5 ms·

A possible "third variable" could be intelligence. It's been shown to be strongly correlated with success in general, and it seems likely people of similar int

A possible "third variable" could be intelligence. It's been shown to be strongly correlated with success in general, and it seems likely people of similar intelligence would find it easier to relate to each other.

LPisGood 2mo ago
> It's been shown to be strongly correlated with success in general Has it? I was under the impression we could hardly define, much less measure that.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 2mo ago
  I think we have many very decent measures of intellect. It’s true that none of them are perfect but I think it’s basically propaganda to say we can’t define or measure it at all.
  - dd8601fn 2mo ago
    > I think it’s basically propaganda to say we can’t define or measure it I worked at a (very well known) test publishing company, for some time. You would not believe how often someone would hear where I work and lecture me about intelligence measurement being nonsense. Almost like they were offended that the test batteries exist. But also, they had absolutely no idea how those tests were developed and validated. They weren’t even aware of the language and cultural work involved in making test variations that validate across different people. I would mostly shrug and keep my mouth shut. I’m not an expert on the subject. But I saw a bit of what those many smart people did at work, and I’m confident that they were better informed. Maybe it was just silly defensiveness, but for a while I started to think all the delightful, “You’re all special in your own way.” messaging of our youth had been extrapolated into more unreasonable notions.
- Swizec 2mo ago
  > > It's been shown to be strongly correlated with success in general > Has it? I was under the impression we could hardly define, much less measure that. IQ has a strong positive correlation with life outcomes. Economic and otherwise. Whether IQ is a good measure of "intelligence" remains debated but there's no question that high scores in that measure correlate with high scores in life outcome measures: Life expectancy, economic success, relationship success, etc. Every single thing you can measure about a person's life trends upwards with IQ. Some (maybe much) of the effect can be attributed to privilege and other covariants, so we don't know if IQ is causal for life outcomes but we have strong evidence that it's correlated. one study of many: https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=74943 https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=74943
  - timr 2mo ago
    All of these things are strong covariates, which is something the online hive-mind struggles with. It's not intelligence OR wealth OR hard work OR $thing, it's all of the above, with some weighting function that spits out high values for all factors. And since IQ is just a proxy for intelligence (however good), it also correlates to some greater or lesser degree with the other factors.
    - Swizec 2mo ago
      > All of these things are strong covariates Yeah it turns out having positive multipliers on your inputs leads to better outcomes. Who knew!
- estearum 2mo ago
  There is "something" that seems to correlate strongly with wealth, education, test scores across every subject/dimension, seems highly heritable from parents to offspring, and fits with both SAT and IQ test results. It can't possibly be intelligence (would be inconvenient if it were) but there's something there. Maybe we can call it "shminshmellishence".
  - LPisGood 2mo ago
    Could it also be called wealth-mellishence or perhaps familialValuationOfWorkEthic-melloshence?
    - estearum 2mo ago
      Those were some of the leading candidates until twin studies and controls for familial wealth invalidated them and left us only with shminshmellishence :/
      - LPisGood 2mo ago
        “Controls” for familial wealth have mostly been debunked by any kind of basic statistical analysis.
        estearum 2mo ago
        Look up twin studies. "Intelligence doesn't exist" is just a defense mechanism for above-average intelligence people to feel like they earned all their good outcomes. But here's the thing: even if it was all hard work and not that you were born of above-average intelligence, it's pure luck that you were born someone who works hard. But also intelligence exists and it's wildly discrediting to insist it doesn't.
        AnimalMuppet 2mo ago
        You don't think people can choose to work hard?
tartoran 2mo ago
There are intelligent people who may not be necessarily be on the same scale socially and they do get burned by it.
- juliangoldsmith 2mo ago
  Impulse control issues, like ADHD, can factor in too.
heroprotagonist 2mo ago
Tell that to the generation of autistics roaming America that were never properly diagnosed in their youth. High intelligence, often even high paying jobs, but all the other 'success' metrics will probably end up looking very wavy.
- annzabelle 2mo ago
  I'd argue that mildly autistic people had much better outcomes decades ago before we started thinking it was something to diagnose. My grandfather was probably autistic, but there was no internet to sink into so he had to interact with people and build some basic social skills. Out of high school he joined the Navy as a radar technician and lived in a structured environment that taught a lot of life skills. Then he went to college for engineering and was set up on dates with my grandmother (as a bit of a matchmaking thing). Suburban house, 4 children, married for decades, church. Generally a very normal and happy life, even if he was considered eccentric and sensitive to noises. I don't think anybody ever thought to diagnose him with it. My brother is mildly autistic, too, but he has always had the option to skip out of socialization in favor of the computer, and we've lost the societal structure that helped my grandfather thrive. I don't think it's diagnosis that helps people.
  - disgruntledphd2 2mo ago
    > I don't think it's diagnosis that helps people. It might be the societal structure is good for everyone, regardless of their diagnoses, or lack thereof.
  - Timon3 2mo ago
    I strongly disagree that getting diagnosed causes worse outcomes in such cases. I'm not sure what the link is between your brother getting diagnosed, and him having the option to skip out on socializing. Undiagnosed people frequently make the same choice under worse circumstances, since it's hard to name why they want to choose this escape. I wouldn't be surprised if the undiagnosed made this choice more often, as they struggle in ways most people around them don't seem to, which naturally leads to the struggling seeking community in other places (= digital ones). It may well be that a life journey like your grandfather's was more likely for mildly autistic people 50 years ago (though I'd urge you not to forget that many in that situation just break and die early), but the world has fundamentally shifted since then. IMO not getting diagnosed wouldn't improve things, people would largely live the same, but with much greater self-doubt, anger and broken relationships.

LPisGood 2mo ago

> It's been shown to be strongly correlated with success in general Has it? I was under the impression we could hardly define, much less measure that.

asdfasgasdgasdg 2mo ago
I think we have many very decent measures of intellect. It’s true that none of them are perfect but I think it’s basically propaganda to say we can’t define or measure it at all.
- dd8601fn 2mo ago
  > I think it’s basically propaganda to say we can’t define or measure it I worked at a (very well known) test publishing company, for some time. You would not believe how often someone would hear where I work and lecture me about intelligence measurement being nonsense. Almost like they were offended that the test batteries exist. But also, they had absolutely no idea how those tests were developed and validated. They weren’t even aware of the language and cultural work involved in making test variations that validate across different people. I would mostly shrug and keep my mouth shut. I’m not an expert on the subject. But I saw a bit of what those many smart people did at work, and I’m confident that they were better informed. Maybe it was just silly defensiveness, but for a while I started to think all the delightful, “You’re all special in your own way.” messaging of our youth had been extrapolated into more unreasonable notions.
Swizec 2mo ago
> > It's been shown to be strongly correlated with success in general > Has it? I was under the impression we could hardly define, much less measure that. IQ has a strong positive correlation with life outcomes. Economic and otherwise. Whether IQ is a good measure of "intelligence" remains debated but there's no question that high scores in that measure correlate with high scores in life outcome measures: Life expectancy, economic success, relationship success, etc. Every single thing you can measure about a person's life trends upwards with IQ. Some (maybe much) of the effect can be attributed to privilege and other covariants, so we don't know if IQ is causal for life outcomes but we have strong evidence that it's correlated. one study of many: https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=74943 https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=74943
- timr 2mo ago
  All of these things are strong covariates, which is something the online hive-mind struggles with. It's not intelligence OR wealth OR hard work OR $thing, it's all of the above, with some weighting function that spits out high values for all factors. And since IQ is just a proxy for intelligence (however good), it also correlates to some greater or lesser degree with the other factors.
  - Swizec 2mo ago
    > All of these things are strong covariates Yeah it turns out having positive multipliers on your inputs leads to better outcomes. Who knew!
estearum 2mo ago
There is "something" that seems to correlate strongly with wealth, education, test scores across every subject/dimension, seems highly heritable from parents to offspring, and fits with both SAT and IQ test results. It can't possibly be intelligence (would be inconvenient if it were) but there's something there. Maybe we can call it "shminshmellishence".
- LPisGood 2mo ago
  Could it also be called wealth-mellishence or perhaps familialValuationOfWorkEthic-melloshence?
  - estearum 2mo ago
    Those were some of the leading candidates until twin studies and controls for familial wealth invalidated them and left us only with shminshmellishence :/
    - LPisGood 2mo ago
      “Controls” for familial wealth have mostly been debunked by any kind of basic statistical analysis.
      - estearum 2mo ago
        Look up twin studies. "Intelligence doesn't exist" is just a defense mechanism for above-average intelligence people to feel like they earned all their good outcomes. But here's the thing: even if it was all hard work and not that you were born of above-average intelligence, it's pure luck that you were born someone who works hard. But also intelligence exists and it's wildly discrediting to insist it doesn't.
        AnimalMuppet 2mo ago
        You don't think people can choose to work hard?

tartoran 2mo ago

There are intelligent people who may not be necessarily be on the same scale socially and they do get burned by it.

juliangoldsmith 2mo ago
Impulse control issues, like ADHD, can factor in too.

heroprotagonist 2mo ago

Tell that to the generation of autistics roaming America that were never properly diagnosed in their youth. High intelligence, often even high paying jobs, but all the other 'success' metrics will probably end up looking very wavy.

annzabelle 2mo ago
I'd argue that mildly autistic people had much better outcomes decades ago before we started thinking it was something to diagnose. My grandfather was probably autistic, but there was no internet to sink into so he had to interact with people and build some basic social skills. Out of high school he joined the Navy as a radar technician and lived in a structured environment that taught a lot of life skills. Then he went to college for engineering and was set up on dates with my grandmother (as a bit of a matchmaking thing). Suburban house, 4 children, married for decades, church. Generally a very normal and happy life, even if he was considered eccentric and sensitive to noises. I don't think anybody ever thought to diagnose him with it. My brother is mildly autistic, too, but he has always had the option to skip out of socialization in favor of the computer, and we've lost the societal structure that helped my grandfather thrive. I don't think it's diagnosis that helps people.
- disgruntledphd2 2mo ago
  > I don't think it's diagnosis that helps people. It might be the societal structure is good for everyone, regardless of their diagnoses, or lack thereof.
- Timon3 2mo ago
  I strongly disagree that getting diagnosed causes worse outcomes in such cases. I'm not sure what the link is between your brother getting diagnosed, and him having the option to skip out on socializing. Undiagnosed people frequently make the same choice under worse circumstances, since it's hard to name why they want to choose this escape. I wouldn't be surprised if the undiagnosed made this choice more often, as they struggle in ways most people around them don't seem to, which naturally leads to the struggling seeking community in other places (= digital ones). It may well be that a life journey like your grandfather's was more likely for mildly autistic people 50 years ago (though I'd urge you not to forget that many in that situation just break and die early), but the world has fundamentally shifted since then. IMO not getting diagnosed wouldn't improve things, people would largely live the same, but with much greater self-doubt, anger and broken relationships.