3 ms·

What shows that they are more intelligent? They might be better at extracting value from enterprise, but is that generally “more intelligent?”

by throwaway20222 12d ago

mhh__ 12d ago
Well they're considerably better paid and in a business that allows economies of scale. It's a steelman argument to be clear I'm not entirely convinced by it.
gruez 12d ago
>but is that generally “more intelligent?” Contrary to popular belief, being intelligent in one thing does correlate with being intelligent at other things[1]. For doctors, the comparison with private equity (MBAs?) might be close, but it's not hard to imagine the targets of other PE rollups have owners that are more average in intelligence, think plumbing or roofing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)
- tbrownaw 12d ago
  DISREGARD THIS, I CAN'T READ TODAY > Contrary to popular belief, being intelligent in one thing does correlate with being intelligent at other things[1]. > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) Which section of that very long article are you claiming supports your assertion? Here's a bit from the start of the "Concept" section: >> In a famous research paper published in 1904,[8] English psychologist Charles Spearman observed that children's performance measures across seemingly unrelated school subjects were positively correlated. The consistent finding of universally positive correlation matrices of mental test results (or the "positive manifold"), despite large differences in tests' contents, has been described as "arguably the most replicated result in all psychology".[9] That explicitly contradicts your assertion.
  - gruez 12d ago
    >being intelligent in one thing does correlate with being intelligent at other things vs >The consistent finding of universally positive correlation matrices of mental test results (or the "positive manifold"), despite large differences in tests' contents, has been described as "arguably the most replicated result in all psychology".[9] How are they contradictory? Did the first part of my comment make you think there was a negation?
    - tbrownaw 12d ago
      d'oh, yep

What shows that they are more intelligent? They might be better at extracting value from enterprise, but is that generally “more intelligent?”

mhh__ 12d ago

Well they're considerably better paid and in a business that allows economies of scale. It's a steelman argument to be clear I'm not entirely convinced by it.

gruez 12d ago

>but is that generally “more intelligent?” Contrary to popular belief, being intelligent in one thing does correlate with being intelligent at other things[1]. For doctors, the comparison with private equity (MBAs?) might be close, but it's not hard to imagine the targets of other PE rollups have owners that are more average in intelligence, think plumbing or roofing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

tbrownaw 12d ago
DISREGARD THIS, I CAN'T READ TODAY > Contrary to popular belief, being intelligent in one thing does correlate with being intelligent at other things[1]. > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) Which section of that very long article are you claiming supports your assertion? Here's a bit from the start of the "Concept" section: >> In a famous research paper published in 1904,[8] English psychologist Charles Spearman observed that children's performance measures across seemingly unrelated school subjects were positively correlated. The consistent finding of universally positive correlation matrices of mental test results (or the "positive manifold"), despite large differences in tests' contents, has been described as "arguably the most replicated result in all psychology".[9] That explicitly contradicts your assertion.
- gruez 12d ago
  >being intelligent in one thing does correlate with being intelligent at other things vs >The consistent finding of universally positive correlation matrices of mental test results (or the "positive manifold"), despite large differences in tests' contents, has been described as "arguably the most replicated result in all psychology".[9] How are they contradictory? Did the first part of my comment make you think there was a negation?
  - tbrownaw 12d ago
    d'oh, yep