Jordan Peterson - Controversial Facts about IQ
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 2024
- original source: • 2017 Personality 18: B...
Psychology Professor Dr. Jordan B. Peterson lays down facts about intelligence that shouldn't be controversial. How do we define intelligence and how do we account for different types of categories?
Dr. Peterson's new book is available for pre-order:
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: amzn.to/2yvJf9L
If you want to support Dr. Peterson, here is his Patreon:
/ jordanbpeterson
Check out Jordan Peterson's Self Authoring Program, a powerful tool to sort yourself out:
bit.ly/selfAuth (Official affiliate link for Bite-sized Philosophy)
"What good is your ruler if it stretches when you use it?".....I .think that defines alot of mentality today....when the ruler doesn't say what ppl want to hear ppl stretch the ruler
I feel like a more relevant version of this would focus on an example with a scale since there are a lot of overweight people today. Who tries to stretch a ruler vs how many people don't want to believe their scale
This. I'm surprised that if average IQ at UofT is 120 and yet still we have triggered individuals who don't believe in facts and stats and will operate on emotions.
@@stellaofthelake3451 IQ simply allows you to learn quicker and analyze complex information. If your taught the wrong things and taught to analyze from a particular point of view high IQ allows them to learn that method quicker. The hope is these high IQ kids will experience enough of the world by the time their 30 or 40 to see a real picture of the world
@@troystreacker8829 that is true I see that the left has done a great job with indoctrination.
@Sweet Maxine found the fatty
"You're going to have a child, do you want the child to have an IQ of 145 or 65?" If intelligence didn't matter you wouldn't care, but the fact is, nobody is going to wish a child to have 65. That's the crux of the matter. I think given that question, everyone will agree, it is an important distinction.
People love to spout platitudes and virtue signal, but when things get personal reality bites hard.
Look up the Polgar family.
You’ll understand why the concept of intelligence is ultimately stupid. When talking about intelligence, where talking about what we see as the principle of talent, which the Polgar absolutely slaughtered.
People are more competent then others, no shit. Yet do we know if that’s because of their parents, teachers, adversities, sufferings, friends or coincidences.
I have no clue.
But ultimately, intelligence doesn’t mean anything as a whole, because the one who claims intelligence has certain criterias
The example of 65 vs 120 is ludicrous, because a prescribed IQ of 65 is, no doubt, cognitive disabilities, yet a prescribed IQ of 130+ is a membership to an organization (MENSA). One being something you don’t wish to anyone and the other which is only positive.
That’s persuasive rhetoric though. That’s like saying “If strength in a man is not important to you, then you should be happy with a crippled man in a wheelchair.”
The person is essentially saying that they don’t mind a man who is weaker than average, perhaps to a fair degree. To choose someone who is functionally disabled is a horse of another color.
Watch out for quotes that resonate deeply. They’re usually persuasive arguments and/or rhetoric, and in many, many cases, they represent logically flawed thinking.
11 11 You need to cite sources. Don’t forget, we’re talking psychology, here. It is an incredibly in-precise soft science. Assessing psychology and sociological studies for validity is absolutely essential. Some of the most poorly conducted studies I have seen come from these fields.
As for your suggestion, I seriously doubt this “hypothesis” has been properly tested. For one thing, you would have to control for differences of race and class - two majorly correlative factors in listening to rap music, and two (most likely) critical aspects in determining IQ.
Even then, your results would be a poor suggestion of real science. What about controlling for city-living verses rural-living? The mother’s age when she gave birth? Rap culture in different parts of the country or on different continents? There are so many factors that could skew the data that developing a proper sample is highly impractical.
That doesn’t mean that studies shouldn’t be conducted. However, any scientist would understand that the results from the studies are mere correlation, and they mean very little.
Judging by your statements regarding cultural sentiment, I can make a rough assumption that what you would like to say here is that there is a decent probability that people who listen to rap music are stupid, but we just aren’t allowed to say it.
That is the kind of untrained arrogance that leads to scientific studies being abused and misrepresented in the media. I hope, if you are working within this frame of mind, your education helps to raise you to a more unbiased, higher standard of analytical reasoning. Please don’t take that as offensive or patronizing, though. First off, I could have completely misunderstood your bias, and secondly, everyone is at a different point along their intellectual attainment, and it seems that you do very much value science, which I find to be a respectable attribute.
@11 11 what metric are you using to measure intelligence? IQ? Level of previously acquired knowledge? Academic performance?
0:32 when you bite a very hot potato and you don't want to spit it out
NICE
Oh man,I laughed so hard at this. Thank you
Tomáš Hauser oh my god yeah that’s perfect! I’ve noticed super smart people often have some strange verbal or physical tics. A friend I had growing up would always rub one eye while contorting his other hand in front of his face. And when talks went confrontational he’d talk in this goofy kid voice and flail his wrists. Now he’s a double masters degree technician who works on satellite software lol
😂😂😭😭😵😵💀💀⚰️⚰️👻👻
Hehe
The reason why I really like Jordan Peterson is the fact that he seemingly has no hidden agenda, therefore I know that he wouldn't teach anything he himself didn't believe in. I can't recall a single time he's been caught in a lie.
That's really very rare in a person, and it brings a lot of trust.
Sk8erGoat oh good grief 😂😂😂
What a ridiculously cold take this is, haha.
Bro please watch any video that criticizes Peterson. He’s FAR from someone with “no hidden agenda”.
@@jase37 oh fuck off
Ye shall know the Truth, the Truth will set ye free...
"-Obviously, If you have any sense" ought to be his catchphrase.
He tales up the question from the student and elaborates on it. That is Real teaching.
So you’re saying women don’t have any sense?
Make your bed took that spot
"It's like, yea, good luck with that, bucko."
That for sure!
Discovering Jordan Peterson's lectures has been the best thing that has happened to me in years.
Same
Has Peterson ever talked about the Flynn Effect: Crystalized IQ increases by 8 points every generation in almost all countries. This is almost certainly an environmental effect because evolution doesn't happen in such short time scale. Shouldn't Peterson focus more on policies that provide equal opportunity to all people so we can better those environmental effects?
@@bohanxu6125 Well said.
Your life must be sad lol
@louis Those are both certainly better than a lot of JP's content!
This clip ended up longer than I wanted, but this just speaks for the quality and density of the lecture. If you are interested in this topic and have 2 hours of spare time I highly recommend clicking the link in the description and watching the full lecture on Dr. Peterson's channel!
Bite-sized Philosophy Thanks for posting all of these. It's nice to get a quick overview of something so you can decide which things you want to pursue further.
The full lecture was great and anybody who enjoyed this short clip should watch it
Thanks mate!
Long clips > Short clips
EDIT: This comment would make more sense if your channel weren't called "Bite-sized Philosophy". DERP!
Bite-sized Philosophy its 1 AM and I've got a chemistry final tomorrow but this is interesting af, let's see that two hour lecture!
What I love about this guy is the clarity with which he can discuss very complex ideas.
He knows next to nothing about most of the things he talks about.
@@gertstronkhorst2343 then why do people lisen to him?
@@modestassleinius9088 Have you considered the possibility that people can be less intelligent? People listened to Jim Jones. In itself, having people listen to you says nothing about the validity of what you're saying.
@@gertstronkhorst2343 Smart guy on comments always knows everything.
@@rlrihards948 No, I don't pretend to know everything. He does. And he knows very little. Btw, what a useless comment!
11:22 "Well that's basically how you end up with IQ"
drops mic, sips coffee, stares down students
James Kincaid he didn't
@@anondoggo oh no he di-int
Imagine having every professor as passionate as JP.
This world would be much smarter.
It seems that IQ is largely genetic...so...maybe.
They would be much more educated. Intelligence and education are mutually exclusive. Although I personally believe anyone can truly be as intelligent as they want, if they put their mind to it. That’s just my personal opinion, though. For myself, I’d rather not be put in a box that some other person created.
A world of very frustrated professors would be the result.
In a world of mostly deaf people there's hardly any need for microphones and speakers
There are many passionate professors out there. The problem is many of them are crazy ideologist whom are busy to indoctrinate little kids.
the Chad IQ:
uses factor analysis and other stochastical methods to get to the truth
vs
the Virgin Multiple Intelligences:
uses anecdotes to make people feel better about themselves
imma make the meme out of it lmao
Not directed at you (obviously a joke) but to some other people I see on the internet. I wonder what is the correlation between the level of unsolicited self-declared "alpha chads" with IQ.
@@caiheang Real question would be whether IQ is correlated to original jokes. Even then, better question would be if IQ is correlated with creativity, which it isn't, according to this lecture. So you can be smart and make chad jokes.
The multiple intelligence model applys better on neurodiverse individuals. People with ASD have inconsistent intelligent scores and don't have a specific G like neurotypicals.
IQ has been equated to socioeconomic function through rampant factor analysis. In its current form it’s the best predictive measure of academic performance and GDP contribution, which is what it’s been tuned to, meaning the same neuroatypicalities that affect social or economic functioning disproportionately affect IQ scoring. That’s not the “truth” of intelligence, that people people with emotional or developmental barriers to engagement have less cognitive potential (in fact, very intelligent people have a higher prevalence of mental disorder). It’s just the economic reality. IQ now is basically a measure of how good you are at playing that game, and has come to ignore other facets of intelligence in favor of this predictability. I think most historical geniuses would test lower on the modern scale than a CEO, due to their social/attentive deficits and the irrelevance of most of their cognitive strengths to education.
Sometimes it seems like I have 120 IQ, and other times it seems like I have 80 IQ
Yeah IQ pretty trivially correlates with success if they are both measured without like at least 5 year gap
that means you have 100...easy
That means you should add them together and your real IQ is 200.
I think in this case you multiply them together to get a 9,600 IQ. Congratulations.
I have an overall score of 122 as of a few days ago, but for computational speed I got a 79, you might just have that kind of situation. I mean, these things can be improved, too.
Jordan Peterson is probably one few psychologists who understands the importance of statistics
but is also aware enough to know that ALL statistics matter, and doesn't just pick and choose the few statistics like an ideaologue.
Funny you say that, as most of what peterson communicates is from his own intuition instead of evidence or statistical data, I mean he knows these information, but he infers from them from his own reasoning, which basically muddles the data, it's like making an experiment based on another experiment, except it's in your head and not empirical.
reiwell del psychology in general is mostly theory. Some of it is based on observation, some of it is not. Psychologist do perform experiments but they are not properly done since most psychologists do not understand how to properly use statistics. Although Jordan Peterson is one of the few who understand statistics, but a lot of what he lectures is based on observation
I don't think you'd officially be a psychologist if you couldn't decipher statistics to conclude an study, seems a bit absurd.. But hey I'm certainly not a psychologist. I think the general public neglecting statistics / very rarely psychologists taking a very broad spectrum of factors in a study/debate would make more sense?
Correlation does not equal causation. That's what psycologist understand. It's why they don't go around blabbing at the mouth, misrepresenting statistics. They wait until they have all the facts. I assume a simplistic thinking ( jump to conclusion) dumbass like your self doesn't do that.
I've known lots of smart people that have been broken by life and ended up not doing to good in it. IQ can be applied in social statistics, but not individually because it negates one's complexity.
You never apply statistical findings to individuals. IQ isn't special.
Your Internet Friend of course you can. Many drugs work on only on 80%of people, but that’s enough possibility for you to risk trying. A workout plan that works for 80% of people is enough for you to take a 12-week shot. We apply statistics all the time on our personal life on almost everything we do. So is IQ, a low score on IQ is probably enough to persuade you to learn a practical talent in order to have a sustainable job in the future.
@@jiadizhang4107
What you are doing is isn't applying statistical findings on an individual. Saying that this drug works for you with an 80% probability is the same as saying that the drug only works on 80% of all people.
Your Internet Friend saying a drug has 80% of chance to work on an individual is the same as the drug works for 80% of the people before the person tries and drug and the person’s group identity is a part of the statistical population. What is your definition of applying statistics to an individual then? If you find out a person has only an IQ of 80, you pretty much know that you should suggest him to learn and skill in order to make a living and that he is probably not up to high standard academics. You can keep you faith in him and give him another trial by sending him to college, but an IQ of 80 certainty says a lot of the person, and most of the evidence that you shouldn’t be too hard on a 80 IQ person are generated for statistics. If you say statistics cannot be applied to individuals you are saying that we should abandon all studies that are done on groups when it comes to individual treatments.
@@jiadizhang4107
OP gave an example of applying statistics to individuals.
I love hearing someone talk about intelligence when they have a great deal of it.
@书中自有黄金屋 Jordan Peterson is definitely well above average in intellect. This is borderline objective. Sure simpletons will find him more intelligent than he actually is but he’s definitely smart.
Cathy Newman: "So what you're saying is IQ is real and we need the toss out the baby with the bathwater''
"I'd like our views to know why you hate babies so much." So much cringe in that interview.
died of laughing ..rofl
This is so fucking hilarious! HAHAHAHA
Only keep the ones smart enough to crawl out before you pitch it.
Eliminate the least intelligent babies, and breed smart children
Man, this Prof. is addictive.
Funny that so many people are butthurt about this. He isn't discounting anything, he's making distinctions and removing a redundant correlation. Watch the video and consider the facts before you cry about having your special branch of 'intelligence' taken away
Robert Poll ayyyy we have almost the same political spectrum
@@j.r.h.6698 Where is your data on that claim?
I'm 25 and grew up in an extremely dysfunctional family and suffered through many physical ailments but always had a good mind going for me. My upbringing is partly why I always had really low consciencounes, an extremely lazy person who missed class 2 or 3 days a week but still got As and Bs. Funny thing is out of sheer boredom I read and listened to many podcasts and eventually became conscientious after formulating a logical and ambitious outlook on life. In other words their is some anictodal evidence that high IQ can eventually override low consciousnes.
Either that or you gained better mastery over your emotions allow increased access to IQ
hmm I seem to be similar to that. I scored an IQ of 130 and scored 0th percentile in industriousness in a personality test. My family was pretty damn dysfunctional (though I wouldn't say 'extremely', we weren't physically fighting all the time). They sent me to boarding school in a different continent when I was 15 to get rid of me basically, and I had some of the most depressing years there. I didn't do well in school except for at the end and had very few people I could relate to. Over the years though I built relations with my family back up (largely thanks to advice from Jordan Peterson) and when I finally finished school I felt so free, and my grades are now really good at university where my social life is so much better.
Goes to show there's so many things that can affect you and help you. I honestly think if it weren't for Jordan Peterson I would be a lot less than I am now.
Conscientious can be trained. Intelligence - not.
@wulfloft5805 That's so great to hear how many people's lives have been changed for the better by Dr. Peterson
Such a high IQ that you can’t even spell
I'd love to take a pyschology classs from this guy, he seems like someone who could actually maintain my attenttion even with ADD.
ADHD right here. Hope you’re still young, one powerful thing I’ve found is age. 23 right now and finally able to delay gratification. I’m in the clear and able to make decisions, moving towards my goal of becoming a psychologist. I hope you can to. For me it’s connected to my existence, understanding myself, better helping those I care about and a platform to help more. I can’t die without this information or opportunity to do so. I don’t know what it means for you but I wish you the best.
@@sylan4094 Do you know if there is a correlation between ADD or ADHD and an inability to delay gratification?
@@sylan4094 how’s everything going with the psychologist field?
I’d hate to take his psychology classes … he is so brilliant that he’d rip my papers apart and I’d likely get lower grades than I am accustomed to …
Well considering his lectures are essentially the speech version of ADD, it's a perfect fit. I love watching his college material
If a "fact" is controversial to you, something is wrong with your world view.
Jordan Peterson proposes aren't facts, he tries to ease the fact that whites and asians are more intelligent than blacks.
Gabo LongQua Whites and Asians on average are more intelligent. That is a fact.
A fact is -- in fact -- illusory. There are not really such things as facts. There are only very, very, very succesful models and theories. New evidence could come out tomorrow which might disprove our present understanding about gravity and the whole scientific community would have to rethink what they thought about the 'fact' of the Theory of Gravitation.
I think it would be better to say that if something with enormous evidence, rigourous empirical measurement and high predictability power is controversial to you... something is wrong with your worldview.
There's a reason it's illegal to judge job applicants based on IQ. A deterministic view on IQ has been shown throughout history to be problematic.
michaelq Yeah... and we call those things "facts" instead of breaking our tongue during every other sentence.
Added English subtitles, and now Romanian as well.
Hungarian is next.
This bite-sized introduction is damn important.
I have a IQ around the room temperature of a mid winter central California room with the window open.
I’m not sure, but it sounds like he is calling me stupid.
Celsius?
Lmfaooo
@@danielgao4590 if he's using Celsius that would be around 20. But i doubt someone with 20 IQ would be using the Celsius scale. He could be using fahrenheit making hes IQ around 70, quite normal for people with below average IQ to use fahrenheit. Or he could be using Kelvin making hes IQ around 295. Very normal for someone insanely smart to just naturally use the Kelvin scale.
Meaning he would either have the IQ of a rat or be godly smart.
Fakhri Asyraf I was just making a joke😂 probably not a very good one...Take it easy dude
@@danielgao4590i know.. i was building on your joke lol
He is much better like this than his usual debate approach. He gets bogged down in terms and philosophical stuff. Here he is quick and concise. A very smart guy.
his debate partner usually lower the quality of his approach.
instead of deeper understanding in one subject,
his debate opponents keep jumping around multiple different subjects, making JP explanation seems shallow
He also had those sweet benzos back then
How is any of this in the slightest "controversial"? This is a standard introductory lecture. Nothing controversial is being discussed. It is completely standard established pedagogy.
My thoughts exactly
His suggestion that Emotional Intelligence does not exist is controversial!
hes not talking about what is said, everybody knows the controversy behind IQ..its because different races score different on them, more specifically its controversial because black people score very low
Tommy Dolan black Obsession.
How is any of this not controversial? The guy practically just said that if you're born shit, then that's what you'll be for the rest of your life. Say goodbye to aspirations, respect, and essentially any form of high-achievement--apparently that's reserved for intellectual elitists. This is most definitely a monstrous statistic.
Stanfod & Binet stated repeatedly that their testing assumptions are not to be used to define human potential in absolute terms, it is a tool, and there are many tools for determining an individual's range of ability - the ultimate one is how they solve the problem of their own existence.
How you solve the problem of your own existence is better handled with higher IQ
Ultimately it always gets back to IQ, which is the central Nexus & Flow from which all wellsprings originate...
So much of the other attempts to supplant IQ have a left-wing agenda, obfuscatory nuanced attempts to make that which is sound, reasonable and duplicatable nebulous... If only to attempt to play the egalitarian diversity game of political correctness, a false morality
Advice from me, a middle aged guy who has been considered gifted by many of his peers but never reached his full potential, to youngsters who might be reading:
- Intelligence is only one parameter among many that determines outcomes in almost every situation
- Never assume someone’s intelligence
- Always assume that the person you are conversing or reading, is smarter and more knowledgeable than you
- Never dismiss an idea just because you think it was put forward by a less intelligent person
- Never accept an idea because it was put forward by someone you think smarter than you
- The dumbest person can outsmart you any day, may say something you never thought about
- Intelligence is like huge waves on water. But it is hard to know what is in the depths
- Never take your intelligence or lack of it, as granted
- Hard work trumps intelligence in almost anything; but efficient and self suited goals are the best
Thank you Kemal for the wise words
You just somed up what it means to be humble.
Happiness is one of the rarest traits in people with very high IQs, so in my mind it is ideal to be of above-average intelligence, where one can solve problems on a daily basis as they occur but also enjoy their life without constantly overanalyzing things.
That may be because people who believe in IQ are extremely judgemental. They judge everyone to be "dumber" than them and in doing so, they believe the World is Doomed. Speaking from the perspective of someone who studies inteligence, IQ is one of the most (If not the most) limiting takes on intelligence I have ever studied
@Lady Mercy it's one dimensional because it's one of the possibilities I decided to point out. That's why I said it *May* be. But you clearly didn't get it. (Which is not a bad thing but it seems like you think it is).
IQ doesn't relate to boredom is my conclusion. It relates to the very specific and limited scope it tests people at. (Geometrical patterns, reading academic dialects and calculus).
I wonder what is your conclusion since you concluded that I had never studied enough to even consider boredom. Monumentally worse to consider I will reach the same conclusion you did.
@Lady Mercy "Consider abstractions that don't pertain to your personal estimation of the world" That is a LOT of word salad to say 'consider personal experience'.
If you wanted to be more accurate you would have said Qualia. If you wanted to make your message clearer you would have used simpler language. It looks too much like you want to sound smart by using synonyms to make your idea less accecible. That only makes you sound dishonest and malicious.
@Lady Mercy How blatantly dishonest do you have to be to think I do not want to hear perspectives other than my own? Do you think I'm some evil cartoon character? How childish is your estimation of people who disagree with you?
@Lady Mercy This irony of you "it's almost like thinking takes effort. Go figure!" I don't even think you understand how we measure brain activity at this point.
This could have been a much different conversation had you been considerate and charitable but this is not the case here is it? Sad.
Don't waste your time answering this. I will not reply.
That’s the thing about schools and passing exams to get in to uni. I think conscientious is much more a factor of success because working hard and having a good memory will get you a lot further than intelligence which usually results in boredom and disinterest in school work. As the great Rick Sanchez once said “school is not a good place for smart people”.
"Intelligence is the ability to take in information from the world and to find patterns in that information that allow you to organize your perceptions and understand the external world."
*Brian Greene*
But it is not. IQ is the ability to score well on a given test created by PhD and Masters assistants to judge 'mental plasticity' and pattern recognition. The largest single predictor of a high score on an IQ test is an advanced grasp of the English language. Someone who does not have a very advanced grasp of written English will consistently underperform even if they have knowledge of multiple languages and in an academic setting have shown to advance more quickly and develop comprehension faster than peers who simply have a more advanced grasp of English. Sad but true fact of measurements...the biggest part of this video is the opening when Dr Peterson discusses how you MUST accept current IQ testing methodologies or you must discount all of psychoanalysis. That is a very telling statement for a concept that has long been known to be very unreliable at best.
Fortus Victus he’s talking about intelligence not IQ; but otherwise, I think you are confusing perhaps the correlation of the English language with IQ with actual causation. Knowing English does not raise IQ far more than any other language
@@dogie9548 I did not pull that from the back pocket. English is not the commonality, just the native language of the test in this case. A multi-cultural study throughout Europe, Asia, and North and South America showed that the SINGLE largest predictor of a high score on IQ testing was proficiency with the native language of the test as self reported. This was corroborated by having multi-lingual students take the battery in both their native language and English as the control. Test found that if a subject did not have at least a collegiate reading level in the test language their performance was effectively capped. The reasons why were not established to my knowledge but common assumptions are on the nature of how the tests themselves were devised (by PhD/Masters level review). This also correlates with some previous (somewhat controversial) studies that attempted to link lower mean IQ scores of minority populations in the USA, Africa, and South America. If the tests were in fact biased towards language proficiency it would go a long way to accounting for those study results as those results have no corroboration at all about certain racial or ethnic populations actually having lower IQs.
@@fortusvictus8297 astounding display of knowledge, kudos for knowing all of these! I want to know if i understood you properly, so:
-the main takeaway is that we need to control for language skills?
And 2 questions:
IQ == intelligence or IQ =/= intelligence ?
Have you considered that *what helps you score higher* on IQ tests also *helps you have a better understanding* of a language?
Thank you for your time!
Fortus Victus
These IQ tests you talk about, are these the old ones that were made to basically label non-white people as stupid or the more valid new ones?
The IQ test I took was just pure pattern recognition, there wasn’t even any words!
He was describing the basis of artificial intelligence (the math behind it) at one point. I love this dude.
Im so dumb that I don't even understand the point being made here lol
Someone explain to me please
@@jamespak8175Well, AI people realised that if you can quantify intelligence objectively, then maybe you can replicate that intelligence in a machine. And in fact that is difficult, we have made little to no progress when it comes to replicating fluid intelligence, which is basically AGI (Artificial General Intelligence).
I have heard some people say that being smarter than others is ableist
Isaac Chay said by the less intelligent :-)
Isaac Chay ableist?
garr
“Ableism” is a buzzword used by intersectional feminists to say that you would rather hire/use/etc one type of person for their physical, or in this case mental, capabilities.
It’s absolute garbage
garr
So essentially hiring someone who is 6’2 to lift boxes is ableist against people in a wheelchair, and therefore oppressive.
@@obviouslykaleb7998 No one uses that
There is definitely a distinction between logical/mathematical/theoretical/abstract intelligence and linguistic intelligence.
Altum Novo Incorrect. Linguistic analysis is very similar to algebra and formal language theory (i.e. the theory behind programming languages) is an applied theory of semigroups.
I believe the only sensible distinction between intelligences is analytical and creative intelligence, and even then there are cases (i.e. mathematicians) where those are highly correlated with each other.
How do you explain people at a young age horrible at maths and great at reading and writing and vise versa. It's pretty well documented to the point where there is really no case against this. Linguistic analysis is NOTHING like algebra. Completely different.
Altum Novo Do you actually believe the garbage early-educational system we have now is any good indication/differentiator of intelligence? Do you also think making connections based on similar symbols (e.g. morphemes) and parsing the meaning of said symbols is not similar to algebra? If you answer yes to either of these questions then you're in absolutely no position to "argue" whatever point you're arguing.
Hint: abstract algebra has nothing to do with numbers by the way. Try graduating from your community college first, dropout.
President Aria, just because the two domains are analytically similar doesn't mean that they invoke the same parts of the brain in practice. Language and grammar, as an activity, is principally parietal/hippocampal whereas most problem-solving is done by the frontal lobe, i.e. the executive function. Although, Altum, I'm gonna have to disagree with you slightly on the left-brain/right-brain dichotomy, as the language centers actually happen to be mostly on the left side.
Altum Novo I would assume that linguistic and logical intelligence are very correlated (in people without mental disorders, namely autism), and perhaps the same thing. I mean, what are you doing when you write or speak? You're combining words to form a logical statement. Is language emotional? It can be used emotionally. But is language itself emotional? It's not. When writing, the meaning behind the words and the creative way that you use the words give the text emotion. If you were creative enough, you could give math emotion. "The plane flew overhead". Was that emotional? It was not. But it was logical, it made sense. Language is logic.
Sam Harris' last podcast was all about IQ, man if their first conversation wasn't so bad (the second one was better, fortunately) I would love to hear them talking about something more like this
Dare to dream.
Daken Nine My thoughts when I clicked this video
Nicholas Lornadek I kind of liked the first podcast though I think Harris looked worse but I'm biased against Harris.
The conversation will go like this:
Peterson: this is how Iq is defined.
Sam: ok cool.
Peterson: cool.
Sam: ok bye.
My measured IQ is 175 (measured by three different top psychologists in NYC) and I disagree with the regressive views this guy holds. I think he missed his era by a good one hundred years. He also doesn't understand complex biochemistry and underestimates environmental factors.
5:58 I love how he unconsciously represents low correlation as two orthogonal vectors with his hands. Probably most of the students watching wondered what he was doing!
Actually I think that most of the students got that
Come on! Have more faith in them :)
5:10
Hmmm, what did she say?
I listen back to it twice
Atill, what is she saying?
I know! The captions will say!
She said "*idea from a student*"
-_-
"Maybe the controversy is that, whatever you're measuring is your common sense" that's what I'm hearing anyway
Love it: "If you have any sense (intelligence) you'll believe in intelligence!"
It would make a definitive impact on my life to have a sit-down with this man for a couple of hours. His mind operates in a way that I've not seen before (with the exception of a few rare authors). I'd love to pick his brain on the subject of cosmological existentialism and Buddhism; the nature of matter and how it affects behavior. Man, to me: that would be like hitting the lottery!
My IQ is 82 but watching Jordan's videos makes me feel smarter.
More smart*
@@Brand00d he is correct the comparative adjective is "smarter"......
Hallowmancer you are the most smart
@@Brand00d "smartest" exists
Hallowmancer intelligentest
"So do you believe in intelligence or not? Well, obviously if you have any sense."
"Emotional Intelligence - which does not exist." quote by Dr. Peterson. The term "Emotional Intelligence" has always appeared to be an oxymoron to me. Whilst I very much enjoy the lecture...I am also glad I am not required to take notes and write the midterm.
The fact the sociopathic behaviors and personality traits exists it proof that emotional intelligence exists. That would be an example of one who is very low on the EQ scale sense the have no concept of empathy or love. EQ is the ability to under stand one emotions and the emotions of others and how to react and handle and emotional situation or conversation. And the fact that we has humans are emotional beings also proves that EQ is 100% real.
@@gundamcollector77 Thank you for your response and thoughtful comment. Emotional nature, Emotional perspective, Emotional response, Lack of Emotion, Excessive emotion ... are all valid descriptors IMHO. Emotional Intelligence is an Oxymoron ... Like "Military Intelligence", "Accurate Estimate", "Bitter Sweet". Intelligence and emotion are both interesting and highly motivating aspects of life, but are to some degree, mutually exclusive. The Myth of Emotional Intelligence is a Newby Buzzword for the increasingly less well read population now running around on our increasingly self congratulatory orb of existence. I think you mean Empathy or dare I say it ... Wisdom. Be Good and Have Fun.
It’s made up by people with low iq who are mad they’re dumb
Wish I had such a professor in College. Very enlightening.
This is one of those classes that stick to you brain and keep you having those long shower thoughts for days. Peterson is my guru.
I think I just took a more useful statistics course in this video than I had in college and in grad school. You could shave with this guy's brain.
I'm stealing that phrase from you. 😂
That is the greatest compliment I've ever heard
This is, in my opinion, the most interesting topic that Jordan Peterson discusses. One of the reasons why is that the number of interesting questions that can be asked about it is infinitely many. Here’s one that’s been in my mind: how do universities account for formal training skewing intelligence tests and how effective are these systems? If universities really do exist to attract truly brilliant people to use as assets in our society, then one has to wonder how to balance this out.
The answer is that you ask a wide variety of questions. There's a limit to how much you can learn in the time you have available, and if you've learned more in that timeframe, then by definition you must be more intelligent, because you have to be smarter to parse that information more rapidly.
There's a difference between intelligence and indoctrination.
I'd like to see intelligence defined as a person's ability to process information. Like in a computer processor, it's a factor of processing speed and data bandwidth. The amount of information you can process at once times how quickly you process that information is intelligence. Yes there are different types of information; mathematical, abstract, spacial, social, linguistic, etc., but I think that there is a root ability to process information that is applied by different individuals to different degrees in there various areas.
That's part of an IQ test already.
@@rleeboston33
Right, but when people use the word intelligence, they usually mix it up with knowledge, wisdom, and experience.
@rysio ochódzki
I'd say that depth is bandwidth, but speed is still involved. I'm saying that processing power, thus intelligence, is the coin that speed and bandwidth/depth are the heads and tails of. You can't have one without the other. Speed means nothing without any content and depth means nothing if it's static.
(People treat the universe as though it's a thing, but it's more of a happening; a verb, not a noun. It's appearance as an object is an illusion, although a valid aspect. It's a stream or a feed, like streaming media. Our perception is like sampling analog music for digital storage and reproduction. You have the sampling rate and the bit depth. The higher the resolution, the more accurate the reproduction. We all sample the world at different resolutions. Some people are low resolution and some are high resolution. Meditation is the master, but not the only, tool for increasing one's resolution.)
In IQ testing there is a component of interpretation called the information processing model. Many psychologists are lazy in interpreting IQ tests.
There is processing speed and perceptual organization
The cool think about intelligence is that through hard work it can improve but even people with high iq can turn out to be losers in life or waste their intelligence being couch potatoes..so what really matters is finding a hole in the universe and filling it making the world a better place..do what you love and you'll find a problem for which you have a solution to.
That's a great point, and I agree with a lot of that. However I think the issue that Dr. Peterson brings up also states that intelligence, or IQ, is a static trait that cannot be improved upon substantially. Yes, there are ways to increase competency of completing specific tasks which require a high level of intelligence, but this effect does not sustain itself across different domains, or the ability to learn across different domains. Because of that discrepancy, it becomes exponentially more difficult for someone with a lower IQ to get ahead in life.
IQ doesn't improve with hard work. It's highly correlated with reaction time which is also notorious for being unimprovable.
I have never met a dumb good piano player.
Green Deane I have never met a smart drummer, and I'm a drummer.
Green Deane but have you ever seen a dumb person that's highly interested in learning piano?
Dumb in what terms ?
smart people are usually just more able to do the whole persistence thing
If that good piano player makes a mistake every 4th word he writes, is he dumb?
I just don't get his views on intelligence. I've listened to Peterson on this topic numerous times and I am not wrapping my mind around his limiting intelligence to IQ and the traditional model of language and logic. As a teacher of cello for over 30 years and a professor of cello for 20, teaching all age groups, I can say without any hesitation that those with high academic intelligence (high IQ, high SAT scores, etc.) are not necessarily quick at or show mental horsepower for 1) conceptually mapping out the finger board, 2) reading rhythms, 3) hearing pitch, 4) hearing a tone or timbre and translating that to Kinesthetic movement, 5) catching on to musical ideas, 6) listening to those around them to fit into a musical ensemble, and 7) doing all of the above in one grand gestalt. To say music is only a "talent" and doesn't require an some sort of mental "horsepower" seems completely naive to me and would only be uttered by someone who can't do it or hasn't tried. I love his views on postmodernism but his views on intelligence...well, agree to disagree...strongly.
I undestand your point, but I think you don't understand what he says and how statistics work. You have to invert the question
Do my students have high IQ?
Maybe you're just a bad teacher to people with a certain type of intelligence, if you identify your area of expertise you could push that, or else work on the areas you find more difficult. Oh and don't forget to tidy your room
Or just try teaching someone with an iq of 90 how to play cello
What you all miss out on is that IQ is a mean average, most people that are very good are just good in one thing, perfect math brain but suck at anything non math realted. So somone can be a genius musician but suck at the buissness side and the social side etc.. Its atcually very common.
It would have to do with working memory. A man with 110 iq and superior working memory will always outperform another man with 150 iq and average bor below avg working memory in rule based systems such as music, math etc. It's the secret of child prodigies too
People do love to have a Guru, as it is quite evident in comments. When people are only praising a person on his arguments rather than adding on to it & giving their opinion on the matter, you know people's comments are not worth reading.
I've never mesured my IQ. It was never a requirement in my life so far. Now I am rather scared about looking into it because I might not like the answer.
I guess I mesure IQ as a sense of self-worth. And right now I am not sure I need that sort of information.
Just do it, and get someone to give you advice on how to increase it. Because you can increase it to some degree.
And if all else fails, just apply yourself. Knowing where you are weak at is an incredible advantage.
IQ is not a deterministic mechanism... It's just a measure that shows trends statistically. Even if you know your IQ, it shouldn't hold you back at all. JP would agree.
That's quite an insightful and philosophical assessment. I would suggest above average.
You don't get to change the definition of IQ based on your feelings.
But you could formulate that sentence so you already know your IQ is above 95 lol
This really boils down to simple isometrics
I think what people don’t realize is that the socio economic pressures on the intelligence hierarchy is flawed at best.
So if we collectively have a proclivity towards corruption of the basic fundamental principles underlying the hierarchy then the whole substructure is corrupt to begin with
As professor Peterson has said this is basic arithematic. What he fails to see or demonstrate is that this problem can’t be solved within the hierarchy because the whole system is corrupt.
What’s needed is criticism or constructive criticism from beyond the hierarchy.
Would you want your defense to be judge and jury at a judicial hearing? I think not.
That there are people with different levels of intelligence is not a "system" you can "critique". Might as well critique the shape of mountains or reprimand the trees for growing too slowly.
Several people ranting in the comments without citing anything he's said as wrong are doing an excellent job at proving him right
12:40 of intellectually stimulating discussion followed by 30 secnds of destruction of every objection ever made against IQ measurement.
I love his lectures. Thank you for posting them.
Native Daughter iq tests are subjective.. 100% of our dna is African and we are 99.99% the same .. lol 😉 "You and I, in fact everyone all over the world, we’re literally African under the skin; brothers and sisters separated by a mere two thousand generations. Old-fashioned concepts of race are not only socially divisive, but scientifically wrong."
www.nationalgeographic.org/activity/all-africans-under-the-skin/
My family is a high iq family. It doesn’t mean we are all successful. Alcohol, drugs, and early pregnancies has destroyed many of my family members. They are all super smart. Doesn’t mean they are very wise. My dad was the only one who got out of the toxic family and taught me how to properly live life. I’ve been blessed with a high iq and good set of parents and I hope I can teach as many people as I can how to get out of bad situations.
Same with my Family. High or above normal IQ does protect you from maligned behaviors and evil Plots. Street smart, Morals, Ethics with self confidence, an ability to read or understand intentional behaviors and not worrying what others think helps keep us on the straight and narrow. It’s really a battle field outside the Family circle, however the Family circle could still have their own set of behavior problems. Often times inner Family influences might not show up until the naive are in their later years. Sometimes these more serious behaviors surpass counseling and require Law Enforcement or even Military attention. There are many levels of how behavior problems are dealt with.
I got a high IQ score when I was 8 and now I’m failing three classes watching this video for validation.
IQ is one predictor of success. Conscienciousness (the hard work aspect) is the other major one.
Consciensciousness does tend to increase with age, so you do have a chance.
Also, consider seeing a psychiatrist to see if you don't have some sort of disorder like ADHD or ASD? You may have a lot of raw reasoning ability, just be unable to use it productively.
80 is not high hunny
@@Olivia-W the correlation is more modest than high tho.they are low to moderate,and socioeconomic factor play a lot about this.
IQ correlate to 0.5 with high school grades(meaning it explains 25% of grades variance),certainly less when we add socioeconomics factors.for undergraduate,it correlates up to 0.5 for verbal IQ,and a very poor 0.22 for performance IQ(meaning it explains 4.84% of grades during undergraduate).
terman famous study also showed that IQ is a modest predictor of academic sucess,most of them did the same jobs as average people,and a lot of people who did ivy league got help and letter of motivation from terman itself.
IQ is a limitor though,but a relatively low one.Terman study showed that if High IQ don't correlate with High sucess,it correlates with low failures.the rate of sucess in high school was wayy higher,even compared to average white males/females.the main conclusion from it was that average is sufficient for undegraduate(and i'm saying sufficient,average would be more around 105,so would be harder but still very easy),110-115 would be sufficient for a master,and 120 for a PhD/Ivy league.the other main conclusion was that being 10-20-30-40 or whatever over 125 won't change things that much to be a genius.you need 125 to be one,more won't change anything,it's then other factors that will be important.
@@orangegames3284 You can't even structure a comment properly, let alone punctuate properly.
@@LaughingMan44 so instead of arguing,you do an ad hominem?and loose your time to do so?cool man
Loved the end of that vid. Hard conclusion 🤣😂 I really enjoy watching his lectures. He always finds a way to personalize his ideas so that his audience can understand and relate. Hes a really special and gifted human. Brilliant mind to say the least.
Intelligence has a base of how quickly you learn and how strong your memory is. After that, it depends upon what you learn. You can learn things that are untrue which destroy your ability to learn further and leave you less intelligent than where you started. Probably the biggest offender that I have seen is learning that "rugged individualism" is a good character trait. If an intelligent person "learns" that, it can destroy their ability to learn further. Nobody can do this life alone. Successful people tend to learn a shared dependency of a group because its better to focus on new problems than "reinventing the wheel" by doing everything themselves. One common trait I see from people in poverty is they insist on doing everything for themselves but that means, even if someone is very very intelligent, they will run into pitfalls and major mistakes that could have been avoided if they worked with a group.
My personality type doesn't work well with groups. Doesn't mean my way is wrong and yours is right. Both types of people are needed. You would probably be better off in an office setting where teamwork and collaboration is needed whereas I am better off as a technician or repairman where more than one person working on the same project is usually just a waste of company resourses unless it's to train a new person.
I think he’s spot on regarding the definition problem. One of the issues I constantly run into when discussing the idea of “life success” with friends is what does that mean? Often one of us is talking about financial success while the other is talking about happiness and another is talking about stability. I think this is why discussions of “other intelligences” have come up -though I think such terms are bad because they aren’t seeking to measure intellectual capacity or performance. People want to explore what predicts success in different areas, using different definitions of success to start with.
" other intelligence is bad." IQ is total crap. My brother used to practice IQ tests. It's a false proposition.
respect for the camera man panning non stop lmao
How does IQ relate to relationships? For example, if one person has a high IQ and the other low, is there any chance of a long-term, successful relationship? I remember Dr. Peterson talked about this subject once; can someone link the video?
Probably not, but matching by IQ is a good guarantee for success as much as possible
I love that he exposes/discusses the fact that the entire world discriminates against people with low IQs and points out that no one really acknowledges it. It's a modern day gladiator pit. They should get automatic social security for life.
Ted Bolha they usually do.
I'm not sure anyone would appreciate being told they're functionally incapable of contributing to society and made into a burden. They should have the chance to contribute. There's a certain pride that can come from, for instance, maintaining a lawn or keeping a public area clean and tidy.
In the natural world, low IQ people would simply be eliminated from the gene pool, which is why humans are as generally smart as they are.
+IncognitoTorpedo
I don't think he needs your help to understand how evolution works. The fact that something is natural doesn't make it ethical or desirable.
High IQ parents often produce low IQ children and vise versa. Considering every family has high and low IQ members.
I literally screamed YES at the end of this. I hate when people try to downplay IQ. Its like they don't want to admit that intelligence is measurable because of their own insecurity.
@rysio ochódzki I think your over simplifying it. It's obviously a valuable vector to measure intelligence to a certain extent. See what I believe the best way to find your IQ is take as many tests as possible then average your score. The value I think these tests have is they let you know kind of jobs you would most likely be good at so you don't waste time and energy on a career your most likely not going to be optimal at. It's like a physical assessment. If your 5'8" you probably won't make it to the NBA, but does that mean you absolutely can't? No. Does it mean you would probably be better at something else, yes. We need people of all different intelligence levels or we couldn't have cooks, janitors, welders, computer programers, CEO's, brain surgeons. Imagine a janitor trying to be a brain surgeon or vise versa. Obviously intelligence matters for what job you're fit for.
@rysio ochódzki it isn't hypocrisy. So are you assuming no women like short men? Are you saying being short doesn't have it's advantages? Are you ignorant to the fact some women like having a man who isn't handsome because they have low self esteem and like the idea that they won't be bombarded by women trying to steal him away? Everybody has advantages and disadvantages. Intelligence is only one quality and has its own disadvantages. Imagine being Einstein, how challenging it must have been for him to deal with people of much lower intelligence. Or how lonely it must have been having barely anybody who could relate to his life experience. Some of the least intelligent people I know are some of the happiest, because their lives are simple. Less stress of the complexity that you have the burdon of dealing with on a regular basis.
@rysio ochódzki leftist humanism? Eugenic standpoint? I'm too complex and sophisticated to belong to one train of thought or ideology like any intelligent human being. Biology? Please, you probably think we evolved from apes. I love human biology and physiology. Learning about the two make up a good bit of my free time. And I can say with absolute certainty that the more I learn the more I learn we don't know. Trying to explain everybody by saying 1+1=2
@rysio ochódzki I just gave an example of why a women might want a man you consider ugly. There are many reasons. I might find really skinny women attractive and you might find borderline fat women attractive. Sometimes people just like what they like. Even if there was a biological answer 10 years from now it will probably be "proven" to be wrong like so many other things we think we know.
@rysio ochódzki you proved my point. You are probably above average intelligence and you prefer loneliness yet act like you dont understand the plight of Einstein not having many peers intelligence wise. If you want to bring bullshit biology into it, people subconsciously feel the need to fit in and when you are more intelligent than 99.9% of people on earth you simply don't. You enjoy complexity while most people loath it. You can't stand oversimplification and that's what the majority operates on. I'm miserable having to work around the people I work around who are obviously of lower intelligence than myself, is that just being annoyed because you say so? Do you believe I can't tell the difference? In 37 years I'm pretty sure I can separate the two. You are miserable too. People don't isolate their selves because they are well adjusted and accepted by their peers. Also the more intelligent people are the more nuanced they are which makes it harder to find people like you even if they are as intelligent. Your obviously intelligent but I still have vastly different views than you. But I'm sure you're used to that.
Why is this even contraversial? This is pure common sense?
Actually is not , you just haven't quite understood the problem.
It's controversial I think because with IQ you can put a number people's intelligence that can be compared to other people's IQ. Due to how big a role intelligence plays in success in life and usefulness to other people a large part of a person's value to other people depends on his or her intelligence because it is closely correlated with ability. With higher IQ you will become better educated and get a higher paying job that helps more people. People aren't equal. That means that some people generally are inferior to other people and that is possibly the most controversial topic of any topic.
He has a persecution complex and his wife won't have sex with him any more
@@tarkamlokar9709 the school of science changes with the age tho and if one doesn't keep up then yea ,you will be considered to be dumb by the study of focus in the society. One who is a farmer is nuch smarter then a computet scientist if they were both trapped in the middle of nowhere.... in the days of antiquity astronomy was regarded as one of the most important sciences so people who map the sky were alot smarter then just math.
And to a greek philosophy was a much valued study then or things we would consider science today
That why it's controversial. He's using common sense, or just speaking factually. Both are enough.
Thanks you for being brave enough to speak the truth in this time of insanity.
1. Intelligence (IQ) vs. Hard Work, Motivation and Persistence = Success ?
2. Success in University = Happiness and fulfilment in life?
Measuring someone's IQ to forecast a future pattern, successes or failures just doesn't cut it for me. Many more things have to be taken into consideration. The real solution to success and self fulfilment is dedication, motivation and hardwork, across all walks of life and in all levels of IQ scores.
MONTERO _ what “cuts it” for you is irrelevant. What actually *is* relevant is the corpus of peer-reviewed scientific literature showing that IQ correlates with success, with conscientiousness being a much weaker predictor, but still significant
What is success?
Income?
Life satisfaction?
Life length?
Self-fulfillment?
Motivation and persistence does not lead to success if you’re not capable of solving problems. A fish can’t simply climb a tree if it keeps doing it day after day what is important is figuring out how it going to climb the tree. Success in university usually means success in life in all aspects, if you’re capable of solving problems you will know how to solve the problems and you will be happy and therefore success.
The Dunning Kruger effect is a real thing. I've met a lot of stupid people whose arrogance have blinded them to the fact that they are complete idiots.
Kruger*, bud
@@JacksHardenedLiver sorry, i have big hands and sometimes when i type on my phone I hit the wrong keys.
I feel completely retarded and never smart enough. I can't tell how dumb I am
i’m just looking at the comments and watching people try to make themselves look smart, it’s a sad world.
If we don't try, then we never will achieve. Failure is required for success.
edward heaney bruh
cashmoneyghost lmao I just noticed this too. I see so many comments trying to sound philosophical or scholarly it’s honestly kinda cringe.
yes there is something left, kinesthetic intelligence. mike tyson was mozart on the ring with an iq below 80.
Reflexes and quick decision-making. There's no way he could actually process all that information consciously being that dumb.
That would be interesting if true, because IQ actually takes into account speed and reaction time, for what I've heard.
@The Medical Enthusiast "My style is impetuous, my defence is impregnable, I'm just ferocious I want your heart!"
@The Medical Enthusiast Goes to show that education is huge for how intelligence is expressed whilst not affecting innate capacity. Same with Floyd really - his mastery of boxing is nothing short of genius, despite his background.
Jon R Mike Tyson is not dumb
An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from several standardized tests designed to assess human intelligence.
There are many types of tests but Aristotle suggests perception as possibly the best indicator due to it can not be learned. Many IQ questions fail because you can learn them.
Once you have reached a minimal operating IQ, it is Grit that counts most for success
“...emotional intelligence, which DOES NOT EXIST by the way!” 9:20
Love it. Our Prime Minister is praised for his emotional intelligence, I guess he really has no intelligence then.
He means it is not real in the realm of science.
"no real intelligence then" that's not what he said. He said that what people call emotional intelligence is actually some sort of mixture of high IQ AND some personality traits.
I know plenty of people who got high marks in school but are terrible at socializing and making connections. I know plenty of people who failed in exams and excelled in business. So how come emotional intelligence doesn't exist?
@@stevefernando94 they failed in school because they weren't motivated enough to study, and the succeeded in business because of the power of their iq.
Emotional intelligence is that type of intelligence which only dumb people claim to have.
I like these kind of lectures, because they look at the information objectivly instead of getting politicly correct not to insult some people... it drives me crazy when people say "oh well I dropped out of college but that says nothing about me!" It either says you are a lazy ass or it says you are not smart enough to learn certain subjects.
gur lurye I never want to be the guy to say that, but I have heard that statement 1000 times..... “I was in my last semester and decided to leave”, or “I was one class short of my degree”, or “I would be an engineer but my professor wouldn’t give me my last semester grades”... lots of poor excuses, yet some may be real. But few, few.
@Ligeia D.Aurevilly as someone who is a student right now, and diagnosed with ocd and adhd I am telling you although its not easy at all, its still not an excuse to say that dropping out of university "says nothing" about you
@Ligeia D.Aurevilly I agree with you.
Or maybe it just says that they couldn't afford it / didn't want to be in a mountain of debt for something they could learn elsewhere? College education is a great thing, but the elitist culture surrounding that form of education insulates it from making the changes necessary to truly benefit society at a greater scale. Some people just want to get the required education to make a good living doing something they like, and a college degree is not a required or efficient path for a decent chunk of well paying career options.
@Ligeia D.Aurevilly agreed, however I don't often see people blaming university for their failures. I often see the opposite: the maligning of people that didn't get a college degree.
-"Where do you land on the dumbness scale?"
-"Yes."
-"Okay, that's all I need to know."
No.
@@dinviesel2866 Maybe?
Indubitably my IQ point on the distribution of the bell curve ranges from .96 to 1.16 standard deviations left shifted from the top of the bell curve given various conditions of sleep, current state of body chemistry and whether I'm watching a Jordan Peterson video at the time 😜 in which case I am of course always right shifted and almost flatlining 🙄
Same
Trust me I am low IQ genetic piece of shit, and its fucking hard.
Too bad I didn't blew my head with a double barrel sawed off
Wow very impressive. I'd like to add that today universities (at least in The Netherlands) select on students that reproduce knowledge instead of real critical thinking. They don't feel comfortable with students that ask questions that they find too hard.
They should be selecting for SAT (or the netherlands' equivalent) test scores which is essentially an IQ test.
Come back, JP. We need you now more than ever.
He's gone?
@@carlosv4782 He took a sabbatical for rehab on some kind of anti-depressant.
I used to think IQ didn't show much. Turns out my IQ is high and now I think it's the best thing ever 😉😂😂
English is my third language and despite his difficult words I coud understand what he was saying.
This man has a rare talent of explaining stuff. He has Big brain
to me he comes across as insecure, so he resort to jargon when a simple explanation would suffice.
i'm an expert in computers and programming.
if you're not a programmer and ask me to explain a very simple program to you, i would give you a very simple explanation that you, as someone who is not an expert, can understand without having to look up any words.
i could give you a detailed explanation at the subatomic level on how electrons move, and quantum tunneling in the transistors. and it would be technically correct, but unless you're an expert you will not understand. this is what peterson loves to do. use a lot of technical jargon instead of a straight forward explanation.
he's the white christian deepak chopra.
@@sabin97 As someone who also does computer science. I agree, a smart person doesn't make their explaination verbose in attempt to make themselves sound more intelligent. Its just a smoke screen for their lack of knowledge.
@@keshi5541
yeah. einstein supposedly(i dont know if it was really him, but i love the quote so i'll use it anyway) said "if you cant explain it to you grandmother, you dont really understand it".
Scroll down for people pretending to be smart bc it looks cool to be in the video
About the only thing I've read here that's honest
I would say that there is such a thing as musical intelligence, somewhat apart from
regular intelligence. There are those who can succeed at very complex musical
achievements, but who are very low functioning at other life tasks. Musical achievement
is like a parallel ability, that others have in more conventional realms.
Music is math. Math is music.
I was as thick as shit. But I invested in houses at a young age and retired when I was about 45. I am 60 now and still as thick as shit.
The first 2 minutes and 15 seconds is so damn good to hear. When you first lay down and accept your disbelief to suspend it for a moment, you may enter the realm of places, of things that do not yet exist. For those things we have not made, and do not have, there is space left to make them. For that is a key part of imagination. But to separate imagination from reality is even more key, and this is done for however long-or-brief a moment but, it's necessity is followed-through nonetheless. A key moment for any good argument to be sure.
Had a guy in my home town who thought IQ was a vision test.......
His vision must be kinda bad.
@@gabrielkaz5250 I think it was. He said he failed the test.
I hope you didn't insult his father with a pap smear.
Maybe he thought about computer graphics or camera quality, because IQ is also used to refer to image quality.
I consider myself to be a fairly intelligent individual by most measures, yet Dr. Peterson's intellect keeps me very well grounded on my place in the pecking order. He's a treasure to those in this world that care about facts and insights. Master level stuff.
If you are listening to Peterson than you are not fairly intelligent.
@@michaelwright8896”…than you are not fairly intelligent.”
@@ch33zyburrito36 im not listening to him for the same reason.
Then how do you explain that so many people with an IQ higher than 125 are unemployed or severely underemployed?
All people I know with an IQ higher than 125 are quite unhappy and deal poorly with others which makes it hard for them too keep jobs. Those who keep the same job for more than 1 year are on the minimum wage.
On the other hand, all people I know who work in management are very polite, have a subtle smile on their face and from the second they see you the first time, they act as if you know each other for years. They also lie without blinking instead of giving you bad news and after the truth is unveiled they act surprised by your indignation.
I think machiavelianism surpassed IQ as a metric for success.
I believed you pulled that statistic out your low IQ ass to satisfy yourself.
you should view it in the other direction. All people with a high function who are really succesfull have a high IQ. Instead of saying "there are a lot of smart people unemployed".
not related he is talking in terms of averages
Cite your sources. An IQ of 125 isn’t anything spectacular. Its smart but not to the point of causing social irregularities.
This sounds like anecdotal evidence.
I think a factor that isn't always taken into account is lack of motivation from depression or other mental issues, on average people with a higher iq tend to have a higher percentage of depression. I did terrible in highschool cause I didn't care about anything at the time, my IQ is pretty high(not to toot my own horn) just to add in an example.
I think it’s more that intelligence PREDICTS success, not that intelligence necessarily leads to or causes success
My IQ was the only thing that kept me from failing high school.
Yeah I can relate man. I understand pretty much everything I’m taught but I don’t have motivation to get up and study. I also suffer with depression and overthinking.
You probably have 115 IQ and think that's high
@@LaughingMan44 lol nah
IQ is intelligence quotient. A measure of the possible or potential intelligence of an individual. A person could be a total failure or could be a raging success in terms of performance. Everyone has what I call a gift, something special about them. A talent. Society measures an individual by factors other than IQ. individuals choose a mate by other factors then IQ to a large extent. What is the next topic? This one is well worn.
yes while it is true everyone has something they're better at than others, the reason why the argument that IQ is a huge predictor of success is because it reflects adaptability and retention of information, which affects your success in all areas of life.
No, some people are complete failurers, talentless or a burden and safety hazard to general society. People need to accept that nature is not some zero sum game but a constant process of re-iterations... normally nature word sort garbage out... but humans bot only keep it, they are even unwilling to prevent useless "baggage"... it hinders the progress of humanity.
Paxmax What you speak is the evidence for what I stated.
k l IQ has nothing to do with adaptability. A complete dunce can be adaptable. That's inherent and instinctual.
A dunce who is agreable and peaceful is just a dunce, he/she might accept to mop floors. But calling it a dunce having a "gift"..? ...when it is mopping the floor? A dunce who is disagreable and violent is worse than useless, these must be managed for societal safety sake, a net cost and contributes zero to humanities. If everyone has a gift then no one has it. I know people wants to play nice be all fricken inclusive, but it is at the cost of distorting truth/reality and I have to ask; what good comes of it?
I took a reputable online IQ test yesterday and got 115, I wish it was higher but I'm still grateful that it's not lower, it's much better than nothing. At least I have a pretty decent chance of getting a job and doing well in the world.
I’m really worried about him. Haven’t heard any news or seen anything new of him in awhile. Hope Jordan doing okay in this corona time
I really doubt most of the people in that room are above 120 IQ. Would be interested to see the statistics.
Well they are students at one of the best universities in the world
@@yackamajez
It has a pretty high acceptance rate, but it's possible.
@@Smullet90 The acceptance rate is rather high especially when you compare it to US top schools but I think that's because they accept everyone who meet their standards academically (which are just as high as US top schools) unlike top schools in the US who require you to meet high academic standards AND have insane extracurriculars. If US schools didn't take into account extracurriculars, they'd probably have a similarly high acceptance rate
@@yackamajez doubtful. Average at best or slightly above. I'm tested at 148 but never applied myself but can still pick up on topics quicker than mostly everyone I've met in life.
@@tylerm7300 Nice humble brag :) You're simply the best
Here's a Controversial Fact: stupid people don't like being called stupid. Here's another: fat people don't like being told they're fat. And so on and so on.
So does your holy ghost
Skinny people don't particularly like being called fat, and smart people don't particularly enjoy being called stupid......
Don't forget the most controversial fact.
People will watch an entire video of a subject matter expert discussing how real something is and then say "Well I know this one guy that doesn't correlate with your information, so you're wrong." Amazing.
Isn’t how you do in university mostly related to work ethic and not necessary intelligence?
You need both. But intelligence is more important. I know people of average and below average intelligence, and these people could literally never learn calculus, chemistry, statistics even if you gave them several years of 1 on 1 tutoring.
He covered that. Work ethic is conscientiousness. As JP said, intelligence and conscientiousness are the two most important factors in predicting success, but of those two factors intelligence matters more.
My IQ depends on what I'm watching on TV at the time.
If I'm watching 'Cosmos' or 'The Ascent of Man' my IQ is about 150.
If I'm watching an American sit-com it's about 70.
If I'm watching a party political broadcast it doesn't even register!!
It also depends on which version of 'Cosmos' you're watching. The Sagan one is superior.
Directly in ratio to the waistline
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education" - Mark Twain. Professors love statistics - it's the best way of deleting inconvenient information - it enables them to ignore raw data points that don't correlate with the correlation factor or graphical line they draw through those raw data points. Then they generalize from this manufactured line and call it the "truth" at the same time as conveniently forgetting all the outlying data points that don't fit the line. To keep our attention focused, channel our thoughts & cement our acceptance of the new "truth" they suggest that there might be other alternatives to the "correlation line" - however they are quick to suggest that considering these will lead to our humiliation (humiliation in front of our peers - just like in our early school days when we challenged the teacher - that was before all the curiosity and courage was conditioned out of us) - Peterson here says we'd be "daft" for even thinking alternatives exist to the now "self-evident truth" he has created before our very eyes. Conform with the majority view (the correlation line) is the message. The authority figure at the front of the classroom will always make us feel safe by removing our responsibility to think and act for ourselves (which would mean challenging him) - he'll distract us by making us feel very smart for listening to him & allow us to feel superior to non-University educated individuals - by these very means the Idea itself bypasses our critical factor & becomes accepted by us without question. Everyone one is equal - but some people are more equal than others - and (apparently) we have a scale we have devised that proves this. We are so easy to play until we read Edward Bernays & understand how these professors really look down on us. They owe their elevated position to the system & arbitrary scale that that puts them there - of course they are going to get us to believe in IQ scales too - but do they use a genuine examination of alternatives - no - they use our conditioned responses and threats of humiliation. How are we made to believe in this stuff ? - finding the answer to that question would be a real education leading to real intelligence - we would then become aware of the subcontext of this lecture (the frame in which it is delivered - which includes the classroom environment we find ourselves in as viewers - sat among passive & accepting students) - and no we can't measure this type of intelligence with an IQ test. An IQ test cannot measure the world that has been pulled over our eyes.
I'm gonna stop you right there. You said "self evident truth". Nothing about what he just said for 13 minutes is "self evident". He did not describe it as such. And it is not so. You don't even understand the Mark Twain quote you started out with. That meaning behind that quote is differentiating between intelligence and wisdom.
One noticeable thing is that picking btw 65 and 145 is not a fair comparison. It should be 135 or 65, or 145 or 55.
I would love being lectured by him. Great energy.
Facts should not be controversial
Money doesn't matter- rich person
Looks don't matter- attractive person
IQ doesn't matter- low iq person