If you study people who have genius IQ's (or those who fight so hard for the Mensa list reaffirmation of themselves ala Matt C) you will find that while a great many of them are book smart and can "regurgitate" info that they have read......due to having an enhanced memory with statistics and factoids........a rather large number of the aforementioned people are socially inept, unable to relate in social situations. A great number of them are for lack of a better word "retarded" at deductive reasoning (or common sense). I am pretty sure thats the case here after reading thru some of Matt C's posts. He has confused the enhanced ability to remember something he has read with the actual ability of "constructive reasoning". Matt if you read War and Peace and remember whole chapters of it word for word, that doesnt mean you have the creative ability and thought process of Leo Tolstoy.....that means you have a pretty darn good memory. Its nauseating reading some of your opinions and belief that they are warranted just because you have a greater than normal ability to "regurgitate" others work.... and that you deem yourself an elitist intelligence-wise because of it.
The core of MattC's opinions ARE based on scientific findings and unless solid counterevidence = posted, whether you get nausea or not from reading certain non PC statements is simply a worthless argument.
Debussey does think that MattCock takes his opinions a bit far at times, but the core belief that there = a pretty big probability for genetic differences between races that leads to average differences in intelligence = a fair belief, given the findings that exists. If that core message makes you nauseous, then so be it. If you really want to debate him on that particular belief, then find some solid science to refute his claims.
And your statements about IQ = off. A high IQ will normally mean that the person does not only have a better than average memory, but also a better ability to make sound statements based upon information presented to him/her, although they might be very controversial since most high IQ people values logical conclusions more than "fitting" their statements into the contemporary value systems of a given society. This often makes it looks like they are "socially inept", but in fact, they are simply being honest. And truth eventually always wins, while the value systems and norms of society changes according to the truth, but only after trying their best to fuck up the message and the messenger.
Does this mean that the honest high IQ person has "inferior" social skills, or does it mean that he has superior social skills if seen in a bigger context than having smooth interactions with the people he = in contact with? That is up to the person, but given that the existing social system he = in contact with is "dishonest" compared to superior logical conclusions, bowing to the inferior conclusions of the social system instead of having integrity and being honest when needed (this does not mean to tell everybody about your shit all the time, but in certain situations, it = needed) might actually be a good asset in your bag of social skills.
Making the interactions "flow" in a social setting is another thing, and it = dependant on your real time ability to calibrate your own behaviour both orally and via your body language to have the best possible impact when delivering your message, and it = very hard to assess MattCocks abilities in these areas based on the way he writes here. In real life, he probably delivers the message pretty well. He's been in the army, he has spent years in school, and he's been working in a club for years, so he's probably a pretty cool guy in real life.
