In Paul Fussell’s book on class (I think), he says that people are really worried about differentiating themselves from the class immediately below them, but largely ignorant of the customs and sometimes even existence of the classes above them. When I found SSC, and then The Motte, and stuff like TLP, I was astonished to find a tier of the internet I had had no idea even existed. The quality of discourse here is . . . usually . . . of the kind that “high brow” (by internet standards) websites THINK they are having, but when you see the best stuff here you realize that those clowns are just flattering themselves. My question is, who is rightly saying the same thing about us? Of what intellectual internet class am I ignorant now? Or does onlineness impose some kind of ceiling on things, and the real galaxy brains are at the equivalent of Davos somewhere?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
You kind of give the impression that you're playing at ignorance, but to address the "but IQ test must be easily learnable", I'll point you towards various standardized tests (SATs, GREs, MCAT, LSAT). They are incredibly important for getting into various schools, and people fight very hard to get to those schools. While training courses exist, they generally don't do much, and if it were as easy as you seem to think, everyone would have 100% anyway.
Seriously, have you ever taken a standardized test? Did you ace it? If not, do you think it's only because you couldn't be bothered?
These are not IQ tests. Note that I said like standardized tests. Although irrelevant to the discussion, the tests you specifically mention are things you need to study for. The top performers on these tests are people from supportive family structures who apply themselves rigorously and consistently.
They're correlated, this doesn't necessarily mean they're the same thing. These tests do not and have never claimed to measure IQ. Many of the questions on these tests require specific knowledge, analytical skills and ways of thinking that can be obtained from a textbook.
What you're saying is not corroborated by anything and is merely anecdotal. It's actually quite the opposite, as differences in standardized test scores across different rungs on the socioeconomic ladder have always been attributed to the accessibility of quality test material and the tremendous opportunity cost of studying, particularly in the US. Assessments like the SAT are made to require studying some amount of trivia, and students from poor neighborhoods just aren't going to have the time, resources or support structure to put into this. Most of these students aren't even going to be thinking about school in the first place because of cultural issues. I'm glad that you're the exception, but there are lot of people that grew up like you did who were not as fortunate.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link