3 ms·
>Interestingly you refute the idea that intelligence determines someone’s “worth,” Well, this is true: intelligence does _not_ determine someone's worth. Ulti
by dumbwork 7y ago
>Interestingly you refute the idea that intelligence determines someone’s “worth,”
Well, this is true: intelligence does _not_ determine someone's worth.
Ultimately how intelligent you are is irrelevant providing that you _can_ provide value.
>Still rats in the race, just rats with a slightly higher score on a particular dimension.
Yes, but surrounded by other rats with a slightly higher score on a particular dimension.
But anyone can still learn how to do it: abstract reasoning us not reserved for the "intelligent", it's open to anyone who is of average intelligence at least.
- nl 7y agoabstract reasoning us not reserved for the "intelligent", it's open to anyone who is of average intelligence at least. Interestingly this implies that the average programmer does have higher than average intelligence (as measured by IQ scores). The reasoning goes like this: - At least average intelligence is required for abstract reasoning (and programming) - This means the the distribution of intelligence for programmers has a minimum around that of the average value - This means that the mean and median must both be above average.