3 ms·

I don't think that meme was wrong. I think the "wrong" part was the assumption that all people have significant creative potential. Remember, 50% of all peopl

by endtime 16y ago

I don't think that meme was wrong. I think the "wrong" part was the assumption that all people have significant creative potential. Remember, 50% of all people have a 2-digit IQ.

wladimir 16y ago
What makes you think it is "wrong"? Simply because it isn't the case now? I believe it doesn't have to be this way. Who would have predicted large scale democracy before the French Revolution? Also, don't define "creative potential" as "high IQ". IQ is just an arbitrary measure which correlates with intelligence (and even that is controversial).
- endtime 16y ago
  >What makes you think it is "wrong"? Simply because it isn't the case now? I think that is the standard definition, yes.
yardie 16y ago
According to the way IQ is measured, 50% of all people will always have a 2-digit IQ. It moves with population and age. And once people get to a comfortable level of subsistence they do become more creative. The guys that build swamp buggies and monster trucks probably don't have IQs greater than anyone else, but there they are, hacking Ford F150s to drive through 6 feet of water.
- endtime 16y ago
  I know how IQ is measured - that's why I felt comfortable making the statement. And of course 100 is not an absolute, fixed value. But, nevertheless, someone with a sub-100 IQ today is unlikely to use his newfound free time, if he's supplanted as high school janitor by a robot, to create wonderful works of art or technology.
  - yeahsure 16y ago
    So what if he can't create wonderful works of art or technology? Does that mean he's either a high school janitor or -if replaced by a robot- should just be a homeless? What if he hadn't become a janitor in the first place? What if he had spent all of his youth learning about anything that really makes him tick? I know - lots of "what if's" but that's exactly what I thought when I was a kid, we would get these kind of answers. Hope some day we can.
    - endtime 16y ago
      That's a non sequitur. Look at what I was originally reply to: >In the 80's-90's there was this common meme that automation would result in a more equal world where people could use their creative potential instead of doing repetitive jobs.

by endtime 16y ago

I don't think that meme was wrong. I think the "wrong" part was the assumption that all people have significant creative potential. Remember, 50% of all people have a 2-digit IQ.

wladimir 16y ago

What makes you think it is "wrong"? Simply because it isn't the case now? I believe it doesn't have to be this way. Who would have predicted large scale democracy before the French Revolution? Also, don't define "creative potential" as "high IQ". IQ is just an arbitrary measure which correlates with intelligence (and even that is controversial).

endtime 16y ago
>What makes you think it is "wrong"? Simply because it isn't the case now? I think that is the standard definition, yes.

yardie 16y ago

According to the way IQ is measured, 50% of all people will always have a 2-digit IQ. It moves with population and age. And once people get to a comfortable level of subsistence they do become more creative. The guys that build swamp buggies and monster trucks probably don't have IQs greater than anyone else, but there they are, hacking Ford F150s to drive through 6 feet of water.

endtime 16y ago
I know how IQ is measured - that's why I felt comfortable making the statement. And of course 100 is not an absolute, fixed value. But, nevertheless, someone with a sub-100 IQ today is unlikely to use his newfound free time, if he's supplanted as high school janitor by a robot, to create wonderful works of art or technology.
- yeahsure 16y ago
  So what if he can't create wonderful works of art or technology? Does that mean he's either a high school janitor or -if replaced by a robot- should just be a homeless? What if he hadn't become a janitor in the first place? What if he had spent all of his youth learning about anything that really makes him tick? I know - lots of "what if's" but that's exactly what I thought when I was a kid, we would get these kind of answers. Hope some day we can.
  - endtime 16y ago
    That's a non sequitur. Look at what I was originally reply to: >In the 80's-90's there was this common meme that automation would result in a more equal world where people could use their creative potential instead of doing repetitive jobs.