Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Necrosis on April 16, 2026, 04:03:00 PM
-
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/europe/article/3350097/men-higher-iqs-are-less-conservative-study-finds
-
All they had to do was look at the red state's rankings in various categories.
-
The liberal men have less common sense though.
-
Didn't even read the article he quoted.
The current study showed that high intelligence does not, as one might assume, lead to radical political positions. Instead, highly gifted adults are on average just as politically diverse and moderate as the rest of the population.
-
Didn't even read the article he quoted.
so you have a comprehension problem. The beauty of this is its the case in point of the article, lol!!
what do you think that sentence is saying?
-
come on now, tell me what you think it's saying?
I will help you with it. I have tutored many a folk in my time. Your best is enough!
-
Personally, my own political views have shifted over time. I expect my IQ has stayed stable. That makes me think social and conservative values are influenced more by environment, economy, and life circumstances than by fixed traits like intelligence.
-
Is the richest man in the world the one with the highest IQ ?
I'll take a guess & say no he isn't. And if he isn't then what the Fuck has IQ got to
Do with how folks vote - I would say common sense & having good morals & values
are far more important.
Like most folk have I've met & dealt with many a highly educated high iq individuals & most
Were not highly paid nor could they do anything remotely practical.
So much for their high iq. ::)
-
Personally, my own political views have shifted over time. I expect my IQ has stayed stable. That makes me think social and conservative values are influenced more by environment, economy, and life circumstances than by fixed traits like intelligence.
The study is looking at high IQ individuals, so people who can tolerate complexity and the tension of opposites as it were. The more you can do that the more you tend to embrace liberal views (moderately though). Extreme views are idiotic either way.
What you are describing also has a big impact as well.
-
Is the richest man in the world the one with the highest IQ ?
I'll take a guess & say no he isn't. And if he isn't then what the Fuck has IQ got to
Do with how folks vote - I would say common sense & having good morals & values
are far more important.
Like most folk have I've met & dealt with many a highly educated high iq individuals & most
Were not highly paid nor could they do anything remotely practical.
So much for their high iq. ::)
this common sense thing is point in fact. There is nothing about immigration, abortion etc that is common sense. Common sense is .. don't touch the stove because its hot, don't put the glass at the end of the table because it could fall. Good sense is what you want to be saying.
It doesn't mean that high IQ folks don't have right wing views. It's also worth noting that the highest IQ folks tend to be male, so what that accounts for who knows.
-
I have tutored many a folk in my time. Your best is enough!
Those poor bastards.
this common sense thing is point in fact. There is nothing about immigration, abortion etc that is common sense.
Let me help you:
Common sense is the ability to reach intelligent conclusions based on a simple perception of the situation or facts.
:D
-
Those poor bastards.
Let me help you:
:D
I see you avoided my query as you now realize you are retarded and did not understand what you quoted.
If you want help, let me know. I will give you some hints if you like
Common sense
What it is Not
Common sense differs from specialized, academic, or highly scientific knowledge. It is not about complex reasoning but rather straightforward, practical wisdom
Good sense is what you keep referring do but you just don't know it.
This is a good opportunity to practice humility and admit you are wrong on the above instead of avoiding it and avoiding growth.
-
Seems like the states that take the most federal welfare money is also the states with the highest rate of poverty, unwed mothers, drug use, welfare, high school drop outs, abortion rates, divorce, teen pregnancy, obesity, infant deaths, low life expectancy. They do however, have the lowest rate of education as well.
These are not exactly high IQ traits.
-
I see you avoided my query as you now realize you are retarded and did not understand what you quoted.
If you want help, let me know. I will give you some hints if you like
Common sense
What it is Not
Common sense differs from specialized, academic, or highly scientific knowledge. It is not about complex reasoning but rather straightforward, practical wisdom
Good sense is what you keep referring do but you just don't know it.
This is a good opportunity to practice humility and admit you are wrong on the above instead of avoiding it and avoiding growth.
Making up your own definitions of words = admitting defeat. You really should stick to politics of your own country.
-
Making up your own definitions of words = admitting defeat. You really should stick to politics of your own country.
::) ::) ::)
This was an embarrassing showing from you.
-
::) ::) ::)
This was an embarrassing showing from you.
This must be the "narc" in you talking. ::)
-
This must be the "narc" in you talking. ::)
you are a funny little man.
-
you are a funny little man.
Now I'm offended
-
Now I'm offended
A bunch of people pm'd me and said that they use to think you were big but based on some posts they suspect your lil. Sad little lie you have pretending to be a chunky diabetic when you identify as a thin person on the inside.
-
A bunch of people pm'd me and said that they use to think you were big but based on some posts they suspect your lil. Sad little lie you have pretending to be a chunky diabetic when you identify as a thin person on the inside.
Not quite as sad as you identifying as a man while your wife gets piped by a muzzie. :(
-
Not quite as sad as you identifying as a man while your wife gets piped by a muzzie. :(
she said she doesn't enjoy it. She wouldn't lie
-
Didn't even read the article he quoted.
And even if he read it, he probably didn't understand it.
This study involved 107 people in Germany. It doesn't define "conservative views." Worthless.
-
And even if he read it, he probably didn't understand it.
This study involved 107 people in Germany. It doesn't define "conservative views." Worthless.
He went to school for 12 extra years to memorize some books!!!!!! >:( >:(
-
And even if he read it, he probably didn't understand it.
This study involved 107 people in Germany. It doesn't define "conservative views." Worthless.
I see you don't understand how research works. Not surprising since you hold clearly illogical beliefs!
You realize that the above link is a news article on the study, correct? it's not the actual paper you goober. It's a longitudinal study as well, how many people do you think you could track closely for 35 years lol.
Another dumb take.
-
I see you don't understand how research works. Not surprising since you hold clearly illogical beliefs!
You realize that the above link is a news article on the study, correct? it's not the actual paper you goober. It's a longitudinal study as well, how many people do you think you could track closely for 35 years lol.
Another dumb take.
Ah the dumbest genius ever with another dumb take. How did this comprehensive study of 107 people from Germany define "conservative views"?
-
Ah the dumbest genius ever with another dumb take. How did this comprehensive study of 107 people from Germany define "conservative views"?
You want me to do the work for you as per usual. You can easily read the actual paper as it's open access
I'll give you a hint, they used a well known questionnaire that has shown internal validity and is used quite often in political research. They used proper statistical analysis and found that in women it didn't matter.
High intelligence has been linked to openness and ability to tolerate complexity.
Your problem with this paper isn't even a reasonable one. There are many possible confounders which someone already outlined but you are focusing on how they defined conservatism, when they didn't, they used a tested metric for delineating that. They didn't make up their own as there would be no interstudy coherence nor anyway to determine if it's actual measuring what they claim (it would lack validity/veracity)
You just don't understand how research works and that's fine. Maybe, instead of railing against it automatically you could show some intellectual curiosity and try and understand it. I get my title was inflammatory and trolly but...
-
Seems like the states that take the most federal welfare money is also the states with the highest rate of poverty, unwed mothers, drug use, welfare, high school drop outs, abortion rates, divorce, teen pregnancy, obesity, infant deaths, low life expectancy. They do however, have the lowest rate of education as well.
These are not exactly high IQ traits.
Those red states have the highest black populations (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc). This is never pointed out.
-
Those red states have the highest black populations (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc). This is never pointed out.
Which way to black voters tend to lean, srs question. I thought it was left.
-
High intelligence has been linked to openness and ability to tolerate complexity.
Your article says this:
The current study showed that high intelligence does not, as one might assume, lead to radical political positions. Instead, highly gifted adults are on average just as politically diverse and moderate as the rest of the population.
Which way to black voters tend to lean, srs question. I thought it was left.
High black population does not mean high voter turn out.
-
Your article says this:
High black population does not mean high voter turn out.
Let me explain it for you. The key is the first sentence. Moderate as in, not extreme, aka far right or left. Diverse in the sense of not a monolith, there were right, left, center etc.. however they leaned left, some where right of course but that's expected. When looked at as a whole they were left leaning but showed diverse opinions. I do think its a poor summary whoever chose those words tbf.
From the actual study:
In a 2 × 2 MANOVA and subsequent ANOVAs with the four scales of the multi-dimensional questionnaire (economic libertarianism, liberalism, conservatism, socialism), no significant main or interaction effect emerged, except a significant interaction effect of giftedness and sex for conservatism. Specifically, non-gifted men showed higher conservatism scores than gifted men, whereas gifted and non-gifted women did not differ significantly. The results from supplementary Bayesian analyses were in accordance with these interpretations
Non-gifted men showed right leaning tendencies, which I can confirm from experience. Even the lunatic fringe rights don't come across dumb, they come across mentally unstable. Women didn't differ, gifted or not.
I mean this whole thread was a troll but I think this is a fact. Do I think that is all that matters? no. EQ matters and so does mental stability amongst other factors of which I have zero clue wrt political leanings.
-
At least you linked the actual study and not just copied the parts that fit your narrative. :)
-
Which way to black voters tend to lean, srs question. I thought it was left.
They do, but because of their numbers don't win elections. They do have high enough numbers to bring down the IQ and increase in crime and welfare though. Leftists who argue that red states get more federal help and have poorer schools never point this out.
-
Those red states have the highest black populations (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc). This is never pointed out.
Trickle Down Economics is only for whites?
-
They do, but because of their numbers don't win elections. They do have high enough numbers to bring down the IQ and increase in crime and welfare though. Leftists who argue that red states get more federal help and have poorer schools never point this out.
Really? Because more whites are on welfare than blacks in those red states. And you can't tell me the Bible Belt has less whites than blacks.
**edit - it doesn't.
---
AI Overview
Yes, the population in the Bible Belt area is more white than Black. While the region (spanning the Southeastern U.S.) has a significantly higher Black population than other U.S. regions, it remains majority white overall. However, specific sub-regions, often historically referred to as the "Black Belt" (due to soil color/slavery), feature high concentrations of Black residents.
Regional Demographics: The Bible Belt, roughly covering states from Virginia to Texas, is largely white, particularly in suburban and rural areas.
Concentrated Areas: Areas with higher black populations (often 37% or more) are concentrated in particular counties (the "Black Belt"), particularly in the Deep South.
Religious Demographic: The region has a high density of both Black Protestants and white Evangelical Protestants.
Regional Nuance: Certain areas within the South are less representative of this trend, such as heavily Catholic Southern Louisiana, Hispanic South Texas, and diverse metropolitan areas.
---
-
You want me to do the work for you as per usual. You can easily read the actual paper as it's open access
I'll give you a hint, they used a well known questionnaire that has shown internal validity and is used quite often in political research. They used proper statistical analysis and found that in women it didn't matter.
High intelligence has been linked to openness and ability to tolerate complexity.
Your problem with this paper isn't even a reasonable one. There are many possible confounders which someone already outlined but you are focusing on how they defined conservatism, when they didn't, they used a tested metric for delineating that. They didn't make up their own as there would be no interstudy coherence nor anyway to determine if it's actual measuring what they claim (it would lack validity/veracity)
You just don't understand how research works and that's fine. Maybe, instead of railing against it automatically you could show some intellectual curiosity and try and understand it. I get my title was inflammatory and trolly but...
The article doesn't define "conservative views." Your post doesn't define "conservative views." The entire study is based on "conservative views," but you don't know what those actual "conservative views" are. And this is from another country. I know you are trolling as usual, but this one is particularly dumb.
-
Really? Because more whites are on welfare than blacks in those red states. And you can't tell me the Bible Belt has less whites than blacks.
**edit - it doesn't.
---
AI Overview
Yes, the population in the Bible Belt area is more white than Black. While the region (spanning the Southeastern U.S.) has a significantly higher Black population than other U.S. regions, it remains majority white overall. However, specific sub-regions, often historically referred to as the "Black Belt" (due to soil color/slavery), feature high concentrations of Black residents.
Regional Demographics: The Bible Belt, roughly covering states from Virginia to Texas, is largely white, particularly in suburban and rural areas.
Concentrated Areas: Areas with higher black populations (often 37% or more) are concentrated in particular counties (the "Black Belt"), particularly in the Deep South.
Religious Demographic: The region has a high density of both Black Protestants and white Evangelical Protestants.
Regional Nuance: Certain areas within the South are less representative of this trend, such as heavily Catholic Southern Louisiana, Hispanic South Texas, and diverse metropolitan areas.
---
What is the % of Whites on welfare vs the % of Blacks on welfare in those states? Teen pregnancies? Those below the poverty line? Crime?
-
The article doesn't define "conservative views." Your post doesn't define "conservative views." The entire study is based on "conservative views," but you don't know what those actual "conservative views" are. And this is from another country. I know you are trolling as usual, but this one is particularly dumb.
So you are a moron are ya?
I can't be holding your hand through this.
The questionairre is a validated questionairre for these purposes. Are you not UNDERSTANDING what that means? the questionairre defines what is conservative quite clearly and has been validated. It defines all the terms it seeks to measure accurately.
Why I am seriously responding to these posts is beyond me. I must be a masochist
-
What is the % of Whites on welfare vs the % of Blacks on welfare in those states? Teen pregnancies? Those below the poverty line? Crime?
Red states have more white population on welfare than blacks. But a higher percentage of blacks as a race than whites.
-
So you are a moron are ya?
I can't be holding your hand through this.
The questionairre is a validated questionairre for these purposes. Are you not UNDERSTANDING what that means? the questionairre defines what is conservative quite clearly and has been validated. It defines all the terms it seeks to measure accurately.
Why I am seriously responding to these posts is beyond me. I must be a masochist
this is a pretty bad article for a few reasons. One its a mish mash of studies of various methodologies, some referencing themselves, second, it's a survey
-
this is a pretty bad article for a few reasons. One its a mish mash of studies of various methodologies, some referencing themselves, second, it's a survey
Are you SIMPLE?
-
Are you SIMPLE?
Obviously I'm quite complex, you've wasted your 12 year liberal arts education trying to figure me out.
-
So you are a moron are ya?
I can't be holding your hand through this.
The questionairre is a validated questionairre for these purposes. Are you not UNDERSTANDING what that means? the questionairre defines what is conservative quite clearly and has been validated. It defines all the terms it seeks to measure accurately.
Why I am seriously responding to these posts is beyond me. I must be a masochist
So the questionnaire defines "what is a conservative quite clearly"? Where is the questionnaire so I can verify this?
And here you are in another thread, basically asking the same foundational question:
When you say far left what do you mean? I don't support them as i am more of a centrist but leaning left most likely.
Canada is doing quite well, what metrics are you using? I am sure you are aware that the US is far behind many countries in multiple metrics. However, I doubt your hubris would allow you to see that.
Just for a minute try to use your brain, take your emotions out of things and be rational. Try and be curious and you might learn something. Thats not a troll.
You are such a friggin troll. And not even a good one. Or a smart one. Or a funny one.
-
So the questionnaire defines "what is a conservative quite clearly"? Where is the questionnaire so I can verify this?
And here you are in another thread, basically asking the same foundational question:
You are such a friggin troll. And not even a good one. Or a smart one. Or a funny one.
Are you insulting his gratuitous use of chatgpt?
-
Are you insulting his gratuitous use of chatgpt?
Is he using AI too? Not surprised. I should have used the Gibberish Translator.
-
So the questionnaire defines "what is a conservative quite clearly"? Where is the questionnaire so I can verify this?
And here you are in another thread, basically asking the same foundational question:
You are such a friggin troll. And not even a good one. Or a smart one. Or a funny one.
Again, are you dumb? the questionairre is clearly indicated in the paper. Are you unable to do a search? what do you think they just made shit up? I realize that's the world you live in but it's not how intelligent folks operate
I asked the question about someone's opinion, not a validated questionairre used to conduct political research as it relates to a paper.
What a dumb comparison, it's apples to oranges.
Back to the drawing board.
-
Is he using AI too? Not surprised. I should have used the Gibberish Translator.
never in my life.
It's quite the compliment in fact. He is attempting to alleviate his feelings of inferiority because he cannot comprehend some of my posts. Instead of doing the noble thing and asking questions he doubles down.
I would hope chatgpt knows how to write since it's clear from my posts that are littered with poor grammar I do not.
-
Are you insulting his gratuitous use of chatgpt?
It;s cute when you guys team up. I'll take it as a compliment.
It's very beta though.
-
It;s cute when you guys team up. I'll take it as a compliment.
It's very beta though.
Is that like when you and Lurkingforboys follow each other around and dock your weenies together to talk about Trump?
-
Obviously I'm quite complex, you've wasted your 12 year liberal arts education trying to figure me out.
This is hilarious.
-
Red states have more white population on welfare than blacks. But a higher percentage of blacks as a race than whites.
There you go.
-
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/d5tsqsxpn4KMUzkILHWDeA--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTI0MDA7aD0xMzUwO2NmPXdlYnA-/https://media.zenfs.com/en/snopes_632/9a2b6881c8df74253b1c9e6caf1c436e)
-
Is that like when you and Lurkingforboys follow each other around and dock your weenies together to talk about Trump?
meltdown.
-
There you go.
I am not sure what you mean by this. Because it agrees with the statement I made.
-
Is that like when you and Lurkingforboys follow each other around and dock your weenies together to talk about Trump?
Dear GetBig,
Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay, Gay,
Signed
GAYoas.
-
Dear GetBig,
Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS, Trumpy TDS,
Signed
LurkingforBOYS
Fixed, Faggotforboys.
-
Fixed, Faggotforboys.
TDS is MAGA for FACTS.
Your constant gayness is noted again. You sound like someone that has been molested by numerous relatives and has a favorite. Creepy ass gay vibes you give off.
-
Again, are you dumb? the questionairre is clearly indicated in the paper. Are you unable to do a search? what do you think they just made shit up? I realize that's the world you live in but it's not how intelligent folks operate
I asked the question about someone's opinion, not a validated questionairre used to conduct political research as it relates to a paper.
What a dumb comparison, it's apples to oranges.
Back to the drawing board.
I say this with all sincerity: you really have a problem engaging in discussions that involve logic and analytical thinking. I always feel like I'm talking to a high school kid with you. Especially your writing, which is atrocious.
In any event, you posted a link that references a study that is based on conservative views. The story you linked does not contain the actual questionnaire, nor does it define conservative views. I was simply asking what definition of "conservative views" was used. I get that you don't understand why this question is important, but for anyone else reading, the reason I asked the question is that the sample size is very small, it involves people in a foreign country, and we don't know whether those "conservative views" are the same views held by Americans. Maybe they are, maybe they are not. But it's a foundational question.
-
I say this with all sincerity: you really have a problem engaging in discussions that involve logic and analytical thinking. I always feel like I'm talking to a high school kid with you. Especially your writing, which is atrocious.
You're like a special ed teacher, you keep trying but you know it's going nowhere. ;D
-
I say this with all sincerity: you really have a problem engaging in discussions that involve logic and analytical thinking. I always feel like I'm talking to a high school kid with you. Especially your writing, which is atrocious.
In any event, you posted a link that references a study that is based on conservative views. The story you linked does not contain the actual questionnaire, nor does it define conservative views. I was simply asking what definition of "conservative views" was used. I get that you don't understand why this question is important, but for anyone else reading, the reason I asked the question is that the sample size is very small, it involves people in a foreign country, and we don't know whether those "conservative views" are the same views held by Americans. Maybe they are, maybe they are not. But it's a foundational question.
Lol. I feel like I am talking to someone about 3 standard deviations away from myself, which I reckon is about accurate. son, you think with your personal attacks and slander I am going to engage sincerely with you and answer your questions reasonably? lol.
I get why the question is important. I have already given you the means to investigate it yourself. It's an extremely weak criticism that is meritless. I indicated why.
Since you clearly can't piece it together let someone who knows more stuff help :D
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000893#bb0345
You can go to the methods and see what tests they used- you will then have to read up on the tests. However, it has been used quite often and mirrors numerous other tests, questionairres etc. There is a brief description there but thats not the point of the test. In the discussion there is more information.
It's simply a fact, it's required to understand complexity. I am not saying this shit because I want it to be true, it's simply true. There are negatives that come with that like emotional lability etc. It doesn't mean anyone conservative is stupid. I would also suggest that the smartest folks are neither left or right and absolutely do not ossify into political categories but keep a dynamic, iterative flow wrt positions never being held down yet never not being moored.
I doubt you understand what I am saying as your life is the opposite. Not that thats a bad thing.
-
You're like a special ed teacher, you keep trying but you know it's going nowhere. ;D
Is he? is that how you see it?
how is your angular cheilitis from the beetus you got when you have his dick in your mouth?
serious question
-
Is he? is that how you see it?
how is your angular cheilitis from the beetus you got when you have his dick in your mouth?
serious question
Heads up, I see you quoted chaos, surely you meant to quote Lurkingforboys. I expect you will fix the error at the earliest practicable juncture. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
-
Lol. I feel like I am talking to someone about 3 standard deviations away from myself, which I reckon is about accurate. son, you think with your personal attacks and slander I am going to engage sincerely with you and answer your questions reasonably? lol.
I get why the question is important. I have already given you the means to investigate it yourself. It's an extremely weak criticism that is meritless. I indicated why.
Since you clearly can't piece it together let someone who knows more stuff help :D
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000893#bb0345
You can go to the methods and see what tests they used- you will then have to read up on the tests. However, it has been used quite often and mirrors numerous other tests, questionairres etc. There is a brief description there but thats not the point of the test. In the discussion there is more information.
It's simply a fact, it's required to understand complexity. I am not saying this shit because I want it to be true, it's simply true. There are negatives that come with that like emotional lability etc. It doesn't mean anyone conservative is stupid. I would also suggest that the smartest folks are neither left or right and absolutely do not ossify into political categories but keep a dynamic, iterative flow wrt positions never being held down yet never not being moored.
I doubt you understand what I am saying as your life is the opposite. Not that thats a bad thing.
I don't take you seriously. You're not smart enough. You're not funny enough. You're just an internet troll, who also happens to be a simpleton.
But I digress . . . Thank you for providing the link. I do not see the questionnaire in the link. Where is the questionnaire? You said "the questionairre [sic] is clearly indicated in the paper." No it isn't. At least I don't see it. It is referenced in the link you just provided, but I don't see the actual questionnaire.
It does have this excerpt, which again is too vague to know the precise conservative views used as part of the study's foundation, and whether those views are parallel to American conservative views:
For example, the Political Ideologies Questionnaire (POLID; Ulrich, 2021; see below) used in this study consists of four scales: economic libertarianism, conservatism, socialism, and liberalism. Economic libertarianism emphasizes individual and market freedom, viewing merit-based inequalities as justified (see also e.g., Duckitt, 2001). Conservatism is rooted in societal cohesion through shared culture and tradition, advocating for stability and security (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2003). Socialism focuses on reducing inequalities by addressing exploitation of disadvantaged groups, promoting equality of outcome (see also e.g., Lipset, 1981). Liberalism is characterized by valuing individual autonomy and freedom (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2009). Importantly, the multi-dimensional political orientations of different conceptions, as exemplified in POLID (Ulrich, 2021), do not necessarily align closely (neither conceptually nor empirically) with the singular left-right dimension. Sociocultural and economical conservative orientations are typically associated with the right pole, while sociocultural and economical liberal orientations align with the left pole (Jedinger & Burger, 2022). In conclusion, the single-dimensional conception and the multi-dimensional conceptions differ substantially concerning the theoretical approach for political orientations. Depending on the survey setting or research question, researchers can use the one or the other conception, or a combination of both.
But I can see that you cannot keep up. Not surprised. It's really funny how you try to sound smart, but end up exposing yourself. Dumbest genius ever. ;D
-
Heads up, I see you quoted chaos, surely you meant to quote Lurkingforboys. I expect you will fix the error at the earliest practicable juncture. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
No, pretty sure he meant you just from the unchecked gayness alone. No one else on this board gives off queer vibes like you do GAYoas.
-
Lol. I feel like I am talking to someone about 3 standard deviations away from myself, which I reckon is about accurate. son, you think with your personal attacks and slander I am going to engage sincerely with you and answer your questions reasonably? lol.
I get why the question is important. I have already given you the means to investigate it yourself. It's an extremely weak criticism that is meritless. I indicated why.
Since you clearly can't piece it together let someone who knows more stuff help :D
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000893#bb0345
You can go to the methods and see what tests they used- you will then have to read up on the tests. However, it has been used quite often and mirrors numerous other tests, questionairres etc. There is a brief description there but thats not the point of the test. In the discussion there is more information.
It's simply a fact, it's required to understand complexity. I am not saying this shit because I want it to be true, it's simply true. There are negatives that come with that like emotional lability etc. It doesn't mean anyone conservative is stupid. I would also suggest that the smartest folks are neither left or right and absolutely do not ossify into political categories but keep a dynamic, iterative flow wrt positions never being held down yet never not being moored.
I doubt you understand what I am saying as your life is the opposite. Not that thats a bad thing.
Shit dude. I don't even think Lurker owns Chaos that badly. ;D
-
I don't take you seriously. You're not smart enough. You're not funny enough. You're just an internet troll, who also happens to be a simpleton.
But I digress . . . Thank you for providing the link. I do not see the questionnaire in the link. Where is the questionnaire? You said "the questionairre [sic] is clearly indicated in the paper." No it isn't. At least I don't see it. It is referenced in the link you just provided, but I don't see the actual questionnaire.
It does have this excerpt, which again is too vague to know the precise conservative views used as part of the study's foundation, and whether those views are parallel to American conservative views:
For example, the Political Ideologies Questionnaire (POLID; Ulrich, 2021; see below) used in this study consists of four scales: economic libertarianism, conservatism, socialism, and liberalism. Economic libertarianism emphasizes individual and market freedom, viewing merit-based inequalities as justified (see also e.g., Duckitt, 2001). Conservatism is rooted in societal cohesion through shared culture and tradition, advocating for stability and security (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2003). Socialism focuses on reducing inequalities by addressing exploitation of disadvantaged groups, promoting equality of outcome (see also e.g., Lipset, 1981). Liberalism is characterized by valuing individual autonomy and freedom (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2009). Importantly, the multi-dimensional political orientations of different conceptions, as exemplified in POLID (Ulrich, 2021), do not necessarily align closely (neither conceptually nor empirically) with the singular left-right dimension. Sociocultural and economical conservative orientations are typically associated with the right pole, while sociocultural and economical liberal orientations align with the left pole (Jedinger & Burger, 2022). In conclusion, the single-dimensional conception and the multi-dimensional conceptions differ substantially concerning the theoretical approach for political orientations. Depending on the survey setting or research question, researchers can use the one or the other conception, or a combination of both.
But I can see that you cannot keep up. Not surprised. It's really funny how you try to sound smart, but end up exposing yourself. Dumbest genius ever. ;D
So you are in fact stupid lololol.
You have never read an actual paper before have you? they don't list the fucking questionairres or indices you goof. They referencing the measurement used like saying we used a 2 way anova (I an sure you don't know what that is) and it's implicitly implied the person reading understands that. Holy fuck youre dumb hahahaha
I even said you will have to look the questionairre up yet you took it as a win because you have no clue how science works HAHAHAHAHAH.
you doubled down as well.
Chef's kiss you moron.
-
Shit dude. I don't even think Lurker owns Chaos that badly. ;D
Ya he is a dummy that thinks he is intelligent but every time we engage he falters horribly.
I honestly feel bad because it's clear there is a huge gap here and I am sure he isn't a bad person at heart.
Chaos is the same way. Just not all that bright, likely a good fella to call if you want some cupboards installed.
-
I don't take you seriously. You're not smart enough. You're not funny enough. You're just an internet troll, who also happens to be a simpleton.
But I digress . . . Thank you for providing the link. I do not see the questionnaire in the link. Where is the questionnaire? You said "the questionairre [sic] is clearly indicated in the paper." No it isn't. At least I don't see it. It is referenced in the link you just provided, but I don't see the actual questionnaire.
It does have this excerpt, which again is too vague to know the precise conservative views used as part of the study's foundation, and whether those views are parallel to American conservative views:
For example, the Political Ideologies Questionnaire (POLID; Ulrich, 2021; see below) used in this study consists of four scales: economic libertarianism, conservatism, socialism, and liberalism. Economic libertarianism emphasizes individual and market freedom, viewing merit-based inequalities as justified (see also e.g., Duckitt, 2001). Conservatism is rooted in societal cohesion through shared culture and tradition, advocating for stability and security (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2003). Socialism focuses on reducing inequalities by addressing exploitation of disadvantaged groups, promoting equality of outcome (see also e.g., Lipset, 1981). Liberalism is characterized by valuing individual autonomy and freedom (see also e.g., Jost et al., 2009). Importantly, the multi-dimensional political orientations of different conceptions, as exemplified in POLID (Ulrich, 2021), do not necessarily align closely (neither conceptually nor empirically) with the singular left-right dimension. Sociocultural and economical conservative orientations are typically associated with the right pole, while sociocultural and economical liberal orientations align with the left pole (Jedinger & Burger, 2022). In conclusion, the single-dimensional conception and the multi-dimensional conceptions differ substantially concerning the theoretical approach for political orientations. Depending on the survey setting or research question, researchers can use the one or the other conception, or a combination of both.
But I can see that you cannot keep up. Not surprised. It's really funny how you try to sound smart, but end up exposing yourself. Dumbest genius ever. ;D
The questionairre is clearly indicated in the paper. What are you looking for raw data you tard? do you know how long papers would be if they did that? this is a peer reviewed article, that's their job, you can see the rating of the journal as well.
I know this is all foreign to you and believing there is some fuckery going on helps keep your simple worldview intact but unfortunately us intelligent folks have things like systems to corroborate these things and actual spent time learning how to do this stuff.
Are you questioning the validity of the metric they used? Or are you melting down because they didn't rehash every detail about a well used questionairre? do you want them to explain the statistics used?
Should they explain what each formula means and break it down for you? or do you think they assume the reader (other professionals) already know this shit and they can avoid printing the raw data which the review panel reviews?
You are making a fool of yourself as per usual. You have a fetish of trying to prove how smart you are to me, just let it go man.
What is something you know a lot about? would you like to talk about that? it will likely make you feel better and you can impress the other mental midgets that scurry around here supporting a man who just said "everyone knows I am extraordinarily brilliant" lol.
I'll give you another helpful lifeline here. It's pretty fun doing this piecemeal as it shows how intellectual lazy you are along with how out of your depth you are
https://zis.gesis.org/skala/Breyer-Left-Right-Self-Placement-%28ALLBUS%29?lang=de
I can only respond to you a few times here and there, I can let this terrible behavior seep into my daily life as I generally prefer to help and teach folks rather then disparage them. However, you earned it!! and as one cannot have good without bad, hopefully something good comes from this beating.
-
here's another! pro tip, there's more!
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/metrics?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082131
Unfortunately its a fact lol big mad your side is the dumb one.
-
Shit dude. I don't even think Lurker owns Chaos that badly. ;D
HEY!!! I refrain from using good material on GAYoas because he is too stupid to understand the finer points of it. That and because it can't penetrate his nonstop gay vibes.
-
Shit dude. I don't even think Lurker owns Chaos that badly. ;D
Would it be possible for you to suck his dick harder?
-
So we're using studies that are 11-12 years old to prove what? LOL Anybody with half a brain (like Negrosis or LurkingforBOYS) should know that "science" is fluid (depending on who pays the funding) and info from 10+ years ago is null and void by this time. Science has moved on kids, you should to.
-
So we're using studies that are 11-12 years old to prove what? LOL Anybody with half a brain (like Negrosis or LurkingforBOYS) should know that "science" is fluid (depending on who pays the funding) and info from 10+ years ago is null and void by this time. Science has moved on kids, you should to.
I will allow you to retract this with some grace as the study is from 2026. I realize that you are confused by what I posted which is the point of the study. If you like I can point out where your mistake is?
Or you can just bow out without disgrace.
Now you could double down on this position and look retarded, thats your choice.
-
Would it be possible for you to suck his dick harder?
If you got out of the way maybe.
-
Would it be possible for you to suck his dick harder?
What's my motivation?
-
I will allow you to retract this with some grace as the study is from 2026. I realize that you are confused by what I posted which is the point of the study. If you like I can point out where your mistake is?
Or you can just bow out without disgrace.
Now you could double down on this position and look retarded, thats your choice.
I realize numbers are hard, dates harder, but maybe go back and check your sources, retard. For someone that is supposedly so smart, you are a fucking idiot. You might have AbrahamG fooled but the rest of us can see it.
What's my motivation?
It's load ??? The pat on your head when it's done ??? Maybe you just enjoy being a cheerleader for debauchery and faggotry ???
Hell if I know.
-
I realize numbers are hard, dates harder, but maybe go back and check your sources, retard. For someone that is supposedly so smart, you are a fucking idiot. You might have AbrahamG fooled but the rest of us can see it.
It's load ??? The pat on your head when it's done ??? Maybe you just enjoy being a cheerleader for debauchery and faggotry ???
Hell if I know.
I gave you a chance but you refused. I tried to spare you. You could of avoided this.
The link you are referencing (I knew what your mistake was as soon as you cited it) is a link to one of the questionairres used in the study I posted. As you may have noticed I was speaking to dos equis. Now the link I posted is a breakdown of the questionairre with further references corroborating it.
I realize the date on that paper is different but its not a study so you are retard. So you couldn't understand (both links are to the questionairres) that they were questionairres, not studies. This indicates that you either cannot read or are too lazy to look past the title, perhaps both.
So no, we aren't using studies from a decade ago as per your claim, as it wasn't a study at all. But you couldn't comprehend that. I even gave you an out lololol :-* :-*
I wouldn't dare fool you! it's honestly like beating up on a disabled person. Let me help you. I can guide you. My offer stands for 24 hours.
-
I gave you a chance but you refused. I tried to spare you. You could of avoided this.
The link you are referencing (I knew what your mistake was as soon as you cited it) is a link to one of the questionairres used in the study I posted. As you may have noticed I was speaking to dos equis. Now the link I posted is a breakdown of the questionairre with further references corroborating it.
I realize the date on that paper is different but its not a study so you are retard. So you couldn't understand (both links are to the questionairres) that they were questionairres, not studies. This indicates that you either cannot read or are too lazy to look past the title, perhaps both.
So no, we aren't using studies from a decade ago as per your claim, as it wasn't a study at all. But you couldn't comprehend that. I even gave you an out lololol :-* :-*
I wouldn't dare fool you! it's honestly like beating up on a disabled person. Let me help you. I can guide you. My offer stands for 24 hours.
I know what the links are, I know what the papers are, I know what the scale is, your study used information from over a decade ago from a handful of people that self identified as "conservative" and denies the fact that science, especially something as made up and based on emotions as psychology, is fluid and ever changing. I find your "holier than thou, I'm so smart" behavior quite pathetic. I know there are several very smart people on getbig, you are not one of them.
-
I know what the links are, I know what the papers are, I know what the scale is, your study used information from over a decade ago from a handful of people that self identified as "conservative" and denies the fact that science, especially something as made up and based on emotions as psychology, is fluid and ever changing. I find your "holier than thou, I'm so smart" behavior quite pathetic. I know there are several very smart people on getbig, you are not one of them.
I did not, you are lying lol
The only paper there is from 2026.
I don't claim to be anything, but I do enjoy how much it upsets you.
I can't engage with what you said because its so far off base that it's pointless. The constructs conservative and liberal and not fluid as you suggest.
Psychology is also not made up unless you admit that everything is made up. I think you mean subjective vs objective, even then there is no such thing as that's like claiming there is a front and back to a wall that inherently exist. You ever see a front without a back? you ever see a down without an up. "objective" science is not objective at all, in fact the most objective physics got quite the shake up when quantum mechanics came on the scene.
There is no point is continuing this discussion. It was the questionairres from the study that I linked in the initial article thats from this year. The questionairres capture constructs that are not fluid overtime. Capitalism isn't psychology and it was the same 10 years ago as it was today save minor changes. This is the same thing as the constructs used in these questionairres, they are not malleable.
Emotions aren't even fluid like you suggest. It's like saying what anger was 10 years ago is different from anger today, such the object of anger may change but the emotion is the same qualia/qualitative dimension.
I will give you points for making some sense but alas it's all for naught.
-
It's load ??? The pat on your head when it's done ??? Maybe you just enjoy being a cheerleader for debauchery and faggotry ???
Hell if I know.
Sounds like your gay projections are overwhelming you again.
-
You're like a special ed teacher, you keep trying but you know it's going nowhere. ;D
You have to Remember who you are dealing with!!!
Just look at what the Leftists Support & Believe- how the Fuck do you expect
To get any rational sense out of any of Them !!! 🤷🏻
-
I did not, you are lying lol
The only paper there is from 2026.
I don't claim to be anything, but I do enjoy how much it upsets you.
I can't engage with what you said because its so far off base that it's pointless. The constructs conservative and liberal and not fluid as you suggest.
Psychology is also not made up unless you admit that everything is made up. I think you mean subjective vs objective, even then there is no such thing as that's like claiming there is a front and back to a wall that inherently exist. You ever see a front without a back? you ever see a down without an up. "objective" science is not objective at all, in fact the most objective physics got quite the shake up when quantum mechanics came on the scene.
There is no point is continuing this discussion. It was the questionairres from the study that I linked in the initial article thats from this year. The questionairres capture constructs that are not fluid overtime. Capitalism isn't psychology and it was the same 10 years ago as it was today save minor changes. This is the same thing as the constructs used in these questionairres, they are not malleable.
Emotions aren't even fluid like you suggest. It's like saying what anger was 10 years ago is different from anger today, such the object of anger may change but the emotion is the same qualia/qualitative dimension.
I will give you points for making some sense but alas it's all for naught.
Where do I even start with this? Maybe I'll revisit this during my morning coffee tomorrow. I can't deal with the retardism you are projecting.
-
Where do I even start with this? Maybe I'll revisit this during my morning coffee tomorrow. I can't deal with the retardism you are projecting.
do better, I know its in you
-
The questionairre is clearly indicated in the paper. What are you looking for raw data you tard? do you know how long papers would be if they did that? this is a peer reviewed article, that's their job, you can see the rating of the journal as well.
I know this is all foreign to you and believing there is some fuckery going on helps keep your simple worldview intact but unfortunately us intelligent folks have things like systems to corroborate these things and actual spent time learning how to do this stuff.
Are you questioning the validity of the metric they used? Or are you melting down because they didn't rehash every detail about a well used questionairre? do you want them to explain the statistics used?
Should they explain what each formula means and break it down for you? or do you think they assume the reader (other professionals) already know this shit and they can avoid printing the raw data which the review panel reviews?
You are making a fool of yourself as per usual. You have a fetish of trying to prove how smart you are to me, just let it go man.
What is something you know a lot about? would you like to talk about that? it will likely make you feel better and you can impress the other mental midgets that scurry around here supporting a man who just said "everyone knows I am extraordinarily brilliant" lol.
I'll give you another helpful lifeline here. It's pretty fun doing this piecemeal as it shows how intellectual lazy you are along with how out of your depth you are
https://zis.gesis.org/skala/Breyer-Left-Right-Self-Placement-%28ALLBUS%29?lang=de
I can only respond to you a few times here and there, I can let this terrible behavior seep into my daily life as I generally prefer to help and teach folks rather then disparage them. However, you earned it!! and as one cannot have good without bad, hopefully something good comes from this beating.
What the heck is all this crap? Just post a link to the questionnaire. If you don't have it, just say so.
-
What the heck is all this crap? Just post a link to the questionnaire. If you don't have it, just say so.
I posted multiple links lol
just stop
-
What the heck is all this crap? Just post a link to the questionnaire. If you don't have it, just say so.
He posted the link to a 10+ year old study of how they came up with the questionnaire, his whole 2026 study is based on antiquated information, using a miniscule foreign population sample and it was all established based off "feelings". For someone that claims to be smart, he comes across pretty much how you would expect a brainwashed liberal to.
-
He posted the link to a 10+ year old study of how they came up with the questionnaire, his whole 2026 study is based on antiquated information, using a miniscule foreign population sample and it was all established based off "feelings". For someone that claims to be smart, he comes across pretty much how you would expect a brainwashed liberal to.
Super dumb post. You are a very emotional guy. You should be attempting to elevate the board instead of dragging it down.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11308703/
every single piece of research says the same thing, conservatism is associated with lower IQ LOLOL.
This thread is a perfect example. I know it sucks but there are still things you can do to help us competent folks out. You can pick up the garbage, paint fences etc..
Just stop electing morons that you identify with that fuck up the world. Also, try not to bring back measles while you are at it. I often wonder do dumb people know they are dumb? according to this thread they do not and in fact double down when clearly in the wrong lol.
I'll keep trickling in more data as you come to grips with reality. If I overload you something bad could occur.
-
Super dumb post. You are a very emotional guy. You should be attempting to elevate the board instead of dragging it down.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11308703/
every single piece of research says the same thing, conservatism is associated with lower IQ LOLOL.
This thread is a perfect example. I know it sucks but there are still things you can do to help us competent folks out. You can pick up the garbage, paint fences etc..
Just stop electing morons that you identify with that fuck up the world. Also, try not to bring back measles while you are at it. I often wonder do dumb people know they are dumb? according to this thread they do not and in fact double down when clearly in the wrong lol.
I'll keep trickling in more data as you come to grips with reality. If I overload you something bad could occur.
Must suck to think you're super smart only for people to laugh at you wasting 12 years of your pathetic life. ;D ;D ;D
Calling others emotional while you scour the internet for proof that you're smart. LOL Loser.
-
Must suck to think you're super smart only for people to laugh at you wasting 12 years of your pathetic life. ;D ;D ;D
Calling others emotional while you scour the internet for proof that you're smart. LOL Loser.
Dummy alert!!
-
Dummy alert!!
Thanks for letting us know you're here!
-
Super dumb post. You are a very emotional guy. You should be attempting to elevate the board instead of dragging it down.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11308703/
every single piece of research says the same thing, conservatism is associated with lower IQ LOLOL.
This thread is a perfect example. I know it sucks but there are still things you can do to help us competent folks out. You can pick up the garbage, paint fences etc..
Just stop electing morons that you identify with that fuck up the world. Also, try not to bring back measles while you are at it. I often wonder do dumb people know they are dumb? according to this thread they do not and in fact double down when clearly in the wrong lol.
I'll keep trickling in more data as you come to grips with reality. If I overload you something bad could occur.
From your link:
Political orientation was assessed with the single item “What is your political orientation?” on a 1–5 scale ranging from “extremely conservative” to “extremely liberal.”
So they had a handful of people self-identify as conservative, etc. with no objective criteria to determine their political beliefs?
Is there something else that helps define conservative and liberal in Germany as it directly relates to the handful of people involved in this study?
-
He posted the link to a 10+ year old study of how they came up with the questionnaire, his whole 2026 study is based on antiquated information, using a miniscule foreign population sample and it was all established based off "feelings". For someone that claims to be smart, he comes across pretty much how you would expect a brainwashed liberal to.
Yeah. He really is full of himself. If he’s going to try and act like the smartest person in the room, he should actually be smart. He’s not.
-
Yeah. He really is full of himself. If he’s going to try and act like the smartest person in the room, he should actually be smart. He’s not.
It's funny to watch him flail around trying to prove it though. ;D
-
It's funny to watch him flail around trying to prove it though. ;D
Very amusing. ;D
-
From your link:
Political orientation was assessed with the single item “What is your political orientation?” on a 1–5 scale ranging from “extremely conservative” to “extremely liberal.”
So they had a handful of people self-identify as conservative, etc. with no objective criteria to determine their political beliefs?
Is there something else that helps define conservative and liberal in Germany as it directly relates to the handful of people involved in this study?
Jesus, you want to do this again? lolololol.
you have a fetish for embarrassment or something?
What do you hope to achieve here? What do you think what you quoted means in this context? I know what you think it means but let me hear you spell it out, genius. I bet room temperature IQ kamala could understand the context better.
Ya man, just some random germans there hasn't been decades of research or anything
"Intelligence has been found to be associated with a range of political beliefs including liberalism (Carl, 2014), anti-racism (Deary et al., 2008), support for the EU and NATO (Oskarsson et al., 2014), free speech (De keersmaecker et al., 2021), tolerance (Lasker & McNaughton, 2022) and anti-authoritarianism (Choma & Hanoch, 2017).
Two meta-analyses of this literature have been performed. Onraet et al.’s (2015) meta-analysis found intelligence to be negatively correlated with right-wing ideological attitudes (𝑟=−.20). However, the correlation depended on the type of right-wing attitude measured, with higher correlations with authoritarianism (𝑟=−.30) and ethnocentrism (𝑟=−.28) compared to conservatism (𝑟=−.13). Jedinger and Burger (2022) found a very small but significant correlation between intelligence and fiscally conservative beliefs (𝑟=.07). Overall, intelligence has been found to be associated with beliefs that can be described as socially liberal and possibly also fiscally conservative.
To put these effect sizes into context, in the American National Election Study (Gaziano, 2014), it has been estimated that education has an effect of 𝛽=−0.139 and income has an effect of 𝛽=0.124 on right-wing ideology, after controlling for age, race, and gender. Intelligence has a correlation with political belief that is comparable if not greater than the correlations between belief and measures of SES commonly studied by political scientists.
Although IQ is known to be associated with political belief, it is not known why this is the case. The relationship between intelligence and political belief could be confounded or mediated by socioeconomic factors and environmental factors more broadly. In this study, we employ polygenic scores, within-family designs and controls to causally identify the direct effect of cognitive ability on political beliefs.
We might believe intelligence directly changes political beliefs. Political beliefs likely reflect our ethical values and our empirical beliefs, both of which might be altered by intelligence. Intelligence is related to greater general knowledge (Furnham & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2006), knowledge of economics (Caplan & Miller, 2010) and financial literacy (Lin & Bates, 2022). Moreover, intelligence may be related to subjective values, as it shows correlations with patience (Shamosh & Gray, 2008), openness (Anglim et al., 2022), “emotional intelligence” (MacCann et al., 2014) and moral judgement in the Defining Issues Test (Derryberry et al., 2007). Onraet et al. (2015) suggested that the use of stereotypes and socially conservative beliefs function as heuristics, utilizing fewer cognitive resources than thinking about social issues on a case-by-case base. This could cause lower cognitive ability to be associated with right-wing views."
This thread has been way more fruitful then anticipated. For a shitty troll I have you making a fool of yourself and high fiving your buddy out of desperation lol.
I'll make another thread about the dark triad and conservatism as well. As the weeks unfold you can get a better picture of the type of person you are and how others perceive you. Nothing hits like cold hard facts.
-
Thanks for letting us know you're here!
You are talking about everything but the thread topic, attacking me left and right hahahaha.
Apex troll I is.
I'll leave you guys alone for a while. Let you recoup. So far the score is necrosis 10- chaosequis 0.
Let's do economics next. Could be a great learning opportunity for us all. ;D ;D ;D
I wonder what party is better for the economy? I don't know of course but let's find out together.
-
Jesus, you want to do this again? lolololol.
you have a fetish for embarrassment or something?
What do you hope to achieve here? What do you think what you quoted means in this context? I know what you think it means but let me hear you spell it out, genius. I bet room temperature IQ kamala could understand the context better.
Ya man, just some random germans there hasn't been decades of research or anything
"Intelligence has been found to be associated with a range of political beliefs including liberalism (Carl, 2014), anti-racism (Deary et al., 2008), support for the EU and NATO (Oskarsson et al., 2014), free speech (De keersmaecker et al., 2021), tolerance (Lasker & McNaughton, 2022) and anti-authoritarianism (Choma & Hanoch, 2017).
Two meta-analyses of this literature have been performed. Onraet et al.’s (2015) meta-analysis found intelligence to be negatively correlated with right-wing ideological attitudes (𝑟=−.20). However, the correlation depended on the type of right-wing attitude measured, with higher correlations with authoritarianism (𝑟=−.30) and ethnocentrism (𝑟=−.28) compared to conservatism (𝑟=−.13). Jedinger and Burger (2022) found a very small but significant correlation between intelligence and fiscally conservative beliefs (𝑟=.07). Overall, intelligence has been found to be associated with beliefs that can be described as socially liberal and possibly also fiscally conservative.
To put these effect sizes into context, in the American National Election Study (Gaziano, 2014), it has been estimated that education has an effect of 𝛽=−0.139 and income has an effect of 𝛽=0.124 on right-wing ideology, after controlling for age, race, and gender. Intelligence has a correlation with political belief that is comparable if not greater than the correlations between belief and measures of SES commonly studied by political scientists.
Although IQ is known to be associated with political belief, it is not known why this is the case. The relationship between intelligence and political belief could be confounded or mediated by socioeconomic factors and environmental factors more broadly. In this study, we employ polygenic scores, within-family designs and controls to causally identify the direct effect of cognitive ability on political beliefs.
We might believe intelligence directly changes political beliefs. Political beliefs likely reflect our ethical values and our empirical beliefs, both of which might be altered by intelligence. Intelligence is related to greater general knowledge (Furnham & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2006), knowledge of economics (Caplan & Miller, 2010) and financial literacy (Lin & Bates, 2022). Moreover, intelligence may be related to subjective values, as it shows correlations with patience (Shamosh & Gray, 2008), openness (Anglim et al., 2022), “emotional intelligence” (MacCann et al., 2014) and moral judgement in the Defining Issues Test (Derryberry et al., 2007). Onraet et al. (2015) suggested that the use of stereotypes and socially conservative beliefs function as heuristics, utilizing fewer cognitive resources than thinking about social issues on a case-by-case base. This could cause lower cognitive ability to be associated with right-wing views."
This thread has been way more fruitful then anticipated. For a shitty troll I have you making a fool of yourself and high fiving your buddy out of desperation lol.
I'll make another thread about the dark triad and conservatism as well. As the weeks unfold you can get a better picture of the type of person you are and how others perceive you. Nothing hits like cold hard facts.
Yikes. Meltdown. Keep trying (badly) to convince yourself how smart you are. :-\
-
Yikes. Meltdown. Keep trying (badly) to convince yourself how smart you are. :-\
Right? Very entertaining though. :)
-
Right? Very entertaining though. :)
It's funny to watch. Kind of like a little kid when you tell them Santa isn't real. Goes into his room and gets his Santa toys, breaks out his Santa movies, shows you his Santa books, sings all the Santa songs, no matter how much you tell him he's wrong, he has all the evidence and the evidence wouldn't lie!!
-
It's funny to watch. Kind of like a little kid when you tell them Santa isn't real. Goes into his room and gets his Santa toys, breaks out his Santa movies, shows you his Santa books, sings all the Santa songs, no matter how much you tell him he's wrong, he has all the evidence and the evidence wouldn't lie!!
lol Good analogy. :)
-
You guys are trauma bonding from this beatdown HAHAHA.
I have never induced that before I don't think.
Thanks for the laughs boys, good banter.
-
Bumping for anyone who missed this savage beating of pure intellectual tiny tits. We have science denial, logical refutations, eating their words, back tracking and deflection, pure comprehension issues and finally victim trauma bonding in owning solidarity.
Should be stickied to be honest.
-
Bumping for anyone who missed this savage beating of pure intellectual tiny tits. We have science denial, logical refutations, eating their words, back tracking and deflection, pure comprehension issues and finally victim trauma bonding in owning solidarity.
Should be stickied to be honest.
You've made it sticky enough jerking your undeserved ego off.
-
You've made it sticky enough jerking your undeserved ego off.
The thing about really smart people is they don't have to repeatedly tell people how smart they are.
And when you "win" some kind of argument or debate, you don't have to repeatedly tell people.
Wealthy people don't typically show their wealth or talk about it.
There is a pattern.
-
The thing about really smart people is they don't have to repeatedly tell people how smart they are.
And when you "win" some kind of argument or debate, you don't have to repeatedly tell people.
Wealthy people don't typically show their wealth or talk about it.
There is a pattern.
We can tell in real life he has to hear the words "you're right" in order for any discussion to end. His friend group probably cringes when they see him coming.
-
The thing about really smart people is they don't have to repeatedly tell people how smart they are.
And when you "win" some kind of argument or debate, you don't have to repeatedly tell people.
Wealthy people don't typically show their wealth or talk about it.
There is a pattern.
It has been my experience that nouveau riche people are much more likely to make a big, showy deal about their wealth. "Old money", not so much.
-
It has been my experience that nouveau riche people are much more likely to make a big, showy deal about their wealth. "Old money", not so much.
I think that is generally true. Athletes, entertainers, and trust-fund babies fall into that category.
-
The thing about really smart people is they don't have to repeatedly tell people how smart they are.
And when you "win" some kind of argument or debate, you don't have to repeatedly tell people.
Wealthy people don't typically show their wealth or talk about it.
There is a pattern.
Accept the extraordinarily brilliant trump as he likes to self-proclaim. LOL.
You don't know what smart people are like, how could you?
I love that you boys came running though.
This thread is a masterclass. I just wish I had some more game opponents is all.
-
We can tell in real life he has to hear the words "you're right" in order for any discussion to end. His friend group probably cringes when they see him coming.
a victory lap lubricated by the tears of my victims!
-
It has been my experience that nouveau riche people are much more likely to make a big, showy deal about their wealth. "Old money", not so much.
Of course, it has zero to do with wealth and everything to do with the type of person. Dos Equis doesn't appear to understand this.
Trump brags about being worth many billions of dollars, has lavish frankly gauche decorations surrounding him and loves to talk about how successful he is. Even Dos equis uses the "he is one of the wealthiest men in the world" as if it gives him authority or means he is intelligent ffs. In some deranged argument from authority. Trump brags about how smart he is constantly and is serious, unlike me who uses it to get these muppets to meltdown because in a perverted inversion its what they see themselves to be deep down.
Personality dictates the variables mentioned, nothing else. People generally get upset about what they see in others because it's what they can't stand about themselves.
The boys have rigid default mode networks that are coupled with a malfunctioning salience network. Except the important stuff they are filtering is how to inflict maximum damage on the "outgroup".
-
Accept the extraordinarily brilliant trump as he likes to self-proclaim. LOL.
You don't know what smart people are like, how could you?
I love that you boys came running though.
This thread is a masterclass. I just wish I had some more game opponents is all.
Accept/except, learn the difference. This thread is a masterclass in exposing how your ego doesn't match your overinflated sense of AI induced intelligence.
-
Accept/except, learn the difference. This thread is a masterclass in exposing how your ego doesn't match your overinflated sense of AI induced intelligence.
oh no I am a lazy writer!
I love how you assume I must be using AI because you can't keep up, lolololol. It's very flattering to be honest. You would think with how much I read I would be better at writing, huh? odd.
This thread is a masterclass in using one's ego to destroy someone else's. You know that gnawing sense of ought that sometimes trickles through? that's me, your superego trying to help you become a whole person.
Let's use boolean logic, move from either/or to and/both and you will have made a huge stride in understanding things.
-
oh no I am a lazy writer!
Retard ::)
-
Retard ::)
Fail
-
Fail
Yes Agreed - You are a Complete & utter Failure.
-
Yes Agreed - You are a Complete & utter Failure.
Says the poor ol man.
-
Says the poor ol man.
::)
Pronoun Boy
-
1 I'm not all that bright, it's getting harder and harder to tell the players without a scorecard. so who are the ones on here who worship trump and who are the ones who see him for what he really is ? DUHH the lines are becoming blurred. ;) ;) ;) ;) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
Fail
We have gifted, fast reader, lazy writer, self diagnosed luddite, cognitively incurious, functionally illogical retard with an ego allergic to the truth. ::)
-
We have gifted, fast reader, lazy writer, self diagnosed luddite, cognitively incurious, functionally illogical retard with an ego allergic to the truth. ::)
Calm down, it's the middle of the day.