different
Seem pretty obvious.

But now what if more and more Swede in Sweden start to claim they are Scotmen, to the point they start outnumbering original Scotsmen. And this continue to the point when people mention Scotland, they start thinking Ikea and Fjörd.

I don't know where i'm going with that.

Pls stop with the "alt-left" stuff. It's embarassing. Thanks.

I think that's a funny description of co-opting and infiltration.

+1 for cuteness, comrade.

No True Scotsman is a special case of moving the goalposts. It equivocates two claims A and B such that an indefensible claim A with a counterexample is accepted as a result of accepting B, which is merely A qualified so as to avoid the particular counterexample(s.)

Key to this is that A is itself vague or incorrect. Arguing that idpol is not real leftism does not fall under no true scotsman as long as it is an objectively verifiable claim, i.e. as long as you have suitably defined "leftism." If you implicitly allow your buddy to use "they identify as left" you are indeed setting yourself up for this tbh

Also note that many people are more concerned with the superficial and imitative than genuine understanding of logical rigor and will incorrectly allege fallacies for the rhetorical upper hand, whether by ignorance or intent to deceive. This is a major fallacy in its own right and must be confronted. The ">not real communism" and "muh never been tried" lines from Holla Forums are particularly virulent examples.

Stop this

IQ doesn't work that way.
Similar to height (but unlike income) the limited range of potential IQ values means that one person with a high IQ will not change the average much, unless the sample size is very small.
When Bill Gates moves to town, it makes the average net worth there sky rocket, when Hawking moves into town the average IQ will remain more or less the same.

But IQ is a useless measure that only correlates with how good you are at taking IQ tests. If IQ tests measured anything useful, CERN would use them to find applicants.

Fair enough, I forget that at higher IQ's, fewer points make a larger difference. Normal distribution when.

Also, IQ is not totally useless. It is specific to certain cognative ablitity, and it's only valid for the first take of the test, but still.

I think there's some value to be found in IQ, but it's not everything. Intelligence isn't the only measure of personal worth, and even if you have a high IQ/are smart, you can misuse your intelligence. Likewise, people of average intelligence aren't incapable of learning difficult material or making great intellectual achievements.

For what it's worth, my IQ is in the high 130's to low 140's and my best friend's IQ is in the low to mid 130's, and he's a member of M.E.N.S.A.. We're both anarcho-communists, and become so independent from the other's influence. I don't personally know any other leftists, but 100% of the two that I do have "very superior intelligence". ( ° ʖ °)

However, since I live in a deep red state, the majority of high-IQ people I know are rightists. There were a few well-meaning but misinformed socdems in my gifted homeroom, but they were by far the minority.

leftists are normal people with normal intelligence, the problem is that rightwingers are fucking retarded

Hey, Xex.
You should start your own sect of "Leninism Scientism". It will be about how "only top tier scientist can lead us to socialism and this doesn't happen because the market is still conected to science".

Intelligence ain't all it's cracked up to be. "Intelligence" is more or less how efficiently your brain runs. It's not the same thing as knowledge, which is how much (and what) you know. It's not the same thing as wisdom, which is understanding the relevance and ramifications of your knowledge, as well as the ability to distinguish signal from noise as knowledge pertains to a given topic.

I mean high intelligence is nice, but it takes a lot more than that to be a "genius" or even just "smart". People who think their high intelligence sets them apart are probably deficient in other areas and trying to compensate. It's like if somebody who's very physically unfit/unhealthy brags about how big their muscles are. Yeah, ok but you also have shit cardiovascular health and eat fuckin' donuts every day.

Whatever the result it's most likely a case of correlation rather than causation.

woops my board owner nickname

IQ tests measure certain problem solving and pattern recognition skills, which are highly transferable skills used in many other tasks that we tend to deem as "intelligent". It is obviously not possible to find a quantifiable measure of intelligence unless we all agree to use the same decided definition and scale of intelligences. IQ tests don't mean absolutely nothing; nor do they necessary mean much. Your IQ score tells you your ability to score well on IQ tests, and that is a fairly transferable skillset.

My IQ is 145

John von fucking Neumann m8

TBH once we get strong AI they will probably be able to come up with some kind of metric. It will probably be too complicated for easy communication the way IQ is though, because it would measure people's strength in different types of cognitive ability, like spatial reasoning vs. pattern recognition vs. "emotional IQ" etc.

Stop that. It's like posting "I'm a grill btw."

Well if the thread was asking if there were any girls on here or something that would be relevant. The OP asked about our IQs

Not really. OP asked for evidence about the trend among leftists. That wasn't my point anyway. On an imageboard, all that matters is what you have to say. It doesn't matter who or what you are. "My IQ is X" is as meaningful here as "I have a Y-inch penis."

I have a Y-shaped penis.

Considering I have never met another leftist person irl, and likewise never met someone on par with my intelligence, the average iq of a commie is probably rather high. My iq is 159, not that it matters because there is more to intelligence than logic skills.

well, here's the survey: poal.me/63z0kh

The problem is how do you know people will tell the truth. I know my IQ is around 143, however there's an issue here of both polyps voting low for obvious reasons or people here voting high to exaggerate. idk.

*maximum over-tip*

I considered creating a knowledge quiz to get an answer code so that Holla Forumsyps could be detected, but the issue with that is that some of them will see where the majority of the votes go and then change their address and simply revote

To add to this, I've taken IQ tests from more than one source and gotten very different results, because the distribution was calculated differently.

This. There are lots of different kinds of iq tests. For some I have scored as low as 125, and for others I have scored as high as 159. Though I use the 159 one because it was the only "official" one I ever received.

Yeah, I've taken multiple online IQ tests, getting shit like [maximum possible score] or "your IQ is too high to register on this test". Never taken a written one. The lowest I ever got was Mensa's test (high enough to qualify), but I had to lie about my age to take it when I did, so it's probably not valid anyway. Also the Mensa test has trivia questions for some fucking reason.

Well lets be real if anyone is to lead the revolution it should be STEM fags. They have an interest in the removal of capitalism almost as much as the common worker - assuming they are a STEM fag because they like scientific progress and are not just trying to jew as much money as possible (basically all eginieers).

As well as this STEM fags are smart enough to comprise the vangaurd.

Engineering has shit all to do with science. Engineers should be in it to build.

This is a myth. STEMfags are good at math. That's not the same thing as being smart. I went to a STEM school in NY and there were Republicans and lolberts EVERYWHERE.

You're probably just saying that because you're a dumb nigger.

WEW
E E
WEW

Basically this. Decent physical scientists stand very, very solidly on one side of the fundamental question of idealism against materialism. Their intellectual heritage is one of radical transformation and improvement of society through application of these principles. We just need go a few steps further and in a new direction.

Come on comrade I'm a leftist too but that's just wrong.

Being good at maths and being smart are often correlated but they're not the same thing.
Mathematics abilities are but one part of the bigger concept of smartness.
Einstein sucked at math by example, he had to ask a mathematician friend of him to put up with the mathematical side of his therories.

iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx

medicaldaily.com/goodbye-iq-tests-brain-imaging-can-reveal-intelligence-levels-241680

Top fucking kek.

No he didn't. That is objectively untrue.

Have you ever studied GR or even glanced at its wikipedia page? The math isn't window dressing.

We can fiddle with the semantics of "smartness" all you like, but "pure" math (theorem-proof-corollary) is essentially pure abstract, rigorous, spatial and symbolic reasoning, which is the most relevant kind.to the most areas of human endeavor.

Not a lefty, or Holla Forumslack, I'm a monarchist but I go to both boards for discussion. I was given 3 tests and scored an average of 172.

The myth of Einstein failing maths at school is just not true. He actually took calculus classes earlier than anyone else his age. He was a fucking genius. You cant develop theories revolving around calculus and not be good at maths.

I'm say it as a joke and he actually does it.

THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN!

Not him but Einstein was not a world leading mathematician.

That's an awfully weird way to spell "differential geometry and tensor analysis" tbh

Socialism requires science the same way the human body requires oxygen
(paraphrased slightly from trotsky's original)

We should actually make some propaganda directed at STEM fags. It wouldn't be hard, just explain how capitalism holds science back.

Actually, just link that molyneux webm saying 'STOP MAKING PARTICLE ACCELERATORS AND DO SOMETHING THE MARKET WANTS!'

That's still calculus just with…more other stuff. I know I was being vague but you get my point.

It's pretty much the same diff even to some famous names on the subject. The rationale is relatively simple and uniform: IQ correlates with performance at work, so people with low IQs are a burden on society unless they are acting as consumers in a capitalist economy, so if we want to move past said economy, the unintelligent people need to be sterilized or culled.

This is worrisome because while it's technically sound in reasoning, basing such drastic real world decisions on a metric like IQ is extremely hazardous because as it is, intelligence testing is a 100% black box process with no basis in known neurological functions. How human intelligence works remains a total mystery.

There is also the fact that, at least IMO, low-IQ people are still capable of functioning in society. Even the average IQ of minorities has slowly risen relative to that of whites (at least in the US), despite Flynn effect increases across the board, so the vast majority of people are capable of working "blue collar" jobs that are necessary for a productive society.

And let's be honest, most people who want society to be molded around intelligence testing are either unaccomplished by their own volition or morons with Dunning-Krueger syndrome. People only care about IQ because of a need to categorize people, to feel less uncomfortable about how unpredictable society really is.

Unfortunately they would probably agree, because many STEMfags are autismos that don't give two flying dicks about human progress.

We should be focusing on people like teamsters and auto mechanics.

I disagree. If you make it clear to the physicists in particular that capitalism is a system that does not accommodate for abstract theories and experiments like the ones at CERN, and without the state they would not exist at all as they create no short term profit, and if they could somehow make profit it would literally take decades after figuring out how to implement their discoveries uses, physicists would start to think 'huh maybe capitalism aint that great.'. It is very much in their interest to move to non-profit based society.

Ok Xex. I have faith in you.

Take Venus Project and turn it into the Leninism it was meant to be.

Well yeah, those are both branches of analysis, which essentially proceeds from putting the classical calculus on an actually rigorous foundation (see Rudin or Rosenlicht for an elementary course)

Why the fuck would autism make you less, rather than more, interested in human progress? Have you seen the average normie of today? Think they're the ones driving the sciences forward?

This. Science is inherently and obviously a collective, social endeavor. Every new discovery builds on and requires countless prior ones and nowhere is the divergence of private profit and social need clearer than here. Especially the matter of paywalled journals keeping research from the people, enabling serious journalistic misconduct and the likes of foodbabe and mercola.

Muke pls. EVERYTHING revolves around calculus at this point. Not a useful statement.

I was under the impressions there are parts of QM that dont really fit with calculus.

...

Most STEMfags aren't physicists or even scientists, they are engineers and administrators.

Answered your own question.

Wait wait.. .. What do you mean administrators???

Like.. Management and so on?

Is this why the Sargonites are so obssesed with Stem? They want to be bourgies???

No, I mean the people who make sure the shit runs all the time instead of creating it, i.e. sysadmins and repairmen. In STEM this takes a lot of skill, as opposed to being the useless dipshit paid to order you around.

The fuck are you on about? "Contradict"? "Fall beyond the scope of"?
If the former, no. If the latter, no shit.
Hell, first year calculus doesn't teach the lebesgue integral or the concept of measure spaces. Generally you don't even hear about general metric spaces. Of course there's more sophistication to these models.

Functional analysis developed to serve the needs of the nascent quantum theory, but in the undergrad course most people just take cookbook linear algebra and assume results hold for "infinitely big matricies."

"Calculus" is not a broad, comprehensive term

Well I havnt done physics at uni yet, so this is just what I have heard second hand.

Ooooh! Computer fags! Got it!

Why do you type with multiple question marks???

What's with the random .. Double ellipses .. ??

Fag .. ??? Why are you capitalizing .. The first letter after the ellipses??