anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 from today's Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/inconvenient-truths-about-our-evolution-2146994.html "A controversial scientist claims he can shed light on human behaviour. But not everyone will like his theories" Some of them seem politically incorrect by today's standards - they include: > Having sons reduces the likelihood of divorce > The myth of the male mid-life crisis > It's natural for male politicians to risk everything for an affair > Men sexually harass women because they are not sexist Not sure I agree with all of them but I definitely agree with one key assertion "Liberals are more intelligent than conservatives"....
Bath Saint Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 I found this one interesting - one for all the thickos on here: "2. Liberals are more intelligent than conservatives A study by Dr Kanazawa, published in Social Science Quarterly in March, based on the same data showed that young adults who identified themselves as "very liberal" had an average IQ of 106 while those who identified themselves as "very conservative" had an average IQ of 95. Humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends. Being liberal and caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals. "
Special K Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 I found this one interesting - one for all the thickos on here: "2. Liberals are more intelligent than conservatives A study by Dr Kanazawa, published in Social Science Quarterly in March, based on the same data showed that young adults who identified themselves as "very liberal" had an average IQ of 106 while those who identified themselves as "very conservative" had an average IQ of 95. Humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends. Being liberal and caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals. " Self confessed liberals have always had a superiority complex, so there is nothing new there. The trouble with the above is that a self proclamation that the individual cares about the an "infinite number of genetically unrelated strangers" does not necessarily mean they do. Actions speak louder than words and from what i have seen, heard and experienced, there are a lot who experience their compassion vicariously and couldn't actually give a **** about anyone else other than themselves. Giving £10 to Shelter and saying it's dreadful what effect the benefit cuts are having on the poor, whilst sat around the dinner table downing more red wine, with like minded liberals, does not qualify.
dune Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Churchill on Liberals. "They are the most disagreeable of people...Their insincerity? Can you not feel a sense of disgust at the arrogant presumption of superiority of these people? Superiority of intellect! Then, when it comes to practice, down they fall with a wallop not only to the level of ordinary human beings but to a level which is even far below the average." "These very high intellectual persons who wake up every morning...see what they can find to demolish, to undermine, or cast away." "Let them quit these gospels of envy, hate, and malice. Let them abandon the utter fallacy, the grotesque, erroneous, fatal blunder of believing that by limiting the enterprise of man, by riveting the shackles of a false equality...they will increase the well-being of the world."
buctootim Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Churchill on Liberals. "They are the most disagreeable of people...Their insincerity? Can you not feel a sense of disgust at the arrogant presumption of superiority of these people? Superiority of intellect! Then, when it comes to practice, down they fall with a wallop not only to the level of ordinary human beings but to a level which is even far below the average." "These very high intellectual persons who wake up every morning...see what they can find to demolish, to undermine, or cast away." "Let them quit these gospels of envy, hate, and malice. Let them abandon the utter fallacy, the grotesque, erroneous, fatal blunder of believing that by limiting the enterprise of man, by riveting the shackles of a false equality...they will increase the well-being of the world."Jesus Dune. I'm normally pretty relaxed about you expressing your views - but give it a rest with Churchill. You aren't him, you never met him and great man though he was, he's been dead for 50 years and you have no idea what his viwews on any political issue of today would be. Besides its too much. Tedious.
dune Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Jesus Dune. I'm normally pretty relaxed about you expressing your views - but give it a rest with Churchill. You aren't him, you never met him and great man though he was, he's been dead for 50 years and you have no idea what his viwews on any political issue of today would be. Besides its too much. Tedious. If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. Winston Churchill
Smirking_Saint Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. Winston Churchill In that case. Your a bit of a bellend. Your a bit of a bellend. you really are a bit of a bellend Smirking_saint 30/11/10
hypochondriac Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 In that case. Your a bit of a bellend. Your a bit of a bellend. you really are a bit of a bellend Smirking_saint 30/11/10 Your points would be better if you could spell.
Smirking_Saint Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 (edited) Your points would be better if you could spell. And your points would be better if people cared .......... so there And another thing, its a forum, not a f*cking grammar lesson. Edited 30 November, 2010 by Smirking_Saint
dune Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 And your points would be better if people cared You should have added "so there" to that.
badgerx16 Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Churchill on Liberals. "They are the most disagreeable of people...Their insincerity? Can you not feel a sense of disgust at the arrogant presumption of superiority of these people? Superiority of intellect! Then, when it comes to practice, down they fall with a wallop not only to the level of ordinary human beings but to a level which is even far below the average." "These very high intellectual persons who wake up every morning...see what they can find to demolish, to undermine, or cast away." "Let them quit these gospels of envy, hate, and malice. Let them abandon the utter fallacy, the grotesque, erroneous, fatal blunder of believing that by limiting the enterprise of man, by riveting the shackles of a false equality...they will increase the well-being of the world." This is the same Winston Churchill who was a LIBERAL MP from 1906 to 1922 ?
dune Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 This is the same Winston Churchill who was a LIBERAL MP from 1906 to 1922 ? Yes, so he clearly knew what he was talking about.
ecuk268 Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. Winston Churchill He did spend 18 years as a Liberal MP (Churchill, not dune)
benjii Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends. Being liberal and caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals. " Does the guy know what "liberal" means?
dune Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Does the guy know what "liberal" means? Clearly he hasn't met me because i was a very intelligent child but i didn't turn into an unwashed liberal.
benjii Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Churchill on Liberals. "They are the most disagreeable of people...Their insincerity? Can you not feel a sense of disgust at the arrogant presumption of superiority of these people? Superiority of intellect! Then, when it comes to practice, down they fall with a wallop not only to the level of ordinary human beings but to a level which is even far below the average." "These very high intellectual persons who wake up every morning...see what they can find to demolish, to undermine, or cast away." "Let them quit these gospels of envy, hate, and malice. Let them abandon the utter fallacy, the grotesque, erroneous, fatal blunder of believing that by limiting the enterprise of man, by riveting the shackles of a false equality...they will increase the well-being of the world." Awesome final paragraph but, again, I would question if he is attacking "liberalism" as a manifestation of what being "liberal" minded actually is. Presumably "Liberals" was a defined group or party and that is who his quote is aimed at.
benjii Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 He seems to equate being liberal with do-gooding (I don't mean that in a pejorative sense). There is no such necessary correlation. It is perfectly possible to be highly liberal and a nasty, misanthropic, sadistic ****y-pants at the same time.
Verbal Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Self confessed liberals have always had a superiority complex, so there is nothing new there. The trouble with the above is that a self proclamation that the individual cares about the an "infinite number of genetically unrelated strangers" does not necessarily mean they do. Actions speak louder than words and from what i have seen, heard and experienced, there are a lot who experience their compassion vicariously and couldn't actually give a **** about anyone else other than themselves. Giving £10 to Shelter and saying it's dreadful what effect the benefit cuts are having on the poor, whilst sat around the dinner table downing more red wine, with like minded liberals, does not qualify. You COMPLETELY miss the point. Liberal tend to have higher IQs than reactionaries. End - as is said around these parts - of. Simple, and intelligible surely to anyone, unless....
dune Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 You COMPLETELY miss the point. Liberal tend to have higher IQs than reactionaries. End - as is said around these parts - of. Simple, and intelligible surely to anyone, unless.... What about the personality of the average tree hugger? Oh and I don't accept the intelligence thing because from what 've read on here left wingers are pretty thick for the simple reason they don't agree with me and i'm right.
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 What about the personality of the average tree hugger? Oh and I don't accept the intelligence thing because from what 've read on here left wingers are pretty thick for the simple reason they don't agree with me and i'm right. You really need to see the Dr about your chronic constipation. You're still full of it. Clearly he hasn't met me because i was a very intelligent child but i didn't turn into an unwashed liberal. No not a liberal at all Stan.
Deppo Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 I am a staunch Conservative/UKIP voter and I'm as thick as pigsh*t.
Bath Saint Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 I am a staunch Conservative/UKIP voter and I'm as thick as pigsh*t. I can vouch for this.
Sheaf Saint Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 Fantastic! dune has hijacked a thread and turned it into a rant about anybody who doesn't share his somewhat narrow-minded political views. It's been ages since we had one of these!
Special K Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 You COMPLETELY miss the point. Liberal tend to have higher IQs than reactionaries. End - as is said around these parts - of. Simple, and intelligible surely to anyone, unless.... Depends if your intelligent enough to realise crap "science" when you see it. Or perhaps you just like to generalise and stereotype if it suits? The supposition is that self confessed liberals have higher IQ based on their ability to "care" about others - **** poor generalisation in itself. I was just giving it a post modern slant.
Verbal Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 What about the personality of the average tree hugger? Oh and I don't accept the intelligence thing because from what 've read on here left wingers are pretty thick for the simple reason they don't agree with me and i'm right. Of course you don't accept it. How could you? IQ has nothing to do with personality. It DOES have something to do with being able to follow the thread of an argument.
Sheaf Saint Posted 30 November, 2010 Posted 30 November, 2010 The supposition is that self confessed liberals have higher IQ based on their ability to "care" about others The article doesn't actually say that though.
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 30 November, 2010 Author Posted 30 November, 2010 Haha, I thought this would encourage a lively debate, even if our thicko conservative posters are finding it hard to follow I thought the best bit was the assertion that men don't have mid-life crises because they are old, rather that their wives are old!
Verbal Posted 1 December, 2010 Posted 1 December, 2010 Depends if your intelligent enough to realise crap "science" when you see it. Or perhaps you just like to generalise and stereotype if it suits? The supposition is that self confessed liberals have higher IQ based on their ability to "care" about others - **** poor generalisation in itself. I was just giving it a post modern slant. Since you 'see it' so clearly, would you care to give us your detailed critique then, rather than resorting to the old 'conservative' (in the context of this thread) tactic of labelling anything you don't understand as 'crap'?
Jimmy_D Posted 1 December, 2010 Posted 1 December, 2010 I think this thread has run its course. If someone restarts it on the same topic, please try and keep it on that topic. Thanks.
Recommended Posts