No. I consider myself libertarian but I would never make this claim. Neuroscience has taught us quite a bit about human nature. One thing that libertarian philosophy argues is that humans are rational decision makers. The fact is that we are neurologically built to make decisions based on emotions. Our rational oversight is simply a mechanism by which we can weigh pros and cons in order to sway our emotions. However, it is still our emotions, not our rationality, that make decisions. While libertarians have probably the most optimistic view of human nature, it is just as naive as any other. Humans are animals, not intrinsically good or bad, but also not entirely rational. We are pretty much all using the same brain we had 50,000 years ago as cavemen in a modern world. While socially and conceptually advanced compared to other animals, we are still driven by the same mechanisms that kept us alive for hundreds of thousands of years.
The second study is conducted by the same guy. Again, I'm asking for something more than a link to an abstract mentioning a study that focuses on a tiny subset of the country.
Again, you haven't really provided anything. Even if we pretend that a small group of white adolescent atheists have an IQ that's a couple points higher than white adolescent religious people, that doesn't indicate anything about religious groups as a whole. Moreover, even if we assume that the average atheist has an IQ that's a few points higher than the average Christian, that doesn't support the ridiculous arguments made by Shewolf. The difference between someone with an IQ of 105 and someone with an IQ of 100 is nearly imperceptible. Her experiences are not the result of IQ differences, but of confirmation bias.
There are lots of links.. but like I said. It pretty much confirmed something that I always sort of felt.. a lot of people raised extremely religious, don't have critical thinking skills and have been sheltered, told what to think, etc. Not all Christians are naive of course, but when you run into one.... better watch out! I have little patience and tolerance for "stupid" people... and some of them, it's like everything you say flies right over their head. It's like talking to a brick wall.. waste of time.. completely void of critical thinking skills, and they are full of indoctrinated rebuttals.
It doesn't indicate anything about religious groups as a whole... it just indicates that there are some people in those said religious groups with significantly higher iqs dragging down the mean. Some Christians are really smart, but if you meet any of these dummies you'll know it.
Maybe you should try again, as you were the one responding to my point. Why do firms prefer central planning?
You realize that it's not possible for you to actually observe a difference between someone with a 105 IQ and a 100 IQ, right? Your own anecdotal observations don't indicate anything.
How do you know it isn't possible? Just becase it is within a standard deviation does not mean it isn't observabe.
And there are plenty of stupid atheists dragging down the intelligent ones. Funny how large groups work like that.
That is true.. but atheists are stupid for different reasons..
There was another study by Satoshi Kanazawa
The latest study saying that liberals and atheists are smarter than conservatives and believers
I'm saying that when someone says "Oh, Christians are on average dumb, I can tell because I talked with them and they're dumb," they don't know what they're talking about.
Not all Christians are dumb.. haha. My uncle is a Christian and he is one of the smartest people I know.. He might even be smarter than any atheist, I know.
You realize that the link you posted is from a blog pointing out a multitude of flaws in that study, right?
How do you know it isn't possible? Just because it is within a standard deviation does not mean it isn't observable.
Share your reasoning with your uncle and see what he thinks.
I'm saying that when someone says "Oh, Christians are on average dumb, I can tell because I talked with them and they're dumb," they don't know what they're talking about.
It's not likely because both 100 and 105 are with in the standard deviation.
If you add in a margin of error, the person with the tested 100 IQ could actually be slightly more intelligent.
I mean, come on. If you meet enough Christians like that, I imagine you would begin to wonder if intelligent ones actually do exist.
No, I understand the difference between anecdotal evidence and actual evidence.
it may be insulting and it may be hyperbolic but as to its accuracy.... who can know? there has never been a libertarian society. partly because the term is oxymoronic.
or am i mistaken?
geo.
Margin of error? IQ tests are normed.
Anecdotal evidence is still evidence. It just isn't highly representative evidence.
If I tried to argue that left handed people were on average idiots because most of the left handed people I knew were idiots, that would be pretty dumb. This is little better.
If I tried to argue that left handed people were on average idiots because most of the left handed people I knew were idiots, that would be pretty dumb. This is little better.
"LEAVE ME ALONE."
Therefore, libertarianism is the antithesis of zealotry.
I would argue that libertariansim is zealotry, ie. the austrian school of economics. They have a fanatical devotion to a single cause, a "free" market.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?