14
   

Does low intelligence(IQ) mean less suffering?

 
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:06 pm
@stevecook172001,
stevecook172001;172614 wrote:
On what basis do you make the generalised assertion the the more intelligent are prone to contempt for the less intelligent?


I think he's right, for the record, and his basis could just be from experience, like mine. However, if your point is that we would need a better basis in order to be objective, I believe you are right. But again, it does seem to be the case from what I've seen.
Reconstructo
 
  0  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:08 pm
@stevecook172001,
stevecook172001;172614 wrote:
On what basis do you make the generalised assertion the the more intelligent are prone to contempt for the less intelligent?


In my experience, the intelligent (but not the wise!) are indeed prone to contempt for the less intelligent. And I also used to watch TV. Smile
stevecook172001
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:19 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;172617 wrote:
In my experience, the intelligent (but not the wise!) are indeed prone to contempt for the less intelligent. And I also used to watch TV. Smile

Please would you give a definition of intelligence and then of wisdom?
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:21 pm
@stevecook172001,
stevecook172001;172628 wrote:
Please would you give a definition of intelligence and then of wisdom?


Something tells me that even if he offers you a definition, it won't suffice for you. You'll probably pick it apart and claim that it is too hard to determine by stating that there are many different sorts of intelligences, there's no objective gauge, etc. etc.

Right?
0 Replies
 
stevecook172001
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:25 pm
@Zetherin,
I can see how an argument might be constructed that people of higher socio-economic status might be prone to contempt for people of lower socio-economic status and, given that we live in a highly specialized industrial civilisation where a particular type of cognitive functioning is highly rewarded, then the concentration of higher socio-economic people who posses this kind of trait might be prone to contempt as as self reinforcing group behaviour.

However, I think this may have more do with their socio-economic position than it has to do with their IQ per-se.

---------- Post added 06-03-2010 at 11:27 PM ----------

Zetherin;172630 wrote:
Something tells me that even if he offers you a definition, it won't suffice for you. You'll probably pick it apart and claim that it is too hard to determine by stating that there are many different sorts of intelligences, there's no objective gauge, etc. etc.

Right?

Not at all. It's a shame you are given to this impression.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:29 pm
@Render,
stevecook172001 wrote:
However, I think this may have more do with their socio-economic position than it has to do with their IQ per-se.


Hm, I'm not so sure about that. It just seems like the classic, show contempt to those you perceive as inadequate attitude/mindset. And this seems to be something not exclusive to any one culture or socio-economic hierarchy.

Quote:
Not at all. It's a shame you are given to this impression.


Ah, good. :bigsmile:
stevecook172001
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:37 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;172640 wrote:
Hm, I'm not so sure about that. It just seems like the classic, show contempt to those you perceive as inadequate sort of thing. And this seems to be something not exclusive to any one culture or socio-economic hierarchy.

Well, yes, quite so.

However, to reiterate, I think the contempt towards others who are perceived as inadequate may be more related to economics than it is to IQ. Consider, for example, that in past-times the kind of human traits that currently are rewarded highly in our industrial civilisation might not have been so rewarded back then. It may have been that physical prowess and courage lifted you up the socio economic ladder in such past environments. I would argue that the same kind of contempt would likely have been displayed by whoever was higher up that strata and that the particular type of trait that was at the top is only of secondary importance in explaining any contempt that was in evidence

Quote:
Ah, good. :bigsmile:

No worries....
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:45 pm
@Render,
stevecook172001 wrote:
However, to reiterate, I think the contempt towards others who are perceived as inadequate is more related to economics than it is to IQ. Consider, for example, that in past-times the kind of human traits that currently are rewarded highly might not have been so rewarded then. It may have been that physical prowess and courage lifted you up the socio economic ladder in such past environments. I would argue that the same kind of contempt would have been displayed by whoever was higher up that strata and that the particular historical reasons for which type of trait was at the top is only of secondary importance in explaining any contempt that was in evidence


But how is my showing contempt right now, for instance, let us say to you, improving my social standing? I can see how it could, depending on the situation, but I don't see how showing contempt in and of itself has a direct relation with social class. That you can find examples of aristocrats (let us say, those who are "higher up that strata") shunning others, doesn't mean that shunning others in and of itself, for whatever reason, is based on social class. Does it?
stevecook172001
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:52 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;172654 wrote:
But how is my showing contempt right now, let us say to you, improving my social standing? I can see how it could, depending on the situation, but I don't see how showing contempt in and of itself has a direct relation with social class. That you can find examples of aristocrats (let us say, those who are "higher up that strata") shunning others, doesn't mean that shunning others in and of itself, for whatever reason, is based on social class. Does it?

I would argue that contempt for others lower down the social strata is not designed to improve social standing. Rather it cements it. It is a social act designed to indicate to relevant others that you belong to the same in-group. A group reinforcing behaviour, in other words.

Also, a secondary benefit for those showing contempt is that it makes it easier for them to exploit others who are lower down the socio economic strata without violating social ethics. In other words, it is easier to justify f*cking someone over to both your own conscience and the conscience of others when you consider them to be less human than you are.
0 Replies
 
Razzleg
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 04:57 pm
@stevecook172001,
stevecook172001;172606 wrote:
I guess my initial response would be to say that a lower IQ would indeed correlate with a lowered capacity to suffer in that a higher IQ means a greater capacity to consider more variables simultaneously (in other words, a greater capacity to worry). Thus, I would be unsurprised to see a correlation between IQ and neuroticism for instance.

However, a lower IQ also correlates with lower economic performance leading to, basically, a harder and more stress-filled life. Thus, any gains, in terms of lack of suffering that are incurred with a lower IQ are probably more than compensated for by an increase in the amount of sh*t one has to deal with.

I suppose that, from the above, we might surmise that those who suffer least are rich thick people and those who suffer most are poor clever people.


For the most part, I agree with you. My objections heretofor have mostly been to the blanket assumption that greater intelligence leads to a greater capacity for suffering, which I do not think is a supportable position. If one wanted to say that intelligent people are more prone to certain types of suffering, that is a different thing altogether.

I do think that intelligence has been seen to have connections with specific types of psychological and neurological conditions. For example, a correlation exists between the increased incidence of OCD and high IQ. On the other hand, there are similar problems for people with lower IQ scores. For example, people with low IQ scores have a greater chance of suffering from ADHD. (This last is not really a reflection on ADHD sufferers' intelligence, but on the test-taking conditions themselves. There is no true correlation between IQ and ADHD. But in many ways the problems that make the test difficult for those with the condition, short attention span and poor short-term memory, often has a similar effect on the lives of people with ADHD as a lowered intelligence if left untreated, pragmatically speaking.)

However, this sort of high intellectual, psychological suffering is somewhat discounted for me, since it may be somewhat self-regulated or treated by drugs. The problems that cause "greater" suffering, if we want to assign it some sort of arbitrary difference of degree, are less manageable and do not seem to me to be suffered more by those with a high IQ and those with a lower one.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 05:06 pm
@Render,
sevecook172001 wrote:
I would argue that contempt for others lower down the social strata is not designed to improve social standing. Rather it cements it. It is a social act designed to indicate to relevant others that you belong to the same in-group. A group reinforcing behaviour, in other words.

Also, a secondary benefit for those showing contempt is that it makes it easier to exploit other who are lower down the socio economic strata without violating social ethics.


It seems you are describing how contempt could be used as a tool within a social group. And I can't help but agree. But that doesn't mean contempt in and of itself is tied to social standing (whether that be improving or "cementing" it). I think there are a fair share of cases where showing contempt has little to do with social standing. Some examples may come from, for instance, those cases where the one showing the contempt is actually not in the "in-group". They may not have a higher social standing, and, for all we know, may not even care about the social hierarchy altogether.
0 Replies
 
stevecook172001
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 05:08 pm
@Razzleg,
Razzleg;172660 wrote:
For the most part, I agree with you. My objections heretofor have mostly been to the blanket assumption that greater intelligence leads to a greater capacity for suffering, which I do not think is a supportable position. If one wanted to say that intelligent people are more prone to certain types of suffering, that is a different thing altogether.

I do think that intelligence has been seen to have connections with specific types of psychological and neurological conditions. For example, a correlation exists between the increased incidence of OCD and high IQ. On the other hand, there are similar problems for people with lower IQ scores. For example, people with low IQ scores have a greater chance of suffering from ADHD. (This last is not really a reflection on ADHD sufferers' intelligence, but on the test-taking conditions themselves. There is no true correlation between IQ and ADHD. But in many ways the problems that make the test difficult for those with the condition, short attention span and poor short-term memory, often has a similar effect on the lives of people with ADHD as a lowered intelligence, pragmatically speaking.)

However, this sort of high intellectual, psychological suffering is somewhat discounted for me, since it may be somewhat self-regulated or treated by drugs. The problems that cause "greater" suffering, if we want to assign it some sort of arbitrary difference of degree, are less manageable and do not seem to me to be suffered more by those with a high IQ and those with a lower one.

Yes, I guess I would go along with this. Also, on reflection, I note the actual statistics on self harm and harm to others show a significant rise the lower down the socio economic strata you go. IF we make the [admittedly] crude assumption that there is a rough, positive correlation between IQ and one's position in that strata, then my initial assertion that higher IQ correlates with higher levels of psychological suffering is somewhat undermined if we take the levels of self harm and harm to others as an indirect index of psychological suffering.

Or, it may be that my initial contention is correct. However, the levels of environmental stressors for poor people are so overwhelming that any protective effects of lower IQ in term of insulation from psychological suffering are wiped out by those stressors.

---------- Post added 06-04-2010 at 12:12 AM ----------

Zetherin;172668 wrote:
It seems you are describing how contempt could be used as a tool within a social group. And I can't help but agree. But that doesn't mean contempt in and of itself is tied to social standing (whether that be improving or "cementing" it). I think there are a fair share of cases where showing contempt has little to do with social standing. Some examples may come from, for instance, those cases where the one showing the contempt is actually not in the "in-group". They may not have a higher social standing, and, for all we know, may not even care about the social hierarchy altogether.

Well, yes, we are talking about biology here and not physics and so we can only argue in terms of statistics and not rules. That people may exhibit contempt for reasons other than as a social tool is unarguable. The question is whether this is what it is mainly used for. My contention would be that it is, but that is as far as I can argue the point without knowing what the research in this area shows.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 05:16 pm
@Render,
stevecook172001 wrote:
Well, yes, we are talking about biology here and not physics and so we can only argue in terms of statistics and not rules. That people may exhibit contempt for reasons other than as a social tool is unarguable. The question is whether this is what it is mainly used for. My contention would be that it is, but that is as far as I can argue the point without knowing what the research in this area shows.


Ah, ok, fair enough!
0 Replies
 
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 05:18 pm
@stevecook172001,
stevecook172001;172628 wrote:
Please would you give a definition of intelligence and then of wisdom?



Intelligence is being able to ties one's shoes. Wisdom is being grateful one has shoes....and an occasional paradise to walk them through....

I just made that up for you...:flowers:

---------- Post added 06-03-2010 at 06:19 PM ----------

Seriously, isn't IQ a difficult matter? Pattern recognition is good, yes. But human mentality is complicated. And perhaps the IQ test doesn't take the long term effects of desire into account. We shape our brains, do we not, by the way we live?
stevecook172001
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 05:25 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;172679 wrote:
Intelligence is being able to ties one's shoes. Wisdom is being grateful one has shoes....and an occasional paradise to walk them through....

I just made that up for you...:flowers:

---------- Post added 06-03-2010 at 06:19 PM ----------

Seriously, isn't IQ a difficult matter?


Thanks for those definitions. I'm not in a position to say whether or not I agree with them without thinking about it. However, I would certainly go so far as to agree there is a difference. Though, I would emphasise, I see no reason to suppose they are mutually exclusive.

As for whether IQ is a difficult matter, I certainly agree it is for reasons unfortunately too long to go into now as I need to get to bed.

Nice chatting folks and I hope to come across you all again here soon.
Yogi DMT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 08:37 pm
@Render,
I'm not just saying this... i do believe there is a connection between IQ and mental "suffering". First of all, those who aren't as intelligent are usually content with what goes on around them. Those less bright aren't as curious. Curiosity can lead to a lot of unanswered questions and it can also lead to depressing ideas. Those who are of a higher IQ level tend to question more and find discomfort in the answers they receive. People with higher IQ's will suffer over mental confusion and turmoil more than less intelligent beings. On the contrary, those who are a bit dull don't have as much going on in their head. Over-analyzing is another major source of agony that will plague more intelligent beings. Over-analyzing can lead to incessant thought and will lead to bleak truths about life, society, and our world. With a higher IQ you have a harder time accepting things as they are. Not getting an reason, not understanding things properly, and not solving what needs to be solved, this is what brings anguish to the intelligent mind.

Does this explain my PoV well enough?
0 Replies
 
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jun, 2010 10:18 pm
@stevecook172001,
stevecook172001;172684 wrote:
Thanks for those definitions. I'm not in a position to say whether or not I agree with them without thinking about it. However, I would certainly go so far as to agree there is a difference. Though, I would emphasise, I see no reason to suppose they are mutually exclusive.

As for whether IQ is a difficult matter, I certainly agree it is for reasons unfortunately too long to go into now as I need to get to bed.

Nice chatting folks and I hope to come across you all again here soon.


I certainly don't think they are mutually exclusive. Good talking w/ you. Sleep well.

---------- Post added 06-03-2010 at 11:20 PM ----------

Yogi DMT;172772 wrote:
I'm not just saying this... i do believe there is a connection between IQ and mental "suffering". First of all, those who aren't as intelligent are usually content with what goes on around them. Those less bright aren't as curious. Curiosity can lead to a lot of unanswered questions and it can also lead to depressing ideas. Those who are of a higher IQ level tend to question more and find discomfort in the answers they receive. People with higher IQ's will suffer over mental confusion and turmoil more than less intelligent beings. On the contrary, those who are a bit dull don't have as much going on in their head. Over-analyzing is another major source of agony that will plague more intelligent beings. Over-analyzing can lead to incessant thought and will lead to bleak truths about life, society, and our world. With a higher IQ you have a harder time accepting things as they are. Not getting an reason, not understanding things properly, and not solving what needs to be solved, this is what brings anguish to the intelligent mind.

Does this explain my PoV well enough?



I'll agree with you this way. Until the High-Q folks organize their minds, they probably will suffer more, if we are associating curiosity with High-Q. But curiosity is also desire and fascination. The curious are often absorbed in learning. Now the sincere questioner or seeker of truth is not just curious, in my view, but drawn like a moth to the flame. And if that little moth feels too far away from the light, it hurts.
0 Replies
 
Xenekaro
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Oct, 2010 10:47 am
Nice discussion. I think intelligence initiates curiosity and analytical thinking, which is why humans and apes are the only beings that significantly suffer from depression (greater suffering?).
However, I dont think humans with low intelligence suffer any less than people with average intelligence. Firstly, humans are already an intelligent species. Even, "low intelligent" humans will analyse their loss and will thus suffer. They are no dolls or puppets with no feelings and are surely very capable of critical thinking.**
Suffering from curiosity in day to day life (which is IMO, the real suffering), is I think only prevalent in highly intelligent humans or in minority, among averagely intelligent humans. So, the claim that low intelligent humans, as having low curiosity will suffer less, is not very valid.
**Back to the critical thinking abilities of a low intelligent human. I think if we assume that the low intelligent human has low critical thinking abilities, then we can simultaneously assume that he will suffer more failures in life. Failures bring suffering, in most cases. So actually, I think a low intelligent human should suffer more due to "him" being more failure-prone.

I got an IQ of 120 in IQtest.com so my real IQ should be around 110. Which, even though is above 100 is obviously less than the average IQ of a student from a well-to-do family. So, in a sense my IQ is low, which is probably why I get low grades in class. These low grades (classified as failures), bring me suffering and is the reason why I googled "low intelligence depression" and ultimately reached this thread.
0 Replies
 
Xenekaro
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Oct, 2010 10:48 am
and registered the account...
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Oct, 2010 10:52 am
@Teena phil,
Teena phil wrote:

I dont think I agree that leading oneself to anxiety is necessarly a marker of intelligence, though I understand where you're coming from. I do think that people that tend to think deeper or simply think more can end up less "care free" I guess.
Personally I suffer quite a bit from over analyzing things and often causing problems in the present by worrying about and analyzing the potential future. Frankly the way I see it is I would've been perhaps more intelligent if I had the ability to control this and NOT let it make my life occasionally miserable. Intelligence to me would be having the capacity to recognize everything that is necessary but never to a point of it leading to an anxiety or obsessive over-thinking. Using your mind in a way that helps you solve your problems but in a stable, controlled and not obsessive way would have more to do with intelligence in my opinion.

I think its possible that intelligence is related to consciousness...if consciousness has to do with the ability to self reflect, the more thinking capacity one has, the more (and more deeply) one he is able to reflect. no?
No, it has to do with compulsive behaviour to find an answer that fits your preception perfectly. If ones rationallity is low, the answer will dilute the person. I'v seen very intelligent to very simpleminded persons try to overanalyze things, the relative IQ has nothing to do with overanalyzing.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/24/2022 at 10:48:30