Lion of the Blogosphere

Rational thinking is not very highly correlated with intelligence

This finding is explained in a NY Times article.

My take on this is that most people make decisions based on feelings, emotions, bias, previous behavior patterns, etc, and then, after-the-fact, they use their intelligence to rationalize the decision, and the higher the person’s IQ, the more sophisticated—but ultimately misleading and deceptive—argument they would make for why they made the decision.

And then there are people like me who are unusually rational.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 18, 2016 at 1:16 pm

Posted in Psychology

85 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I’m not surprised that there is little correlation between IQ and rationality in a laboratory setting where decisions have no consequences.

    Yet in real life, we see IQ correlated with rationality, whether it’s staying out of debt, not getting pregnant out of wedlock, maintaining a healthy weight, etc. When people have an incentive to get decisions right,higher IQ people make better decisions.

    Hepp

    September 18, 2016 at 1:22 pm

    • On the other hand, when there’s a personal benefit to IRRATIONAL thinking, like believing in the liberal view on race (because believing the truth of HBD can get you fired), we see that people eagerly believe in the irrational.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 18, 2016 at 1:31 pm

      • That actually proves my point. Saying all races are equal has no consequences, but liberals, as we all know, don’t move into black neighborhoods or send their kids to black schools. They may even vote liberal, but that has no consequences either for the individual, since one vote will never determine an election. So on race, liberals are irrational when there are no consequences but rational when it actually matters.

        Hepp

        September 18, 2016 at 1:46 pm

      • or is it a higher level of rationality?

        people believe things for many reasons. only one of those reasons is that what they believe is the truth.

        so when one has a very good reason to believe something he knows to be false, is he being rational or irrational?

        Trumpocalypse Now

        September 18, 2016 at 4:48 pm

      • PRETENDING to believe may be rational if one has certain goals that involve social acceptance, but truly believing is irrational. At least that’s the way I see it.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 18, 2016 at 6:12 pm

      • I think this is a straw man argument.

        Intelligent liberals recognize that there are differences in IQ test scores between races. Part of those differences are genetic and part of them are environmental. There is evidence that the IQ difference between blacks and whites in the USA has decreased by about 1/3 over the last few decades, although some people dispute this. If it is true it is likely due to environmental factors and the narrowing may have stopped 10 years ago or so. If this is the case, it seems likely part of this is due to childhood lead exposure. We know high lead blood levels in children lowers IQ scores and we know that blood lead levels in poor children was much higher in the 50-70s.

        The important point is that the average IQ differences between races tells you nothing about any individual. Barack Obama, Clarence Thomas and Colin Powell are obviously very intelligent. Liberals feel it is far more important to evaluate individuals than racial groups and we should do things to insure that all individuals are given equal chance to succeed.

        mikeca

        September 18, 2016 at 5:38 pm

      • ‘PRETENDING to believe may be rational if one has certain goals that involve social acceptance, but truly believing is irrational. At least that’s the way I see it.’

        As a man of limited IQ and intelligence, it makes rational sense for me to follow in the footsteps of the Patriarchs, Moses and Sages.

        Yakov

        September 18, 2016 at 7:13 pm

      • I think most liberals are brainwashed into being afraid or disgusted by HBD, so they never seek any knowledge about it. Even intelligent people can be brainwashed.

        In Canada it is not rational to vote for a party that wants to import a lot of, say, Somalis, into Canada. Even if you think it won’t effect you personally because you can afford to live far from them, and you don’t have to send your children to school with them, you should be thinking of the long term effects on the society your grandchildren will inherit.

        In my town in the last year or so I’ve noticed that there are a few black people moving in (blacks directly from Africa I believe). There aren’t enough of them now to create problems, and they don’t seem to have the sort of ghetto attitude that many African Americans have. But I have a feeling it won’t end well. I worry about my grandkids.

        Rosenmops

        September 18, 2016 at 7:47 pm

      • Perhaps the increase in black IQ stems from their overall interbreeding with whites and asians? Also, what qualifies as black? Is someone who is 25% black and 75% white categorized as black? What about a person who is 25% Asian, 25% White, and 50% black?

        Bobo

        September 18, 2016 at 11:09 pm

      • It’s easier to fool people if you actually believe what you’re saying.

        If you live in Bangladesh, it’s not rational to be an atheist even if you’ve figured out God doesn’t exist, because they’ll kill you. More rational to believe whatever will keep you alive.

        SFG

        September 18, 2016 at 11:39 pm

      • It’s rational to PRETEND to believe in Allah. It’s not rational to actually believe in him.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 18, 2016 at 11:58 pm

      • “It’s rational to PRETEND to believe in Allah. It’s not rational to actually believe in him.”

        Lion,

        According to my modest knowledge, neither philosopher has succeeded to refute Five Proofs of Aquinas. It is much more irrational to be an atheist than to believe in a god.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ways_(Aquinas)

        You believe you more rational than the Doctor Angelicus?

        Imi Lichtenfeld

        September 26, 2016 at 11:14 am

    • High IQ sociopaths are not rational.

      Moreover, one can make a case that ultra religious Jews have IQs similar to secular Jews. The former group have with all sorts of problems attributed to bad prole behavior.

      JS

      September 20, 2016 at 1:34 pm

  2. Ok, so how heritable is rational thinking?

    Jokah Macpherson

    September 18, 2016 at 1:29 pm

  3. ‘And then there are people like me who are unusually rational.’

    Rationality has no value if you lose the evolutionary battle. I don’t value thus type if rationality.

    Yakov

    September 18, 2016 at 1:41 pm

    • I agree, but one might also add “… if you lose the ability to trip out imaginatively, find things sublime and awesome” (etc) (I know that Lion DOES trip out imaginatively, in his own ways …).
      Something that bugs me, though, about practical arguments of the form, “Oldtime Religion makes for babies and sweet wives; go for whatever makes for babies and sweet wives; go for Oldtime Religion” is that the doctrinal basis of all Oldtime Religion is obviously false and not a single thoughtful Catholic or Orthoprax Jew actually believes in the stuff he’s supposed to believe in. It seems wrong to advise people to embrace what is obviously false, or to pretend to believe in it.

      Garr

      September 18, 2016 at 3:58 pm

      • Garr – While, as you point out, there are some religious people who are going along with the program in order to get along in life as best they can, they are not all of the religious people in the world, just a subset. There are some Catholics – I know this for a fact – (and many Orthodox Jews, as well, I believe, but I do not have as much direct evidence of that ) – who are convinced, based on their life experiences, that all – not some, but all – challenges to the doctrines of their religion are obviously false.

        howitzer daniel

        September 18, 2016 at 5:46 pm

      • not a single thoughtful Catholic or Orthoprax Jew actually believes in the stuff he’s supposed to believe in.

        You’re dumb.

        Samson J.

        September 18, 2016 at 6:40 pm

      • the doctrinal basis of all Oldtime Religion is obviously false

        We found our irrational outlier!

        Samson J.

        September 18, 2016 at 6:45 pm

      • ‘It seems wrong to advise people to embrace what is obviously false, or to pretend to believe in it.’

        Not unless you think that the end justifies the means. If you think that your society will disintegrate and your ethnos disappear without religion, it makes sense to genufflect a few times a day, sing some hymns and bring a sacrifice to survive. Focus on the positive aspects of religion and national survival is one of them. Everything is fair in winning the evolutionary struggle.

        Yakov

        September 18, 2016 at 7:09 pm

      • The Jews have been arguing about the doctrine for thousands of years. It’s a religion that gives a thinking, rebellious, creative and independent mind a lot of latitude. You can be a rationalist interpreting the text allegoricaly, a mystic, who sees hidden meaning in every letter, or a fundamentalist, who wants to take the text for what it plainly states. The faith and understanding grow and evolve with learning.

        Yakov

        September 18, 2016 at 7:32 pm

      • Yakov wrote:
        “If you think that your society will disintegrate and your ethnos disappear without religion, it makes sense to genufflect a few times a day, sing some hymns and bring a sacrifice to survive. Focus on the positive aspects of religion and national survival is one of them. Everything is fair in winning the evolutionary struggle.”

        I agree, Yakov. It can be rational to try to believe (or at least appear to believe) things that might not be true.

        Rosenmops

        September 18, 2016 at 7:54 pm

      • Howitzer Dan, I think they’re sincerely TRYING to believe, and I like them for it. Hi Samson J — “ridiculous”, not “dumb”, okay? Don’t be mean. At any rate, the doctrinal bases of all Oldtime Religions but one are false, and the one that’s left (whichever one it may be) looks just as crazy as the others. But I like some religions a lot because of how it feels to be playing the game, or how I imagine it feels. I know how OJ feels, and I’m pretty sure I can imagine how Puritanism feels. I’m fond of those two games. They’re very deep games. RC is beautiful, but is either monstrously Jew-hating, complete with blood-libel (this was standard up until WWII) or, post-Vatican II, is simply anti-Western Communism with homosexual commissars. Of course, Islam is from the Dark Side. (See, I really am religious!) Yakov — I became familiar with the OJ “questioning” sub-game at shuls. The presupposition is that there’s an authoritative rabbinical answer to every question, an answer that reaffirms the doctrinal system, so it’s a set-up from the beginning. Today the kabbalistic speculations and poetic trips of the past have been completely enclosed within the system represented by the rotting old men sitting around the long table on the front of Kupat Ha’ir’s magical fund-raising brochures. “Modern” OJ shuls are weird clubs of SWPLs being babysat by creepy vampire-families (well, I’m mainly thinking of Chabad castles) who organize parties for them. The “Open Orthodoxy” thing is just SWPL-progressive subversion; their main objective is to double the average time per week a man spends with his face, as opposed to his organ of impregnation, in his wife’s crotch.

        Garr

        September 18, 2016 at 8:22 pm

      • I’m not even saying to beleive in anything, just to utilize the religion, which is what the governments have always done. On this point Lion and me are in agreement, I beleive.

        The enemy has Islam, what do you have? Nothing! So you got to bring back Vikings or Crusaders.

        Yakov

        September 18, 2016 at 8:23 pm

      • Religions have always benefited the people in power.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 18, 2016 at 9:28 pm

      • Garr,

        Thanks for the offer, not till after Halloween, too bussy now.

        Yakov

        September 18, 2016 at 8:29 pm

      • ‘Religions have always benefited the people in power.’

        Please…. You wrote this in a haste and I’m gonna let you take it back. Prophets had always opposed injustice and excoriated corruption, immorality and the rulers who were leading the people astray.

        Yakov

        September 18, 2016 at 9:34 pm

      • Garr – the Book of Proverbs teaches us to avoid saying things about others that are not true, and explains why. I am not sure why you said such negative and untrue things: I will pray that God enlightens you!

        howitzer daniel

        September 18, 2016 at 10:25 pm

      • Howitzer, I believe that waving “I’ll pray for you” around like a prop in blog comments would be frowned upon by God. But He is forgiving, so let’s move on to something constructive: I think that if you believe it is helpful to others for you to ask God to enlighten them, then you yourself must have received enlightenment from God (why else would you believe that God could reach out to others?). In that case, those of us who lack faith might benefit more from an account of your enlightening experiences than from your prayers.

        Rogal Dorn

        September 19, 2016 at 4:48 am

      • “and the one that’s left (whichever one it may be) looks just as crazy as the others.

        the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God

        ————-

        BTW the actual study is nothing about religiosity or much about rationality per se.

        And the study conclusions I doubt are valid and the flights of prejudiced here even less so.
        The sample pop are college students at a medium sized state university. Median age 19- so how much do they know about tellers? “The mean reported verbal SAT score of the students was 577 ( SD
        68), the mean reported mathematical SAT score was 572 (SD69), and the mean total SAT score was 1149 (SD 110). ”

        “For the purposes of some of the analyses described below, the 206 students with SAT scores below the median (1150) were assigned to the low-SAT group, and the 228 remaining students were assigned to
        the high-SAT group.”

        That doesnt seem to be the Median, but then we are dealing with social scientists here.

        Based on the Standard Deviation it seems like in the low case we are dealing with a group that has an IQ well above the US Mean. And because the High Group is a binary designation, we really dont see if there is any correlation with increasing IQ.

        There are no other statistical descriptors of the subgroups which is pretty sloppy and the paper probably should have been rejected without this information. Assuming a normal distribution one could probably work backwards to the Means of the sub samples. But as a thumb in the air I’d guess that the Low IQ is probably around 110 and High IQ is mid 120’s. (this is old SAT).

        http://www.keithstanovich.com/Site/Research_on_Reasoning_files/JPSP08.pdf

        Lion of the Turambar

        September 19, 2016 at 9:10 am

      • RC IS beautiful, Howitzer Daniel, and there are lots of good people, whom I like, who try to really get into that game while ignoring the institution’s degeneration into anti-Western, Commie subversion and imagining that it’s the olden (pre-VatII) days and certainly not having the vast, intense Jewhatred-agenda of pre-VatII RC in mind. Support for the blood-libel was a primary (implicit) article of faith before WWII, and Jew-hatred mattered more to hardcore pre-VatII RCers than any of the articles of the Nicene Creed did. It was proof of depth of commitment, just as it is to the altright today. Note the RC background of Hitler, Himmler, and Heidegger. Not an accident. (Also note Chesterton’s hatred of America. Yes, Tolkien’s a counter-example. In THE HOBBIT he notes that “many Dwarves aren’t any worse than anyone else,” or something like that,” which was very generous of him, and we’re very grateful.) Again, though, I tend to like RCers, and admire them for getting deeply into an interesting game.
        What I feel crummy about — I woke up in the middle of the night feeling crummy about this — was characterizing MO in a way that really only applies to Chabad outposts. I’m very familiar with two MO shuls (not counting what amounts to a social club for old Carpathi guys on the Boro Park – Chinatown border, where Haredim flood the Maariv services). One of these two MO shuls is actually half-Yeshivish. The men of MO population there and at the other one are colorless professionals going through the motions probably from a combination of inertia and a sense of loyalty to the collective organism. They keep themselves from thinking about what they’re doing; this probably amounts at times to the suspension of disbelief that makes virtual-reality-games fun for those who play them. I don’t know whether they ever enjoy what they’re doing. I was able to get into the fantasy at times.
        I also forgot about the knights of Yehudah/Shomron when I posted last night. They have something to DO, which makes a big difference. Here in the USA, nothing will or can ever happen. Everyone just stews, having babies, griping over Yeshiva tuition, failing to enjoy “Simchas”, crippling his own intellect, and dying. Over and over and over again. But over there … a Project! A splendid role-playing wargame in which the warriors of Light and the warriors of Darkness are, from their own perspectives, playing completely different games (the game of Darkness being, of course, Islam.)

        Garr

        September 19, 2016 at 9:22 am

      • Rogal Dorn – some reasons I am sure the God of the Bible is real and hears prayers are the usual reasons – in college, which I went to a year early, I was made unhappy by the comparative ambition and unfriendliness of almost everyone I met – high school was bad enough, but at least I had had a few girlfriends and a few friends who were not arrogant towards me – all that was gone when I moved away to college – and I experienced an existential crisis, followed by a conviction of my own sins; followed by study of the Bible and of the logic of Aristotle and Plato and the modern philosophic theologians (modern being the last thousand years or so). Eventually the former feelings about God – that He was a nice idea but too far off, that He would wait until I was very old, that maybe He was an illusion – generally dissipated, and now I think of the possibility of God not being real as a delusion, almost as bad as the delusion some poor drug addict might have, thinking his neighbors are all narcotics detectives. Over the last 30 years I have often seen my prayers answered, mostly with respect to the health and mental well-being of those I cared about (or who disliked me but who I prayed for anyway); and I have had a near death experience where, at the moment right before death, I realized I had no fear of “dying”. Now, in 2016, I pray a lot, and I am lucky that people I talk to on a day to day basis, even the irreligious ones, respect what I have to say, even though I can tell sometimes they are humoring me….. Of course I could lose the gift of faith tomorrow, so I pray that I keep it just as I pray that others might gain it …. Garr – nice to see you step back a little from the criticism of the Orthodox – of course your generalizations about Catholics were not fair either, although of course there is no defending the actions of many people of any given religion throughout history.

        howitzer daniel

        September 19, 2016 at 9:08 pm

  4. One of the few upsides of the Trump bubble is the unmasking of the media. For instance the irrelevant disclaimer that HuffPo adds to every story about Trumpster.

    In this case, since the prescient has now been set, the news media should append a disclaimer to all articles like this.
    Warning: 80% of Social Science studies cannot be replicated or contain falsified information and conclusions”.

    While they are at it they can mention that 95% of social science *reporting* will be incorrect. Who knows what that number is for reporting involving IQ.

    Lion of the Turambar

    September 18, 2016 at 1:52 pm

  5. “And then there are people like me who are unusually rational.”

    You do understand that everyone thinks that about themselves, right?

    Jesse

    September 18, 2016 at 2:13 pm

    • Not everyone has a rational blog.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 18, 2016 at 3:19 pm

    • I agree with Jessie that most people think they’re very rational. Most people also think they’re above average intelligence. Which is statistically impossible. Regardless, I do think Leon is unusually rational. He’s by no means perfect. But he’s still unusually rational.

      I also think that I’m unusually rational and there’s a very good reason for it. I realized that it didn’t do me any good to believe something that wasn’t true. Therefore, I was willing to accept any truth no matter how much it bruised my ego, hurt my feelings or went against what I wanted to be true. I accept reality for what it is. Then I think and work really hard to make the best of that reality.

      destructure

      September 18, 2016 at 3:56 pm

      • Whatever you think of Myers-Briggs personality types, blogs like Lion’s tend to be written by INTPs. People who regularly read blogs like this one also tend to be INTPs. Lion and his readers are part of an online community that’s unusually rational.

        Pretty much everyone who reads this blog accepts that group differences in intelligence are largely innate. The evidence for this is overwhelming. For the sake of argument, let’s say that soon we understand the genetics of intelligence, the dust is completely settled, and we find that the average genotypic IQ of American blacks is 97. I think most people who comment here would accept that if even if it shatters their worldview. It would certainly shatter mine, but I’d pick up the pieces and move forward. Most people aren’t like that.

        Horace Pinker

        September 18, 2016 at 6:25 pm

      • I agree with Jessie that most people think they’re very rational. Most people also think they’re above average intelligence.

        I don’t think all of this means, though, that a person can’t *actually* tell whether or not he is of above-average rationality – just like I believe I am above average intelligence, and I am actually correct about this.

        The fact is that virtually everyone on a blog like this is going to have above average intelligence and rationality both.

        Samson J.

        September 18, 2016 at 6:43 pm

      • Speaking of, I just ran across this article about whether pay is earned. I think people need to be very careful when dealing with this topic. Because it’s one where people have a tendency to be irrational.

        http://freebeacon.com/culture/myth-success-unearned/

        destructure

        September 18, 2016 at 7:42 pm

      • libertarian propaganda

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 18, 2016 at 8:02 pm

      • Perhaps. But for an unusually rational person that wasn’t a very rational response.

        destructure

        September 18, 2016 at 10:50 pm

      • it was un-usually rational, just brief.

        libertarianism is more irrational than islam.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        September 19, 2016 at 5:45 pm

      • and has done much more harm.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        September 19, 2016 at 5:50 pm

      • His comment was irrational because the article wasn’t advocating libertarianism. It merely argued against the myth of unearned success as the basis for wealth redistribution. Technically, that’s an argument against the myth not against wealth redistribution itself.

        destructure

        September 19, 2016 at 11:14 pm

      • destructure wrote:
        ” I was willing to accept any truth no matter how much it bruised my ego, hurt my feelings or went against what I wanted to be true.”

        I used to think like you. I noticed something odd when one of my babies was a newborn. I was at a gathering where there were a lot of other newborns. It occurred to me that my baby was certainly the most attractive baby in the room. Then I realized that this wasn’t very probable and I was being illogical. I had always prided myself on being logical. After thinking about it for a few days I realized that logic was not useful in this situation. It is much better to go on believing your own offspring is more attractive and desirable then anyone else’s. If we didn’t have this instinct the human race would die out because parents wold abandon the little snot-nosed ankle biters. But evolution has caused us to fall madly in love with our own offspring so we care for them, and propagate out genes.

        Rosenmops

        September 20, 2016 at 1:18 am

      • Rosenmops — Analysis is objective. Motive is subjective.

        destructure

        September 20, 2016 at 2:36 pm

  6. For 115-160 IQ, i’m prone to believe the article has a point. But for >160 IQ people, i’d like to see other example. Because someone with such a high intelligence would never never fall in the conjunction fallacy wich is so obvious. You don’t have to thing that A is always more probable that A & B, except if B is tautological or A is contradictory, in each case probability are equal. So really high intelligence can’t be driven in irrationnal thinking via – at leat – obvious bias.

    But i’ve seen very intelligent people obeying and worshipping extremely dumb one (generally the husband for the wife), but it is because they wanted to be submitted not because they actually believed the non-sensical stuff.

    Bruno from Paris

    September 18, 2016 at 3:12 pm

    • The wife insists on religion. You’re an atheist and don’t care. Why not humor her? (I’m leaving aside the alpha-male PUA argument because lots of guys aren’t alphas.)

      SFG

      September 18, 2016 at 11:38 pm

  7. Rational thinking is probably instead correlated with Neanderthal genes, aka autism genes. Humanity seems capable of a certain level of rationality without them, but only when these genes are present does this rational part of the brain start making decisions/action based on abstractions.

    Rotten

    September 18, 2016 at 3:17 pm

  8. What does “rational” mean? Performing act A rather than act B because you believe that act A is likelier to get you to your ultimate goal than B is? What if you believe that A is likelier to get you there, but that B can get you there more quickly if it gets you there at all? What if you have two ultimate goals, G1 and G2, and you believe that A is likelier to get you to G1 than B is to get you to either G1 or G2, but that A’s getting you to G1 would leave it unlikely that you’ll ever get to G2, while B’s getting you to G2 leaves it fairly likely that you can still get to G1? What if you have a third ultimate goal … I think that ordinary practical calculations are so complex that they are more likely to be done comprehensively and accurately unconsciously; if you try to work it all out consciously, you’ll screw up and feel bad about it later. So trust your gut instincts … they’re the output of a brain doing its thing. Conscious practical reasoning is usually just the “rationalizing” of one’s stupider impulses. (“Gut instinct” is the output; impulses are input.) Conscious practical reasoning results in smart women getting abortions, when, had they followed their gut instincts, they would have made a valuable contribution to the gene pool. Conscious practical reasoning results in smart men becoming Commies, when, had they followed their gut instincts, they would have made a valuable contribution to Am Yisroel or the Anglo Gentry.

    Garr

    September 18, 2016 at 3:19 pm

    • Effective rationality often means arriving at an act C that balances both goals based on their priority as best you can. Yes, these calculations are complex but it’s a type of thinking encouraged by games of strategy. You can’t try to checkmate the King on turn 1 but you can’t ever forget that’s your main objective.
      The gut instincts are honed by prior experience. We make the most accurate snap judgments about things we’ve done/seen many times. One of the more effective ways to actually apply rationality is to know when you can rely on your intuition and when you have to be more cautious and think about it. We can also use reason to decide what information we have and what skills we practice beforehand so that when real life situations arise our gut is ready to handle it.
      It’s best to rely on the gut for situations that people have always dealt with like interacting with someone face to face. But we need to think things through carefully using statistics when we’re dealing with an abstract idea of a nation full of millions of people. Do that enough, though, and you start to get a ‘feel’ for it.

      Giovanni Dannato

      September 19, 2016 at 3:45 pm

  9. I think the stereotype that some people are rational and others are emotional can be misleading.

    Everyone is driven by emotion, but the people we call rational are just those that have an emotional need for logical consistency while other, equally smart people, might have an emotional need for politically correct views etc

    Intelligence is just the parts of the brain that problem solves. But our unsatisfied feelings are the problems that we solve.

    High IQ + a desire for truth = objective analysis

    pumpkinperson

    September 18, 2016 at 3:24 pm

    • Now there’s a good comment.

      Samson J.

      September 18, 2016 at 6:47 pm

  10. I think Hepp provides the whole explanation as to why many people “believe” many things that are obviously false. They can afford to “believe” them because such “beliefs” have no cost or consequence for action. My belief that the Moon is made from cheese has no material consequence, so I can carry on believing it without coming to harm. On the other hand no-one believes that Yew Tree berries are nutritious.

    And very often “holding” certain beliefs casts the “believer” as a virtuous person so that they increase their social status by voicing them, typically on social media such as facebook.
    Thus Billy Bragg, an old British pop star, can declare publicly his belief in diversity, it makes him respectable and “right on”, yet he chooses to live in Burton Bradstock, the whitest village, in the whitest county in England it is possible to find.

    Belief is not just a mental state. Belief must have consequences for action. If like Billy Bragg you don’t send your own children to a school that has a large percentage of black pupils or if you choose to live in an all white neighbourhood then these behaviours say more about your true beliefs than what you affirm or deny in speech.

    I’m not just talking about liberal/lefty hypocrisy here. I am also thinking we can all gain self knowledge by considering our second order beliefs through contrasting what we do and what we say. We “believe that we believe” certain things but when we examine our actions we find that our beliefs about our beliefs are mistaken.

    martin2

    September 18, 2016 at 4:38 pm

    • “If like Billy Bragg you don’t send your own children to a school that has a large percentage of black pupils or if you choose to live in an all white neighbourhood then these behaviours say more about your true beliefs than what you affirm or deny in speech.”

      People have a rationalization for this. If you poke too many holes in it, instead of suddenly seeing the light, instead they will just hate you and call you a racist.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 18, 2016 at 4:41 pm

      • “If you poke too many holes in it, instead of suddenly seeing the light, instead they will just hate you and call you a racist.”

        True. But the proper response is to call them a hypocrite.

        destructure

        September 18, 2016 at 5:34 pm

      • “Once again, I’ve let in 100,000 feckless violent immigrants, so, while it’s true I’m ensconced somewhere without any immigrants and so will sadly not see all this fantastic new diversity, in all humility, I’m pretty fricking great.”

        “Hypocrite! Once again, you’re such a hypocrite!”

        Increasingly unsatisfactory as the years go by.

        Glengarry

        September 19, 2016 at 4:01 am

      • Two people can tell the same joke with one being funny and the other falling flat. Whether the response is “unsatisfactory” depends on the delivery. Similarly, yelling “Hypocrite!” at someone is a terrible delivery. Actually, I’d advise avoiding the topic altogether. But, if someone attacked me, I’d brush aside the charge and cleverly point out their hypocrisy. That was the point after all — how to respond when attacked.

        destructure

        September 19, 2016 at 5:28 pm

  11. mikeca

    September 18, 2016 at 5:38 pm
    ————————————————-
    Stop blaming lead as the reason for black people being stupid. Seriously.

    Vincent

    September 18, 2016 at 6:56 pm

    • Why? Childhood exposure to lead has been shown to lower intelligence and cause behavior problems.

      mikeca

      September 19, 2016 at 10:10 pm

  12. Meanwhile, Trump picking up support from African-American voters.

    http://nypost.com/2016/09/18/black-voters-are-turning-from-clinton-to-trump-in-new-poll/

    Julian

    September 18, 2016 at 7:52 pm

    • Ah-hah, dropping the birther thing helped! Well, why not; it was kind of silly anyway.

      SFG

      September 18, 2016 at 11:41 pm

    • Ignore those crosstabs, they are nonsense that no other poll shows. Blacks absolutely hate Trump.

      The most likely explanation for the USC poll being so off is that it is a bad poll, but it is also possible that it is picking up on Trump support that the other polls are missing. The highly regarded Otis Index subtracts 6 from Trump’s number in the USC poll well averaging it with the others.

      As of today, the Otis Index has Trump down by 1.8 to Crooked Hillary.

      Otis the Sweaty

      September 19, 2016 at 3:05 am

  13. I’ve sadly found that, as you say, intelligent people tend to just have more elaborate excuses.

    Louis Naughtic

    September 18, 2016 at 9:27 pm

  14. youre totally crazy on global warming lion. its your one weak point but otherwise you’re pretty rational.

    james n.s.w

    September 18, 2016 at 11:21 pm

    • Lion isn’t rational when it comes to Judaism, learning Hebrew or cows. He had a bad experience as a kid and ever since then he is irrational about it. What he’s got against cows I don’t know.

      Yakov

      September 19, 2016 at 12:29 am

      • Cows are just funny. The practice of Judaism sucks.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 19, 2016 at 8:00 am

      • This is the voice of reason and rationality? Look, most people get messed up in early childhood and spend the rest of their lives unwinding that mess. You should’ve never gone to that Hebrew school. Tell me it ain’t so.

        Yakov

        September 19, 2016 at 10:54 am

    • He’s also insane on single mothers. The problems their kids have, on average, will *not* be solved by getting their parents to sign a piece of paper.

      Jesse

      September 19, 2016 at 6:38 am

  15. Lion, all the study proves is that rational people don’t go along with the left-wing gimmicky definition of ‘rationality’ by some crackpot psychologist trying to make us doubt common sense.

    I remember tearing apart such nonsense in philosophy class–in the 1950’s. many economists also make the same claim with bizarre interpretations of what rational means based on their unstated PC agendas.

    Robert

    September 19, 2016 at 1:41 am

  16. Diversity for thee, but no me has powerful advantages that are done in bad faith, consciously and unconsciously.

    Take a rich liberal who marries white, has white children who go to white schools, lives in a white neighborhood, and whose homelife is highly conservative/traditional.

    He will advocate open borders, mutliculuralism, miscegenation, etc. on OTHER BAD/POORER WHITES because it makes his whiteness more scarce and therefore more valuable. Implicit is this action is the knowledge that whiteness is superior/preferable. The liberal wants whiteness for himself, but wants to call bad whites Nazis.

    It is not enough for him to succeed, others must fail.

    Hypocrisy is a powerful strategy if it can be pulled off. Do as I say not as as I do is the doctrine of rulers and work managers. Telling others who to do, who’s in control, who is boss, is the great struggle among human beings.

    Embracing a foreign/enemy peoples (treason) is a strategy to gain power of others in your own tribe. And then labeling those who resist such aggression as hateful nazis and racists is a cruel stroke of Turnspeak against people who merely want to protect themselves.

    Turnspeak is where you attack someone and then turn it around 180 degrees and claim they attacked you. Because the truth is the exact opposite of the information being disseminated it is psychologically difficult to counter and leads to confusion. Turnspeak leads to psychological confusion and a feeling of being “burned-out” or “overwhelmed” with too much information, effectively creating a blanket of “white noise” which makes clarity difficult to achieve.

    fakeemail

    September 19, 2016 at 10:35 am

    • fakeemail wrote:
      “He will advocate open borders, multiculturalism, miscegenation, etc. on OTHER BAD/POORER WHITES because it makes his whiteness more scarce and therefore more valuable.”

      Makes no sense. How does he know his children or grandchildren won’t suffer or fall prey to miscegenation, multiculturalism, etc? They will eventually stray beyond the white neighbourhood and white schools. He is destroying is own culture.

      Rosenmops

      September 19, 2016 at 10:58 pm

  17. “My take on this is that most people make decisions based on feelings, emotions, bias, previous behavior patterns, etc, and then, after-the-fact, they use their intelligence to rationalize the decision…”

    That’s similar to Hume’s position in “A Treatise of Human Nature.” The famous quote is: “Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.”

    Lewis Medlock

    September 19, 2016 at 3:37 pm

  18. “rationality” and “reason” are ideological terms.

    The heart knows what the mind cannot understand.

    but the inability to be irrational when selective irrationality is beneficial is a disability in the modern world.

    yet another example of how social rank and virtue are im-perfectly correlated.

    it’s the stupidity stupid.

    for more see 1984.

    Trumpocalypse Now

    September 19, 2016 at 5:36 pm

  19. High IQ often (not always) means making the same mistakes at a much higher rate. Intelligence is multi dimensional. This explains why most people are indeed above average. In multidimensional space most are above average if you consider only minority of projections. E.g. in uniform three dimensional space, seven eights are above average. For five dimensions, 97% are above average and so on.

    My Two Cents

    September 19, 2016 at 8:25 pm

  20. The average IQ for an American White gentile is purported to be ~ 100, regardless of state. New England States have lower scores than Atlantic Canada.

    The average IQ for a Spaniard is ~ 2 points lower.

    Therefore, one can make a point that rationalism has nothing to do with IQ, but more of cultural values. blacks being an exception, due to significantly lower IQs and high testosterone levels.

    JS

    September 20, 2016 at 1:31 pm

  21. Does being a rational thinker give you an evolutionary advantage? Not always, I think. Basically, a rationalist or an emotionalist (nice word I’ve just coined) you gotta stay focused on winning the evolutionary battle. JS is a dinosaur, so his ruminations are fluff. American proles are a different animal and should be taken more seriously. Basically, we need an evolutionary survival index to be developed. This index is gonna keep us all on the straight and narrow as far as what’s important in life. For example, Gengis Khan would have a value of 100, Ru Paul of 0. Any one wants to undertake this project? Lion? Otis? Otherwise it’s just empty talk and speculation without any meat and potatoes.

    Yakov

    September 20, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    • I think that Raymond B. Cattell already tried to do this with his Beyondism philosophy based on HBD.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 20, 2016 at 3:05 pm

      • Interesant (this is Yiddish), I’d never heard of him, gonna check him out.

        Yakov

        September 20, 2016 at 7:25 pm

    • American proles are a different animal indeed. They are the dinosaurs, because of 2 important issues. Non-Whites have taken over many working class jobs for lower pay, and many White American proles shun the kind of socialism offered in Europe, essentially, they’re screwed.

      JS

      September 20, 2016 at 6:34 pm

      • America, not just the proles, was coned by elites. It’s fighting back now. In a couple of months America will resume its ascendance. You will be morally eliminated.

        Yakov

        September 21, 2016 at 3:30 pm

      • Ascendance in what? Ascendance in decadence!

        JS

        September 21, 2016 at 6:41 pm

      • Decadence comes from the elites and mass culture which they produce. The elites corrupt the good proles.

        America isn’t about parasitic behaviour, America is about opportunity. No other country has yet matched it. What a man needs is opportunity, he can take care of the rest. Just remember this simple equation and you will understand everything: America = Opportunity. Process this.

        Thus collateral may help you: xxxx(fill in the country of your choice) doesn’t equal America in Opportunity. This is all you need to know. I’ve brought it down the lowest common denominator for you. Now you have no more excuses for not understanding.

        Yakov

        September 21, 2016 at 10:00 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: