3 ms·

From my life experiences, I’ve come to believe that most people around the world possess a similar level of intelligence. The real difference isn’t in innate ab

by tlogan 2y ago

From my life experiences, I’ve come to believe that most people around the world possess a similar level of intelligence. The real difference isn’t in innate ability but in effort—those often labeled as “not so smart” are usually just unwilling to think critically or engage deeply (basically lazy). It’s less about capability and more about a lack of willingness to put in the mental effort. There is one Balkan joke which illustrate this: Two Bosnian workers in Germany were taking a break when their boss approached them. “Why isn’t the work done yet? Are you being lazy?” the boss asked. One of the Bosnians replied, “Oh no, boss! The Montenegrins are the lazy ones; we’re the stupid ones! We need more instructions —— In your case, it’s crucial to explain management with specifics rather than generalizations: detail exactly what you communicated—“I told this person X, Y, and Z”—and then describe the specific actions they took in response.

WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
> The real difference isn’t in innate ability but ... are usually just unwilling to think critically or engage deeply (basically lazy). It’s less about capability and more about a lack of willingness to put in the mental effort. My longish life has bore witness of the near opposite. I learned that folks generally operate at the level they can. Folks aren't walking around with deep wells of unused capacity that they can trivially convert into profoundly different outcomes. Among the evidence: 1. The time and intensity of investment required to make a sea change in my own life and 2. climbing into the head of my toxic spouse (after 25y marriage) and working out what drives her destructive behavior. Regarding the latter, I came to realize there was no choice she could make today that would yield a different outcome tomorrow. Meaningful change needs years of consistency. However, her internal deck is continually reshuffled; will alone can only do so much.
error_logic 2y ago
I've been realizing that intelligence has two factors, raw capacity and effective output, with the latter determined by how much noise "gets in the way" of accurate results. More important than either, arguably, is the wisdom of knowing one's limitations and adapting accordingly. Someone can be really clever at finding ways of being stupid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O9FFrLpinQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O9FFrLpinQ
stefs 2y ago
if IQ is distributed on a bell curve, then you're mostly right, as most people aren't too different. almost 70% of people are in the middle range, i.e. between 85 and 115. on the other hand, a difference of 85 and 115 might very well be what OP is talking about. i can't remember ever having a coworker who was so much more stupid than me that it would have been an issue, but i do know that i've had colleagues who were so much smarter than me that i suspect i might have been the stupid one in comparison - which would have been more noticable if our work had required higher intelligence (i only realized how much smarter he was than me when talking about private projects outside of work). so the difference in our mental capabilities wasn't necessarily a direct indicator of productivity and success with workloads where my lower capabilities were enough to get the job done, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't have been a stark contrast in a different setting. i guess the people outside of the norm tend to specialize in work that either doesn't depend much on intelligence at all or selects for very high intelligence, so they're mostly among peers again.
- drewcoo 2y ago
  The people who are staggeringly smarter than us have better things to do with their time than post on HN.

by tlogan 2y ago

WarOnPrivacy 2y ago

> The real difference isn’t in innate ability but ... are usually just unwilling to think critically or engage deeply (basically lazy). It’s less about capability and more about a lack of willingness to put in the mental effort. My longish life has bore witness of the near opposite. I learned that folks generally operate at the level they can. Folks aren't walking around with deep wells of unused capacity that they can trivially convert into profoundly different outcomes. Among the evidence: 1. The time and intensity of investment required to make a sea change in my own life and 2. climbing into the head of my toxic spouse (after 25y marriage) and working out what drives her destructive behavior. Regarding the latter, I came to realize there was no choice she could make today that would yield a different outcome tomorrow. Meaningful change needs years of consistency. However, her internal deck is continually reshuffled; will alone can only do so much.

error_logic 2y ago

I've been realizing that intelligence has two factors, raw capacity and effective output, with the latter determined by how much noise "gets in the way" of accurate results. More important than either, arguably, is the wisdom of knowing one's limitations and adapting accordingly. Someone can be really clever at finding ways of being stupid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O9FFrLpinQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O9FFrLpinQ

stefs 2y ago

if IQ is distributed on a bell curve, then you're mostly right, as most people aren't too different. almost 70% of people are in the middle range, i.e. between 85 and 115. on the other hand, a difference of 85 and 115 might very well be what OP is talking about. i can't remember ever having a coworker who was so much more stupid than me that it would have been an issue, but i do know that i've had colleagues who were so much smarter than me that i suspect i might have been the stupid one in comparison - which would have been more noticable if our work had required higher intelligence (i only realized how much smarter he was than me when talking about private projects outside of work). so the difference in our mental capabilities wasn't necessarily a direct indicator of productivity and success with workloads where my lower capabilities were enough to get the job done, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't have been a stark contrast in a different setting. i guess the people outside of the norm tend to specialize in work that either doesn't depend much on intelligence at all or selects for very high intelligence, so they're mostly among peers again.

drewcoo 2y ago
The people who are staggeringly smarter than us have better things to do with their time than post on HN.