Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 245 posts

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#221

Post by WalterBright »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #219
WalterBright wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact is that other nations simply have not done those things that make America special That's right. They chose not to. > most people certainly don't have the means to improve it There are many, many historical examples of individuals of no means rising to strongly influence and even command a nation. There are also many examples of citizens toppling their government and replacing it. You know, like the America…

None of those are the least bit relevant at the individual level. You sound like you subscribe to the "great man" theory of history. That theory is, quite frankly, bunk. No man is an island, and one, single person can't accomplish anything meaningful without the support of others. You allude to this in another comment, but I do know who you are, and, no, you didn't build that. Everything you accomplished was built on…

> Everything you accomplished was built on the backs of what people who came before you did, and you got lucky to end up in such a privileged position to be able to even have some of the opportunities you had, much less take advantage of them.

Yeah, if I'd just watched TV the whole time, the outcome would have been the same. Right?

> single person can't accomplish anything meaningful without the support of others.

Great men go out and get the support of others.

Do you think Apple would have existed without Steve Jobs? SpaceX/Tesla without Musk? The Soviet Union without Lenin? The Church of England without Henry 8? The US without Washington? Why is the US so different from the other North and South American nations? The Haber process without Haber?

Do you know about Norman Borlaug, who is credited with saving over a BILLION lives?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug

There are great men, and they have great influence over history.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#222

Post by neetle »

WalterBright wrote: post #210
neetle wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that they came across the start up in the first place had no element of luck? The fact that they were born with the genetics to be smart enough to contribute to it was fully within their control? The fact that they weren't killed in a car accident when they were 12 was due to their agency? Success is mostly attributable to luck, and ignoring that is just an exercise in outsized ego & shows a sense of agency…

> The fact that they came across the start up in the first place had no element of luck? Did they "come across" it in their mom's basement? > The fact that they were born with the genetics to be smart enough to contribute to it was fully within their control? You don't need to be a genius to be successful. Doing drugs and alcohol is also sure to reduce your smarts. > The fact that they weren't killed in a car acciden…

> Did they "come across" it in their mom's basement?

No, they came across it by being in the right place at the right time, supported by habits and behaviours that were mostly determined by their environment.

> You don't need to be a genius to be successful. Doing drugs and alcohol is also sure to reduce your smarts.

Some people are just not born with the brains to "make it". I know people who will never be able to contribute to a high growth field like ours who are excellent nurses, childcare workers and teachers. This, yet again, isn't decided by agency but by circumstance.

> You can blame your parents for your life up until 18. After that, it's up to you.

I'll remember that the next time a drunk driver tbones me.

> Baloney. Successful people 1) make their own luck 2) make it easy for luck to find them.

Our attitudes, talents and disposition are a sum of the actions we have taken, and experiences that have influenced us. Those actions are informed by our previous attitudes, talents and disposition. The experiences aren't in our control completely either. It's a feedback loop that we have minimal control over.

You can't honestly tell me that you'd come to the exact same conclusion that you are now if you hadn't had gone through what made you you. Just as I couldn't claim to come to my conclusion if I didn't have my experiences.

You're obviously successful mate. Just remember that even if some people can make it to your position, that doesn't mean everyone will. Most people do the best they can given the hand they're dealt, and that's okay. Enjoy your full house.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#223

Post by WalterBright »

neetle wrote: post #222
WalterBright wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that they came across the start up in the first place had no element of luck? Did they "come across" it in their mom's basement? > The fact that they were born with the genetics to be smart enough to contribute to it was fully within their control? You don't need to be a genius to be successful. Doing drugs and alcohol is also sure to reduce your smarts. > The fact that they weren't killed in a car acciden…

> Did they "come across" it in their mom's basement? No, they came across it by being in the right place at the right time, supported by habits and behaviours that were mostly determined by their environment. > You don't need to be a genius to be successful. Doing drugs and alcohol is also sure to reduce your smarts. Some people are just not born with the brains to "make it". I know people who will never be able to c…

> You can't honestly tell me that you'd come to the exact same conclusion that you are now if you hadn't had gone through what made you you.

Yeah, I can. There is nothing particularly special about me or my background (lower middle class). I know lots of people with the same attitudes I have - all have survived failure and went on to success.

> I'll remember that the next time a drunk driver tbones me.

My dad told me he was once driving on a 2 lane country road, when a drunk passed him at high speed in a corvette. There was a stop light up ahead, and the drunk stopped at the light. My dad cautiously stopped about a quarter mile behind him. Good thing he did, because the drunk took off at full throttle in reverse.

More generally, there is a technique called "defensive driving", which is not merely following the traffic laws, but keeping an eye out for threats. I don't drive drunk, I don't get in a car with drunk drivers, I watch for erratic drivers and stay well clear, I wear my seat belt tight at all times (that one saved my life), and when I brake I check my rear view mirror, and have pulled off on the shoulder as the driver behind me hit the guy in front of me. I look both ways when crossing an intersection, even when I've got the green. I stay off the road on New Years Eve, and am generally on extra alert on the road after the bars close.

> It's a feedback loop that we have minimal control over.

You can change your thoughts and attitudes. They are under your control.

People aren't doing the best they can if they believe their lives are victims of chance rather than consequences of their choices.

I bet if I knew the details of your life, I could point out the choices you made that decided things for you.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#224

Post by SamoyedFurFluff »

WalterBright wrote: post #217
wadd1e wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been reading your replies in this thread, and I'd highly recommend you to just take a moment and reflect on what you've been suggesting to other commenters. Your replies have been ignorant at best and pure nonesense at worst. I'd elaborate but I don't have the time and energy to justify myself, so I understand if you take this with a grain of salt, but I wanted to let you know nonetheless.

You're welcome to express your opinion. I'm not interested in defeatism. It doesn't work for me, and I've never seen it work for other people. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of people who took responsibility for their lives, and thereby improved them dramatically. If I may assign you some homework: 1. what do you want to accomplish in life? 2. what are you going to do about it? I know the current popular narrati…

Here’s something that puts a wrench in your idea: disabled people exist and are often denied immigration explicitly because of their disabled status. Statistically everyone is simply not yet disabled. Some people are just disabled earlier in life than others, permanently affecting their capacity for work, immigration, or other self improvement without external assistance (such as medical intervention, without which they would die). In the disability community there’s a lot of just plain luck: how severe is your condition? How much support can your family supply? Are you in a country with a robust healthcare system? Are you able to afford medication, or are you able to dedicate the time to fight for medication, medical equipment, etc? Does your country have accessibility laws?

And before you call this defeatism: actually pushing harder than is realistic usually makes disability much worse! It’s instead important to realistically understand what’s available to you and frankly speak upon factors beyond your control. Otherwise people end up despairing and killings themselves way more, because they keep setting up expectations and blaming themselves when their circumstances prevent them from doing things they used to do before their disability.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#225

Post by neetle »

WalterBright wrote: post #223
neetle wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did they "come across" it in their mom's basement? No, they came across it by being in the right place at the right time, supported by habits and behaviours that were mostly determined by their environment. > You don't need to be a genius to be successful. Doing drugs and alcohol is also sure to reduce your smarts. Some people are just not born with the brains to "make it". I know people who will never be able to c…

> You can't honestly tell me that you'd come to the exact same conclusion that you are now if you hadn't had gone through what made you you. Yeah, I can. There is nothing particularly special about me or my background (lower middle class). I know lots of people with the same attitudes I have - all have survived failure and went on to success. > I'll remember that the next time a drunk driver tbones me. My dad told me…

> I know lots of people with the same attitudes I have - all have survived failure and went on to success.

Yes, however those attitudes aren't derived from the ether are they? They'd be informed by circumstance and background. You can "choose" to take an attitude towards something much like a rock "chooses" to fall when dropped. If your prior beliefs and experiences would have led you down the same rationalisation for that choice every time, is it actually a choice?

> re: defensive driving Defensive driving covers both how to avoid bad situations and how to recover from them IIRC. The implication there being that defensive driving is risk mitigation, not elimination. You're still relying on factors outside of your control to keep yourself safe.

> You can change your thoughts and attitudes. They are under your control.

idk man, hormones are a bitch and genetics predisposing people to addiction and suicide say otherwise. You do the best you can, but looking at every situation and stating that everything is a consequence of choice is assuming that some people's faculties aren't compromised from the start. Things like CBT can help, but not everyone is self aware enough to understand that cognitive distortions exist let alone treat them.

> People aren't doing the best they can if they believe their lives are victims of chance rather than consequences of their choices.

I'm sure you would find dozens of people per successful person with the same mindset as you described, purely due to a knowledge or talent gap. They'd see the same choice, make the wrong one where we'd make the right one and then suffer for it. Feedback loop, little control.

> I bet if I knew the details of your life, I could point out the choices you made that decided things for you.

So could I, but only because I made the bad choices based on the available information and influences in the first place. It's a feedback loop.

I mean, I eat dinner every night now so it's not like I'm not successful.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#226

Post by WalterBright »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #224
WalterBright wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're welcome to express your opinion. I'm not interested in defeatism. It doesn't work for me, and I've never seen it work for other people. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of people who took responsibility for their lives, and thereby improved them dramatically. If I may assign you some homework: 1. what do you want to accomplish in life? 2. what are you going to do about it? I know the current popular narrati…

Here’s something that puts a wrench in your idea: disabled people exist and are often denied immigration explicitly because of their disabled status. Statistically everyone is simply not yet disabled. Some people are just disabled earlier in life than others, permanently affecting their capacity for work, immigration, or other self improvement without external assistance (such as medical intervention, without which t…

Usually I preface comments of mine on this topic with "legally consenting adults with a reasonably sound mind and body."

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#227

Post by WalterBright »

neetle wrote: post #225
WalterBright wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't honestly tell me that you'd come to the exact same conclusion that you are now if you hadn't had gone through what made you you. Yeah, I can. There is nothing particularly special about me or my background (lower middle class). I know lots of people with the same attitudes I have - all have survived failure and went on to success. > I'll remember that the next time a drunk driver tbones me. My dad told me…

> I know lots of people with the same attitudes I have - all have survived failure and went on to success. Yes, however those attitudes aren't derived from the ether are they? They'd be informed by circumstance and background. You can "choose" to take an attitude towards something much like a rock "chooses" to fall when dropped. If your prior beliefs and experiences would have led you down the same rationalisation fo…

> however those attitudes aren't derived from the ether are they?

People choose their attitudes. I changed several of mine that were unhelpful.

> hormones are a bitch and genetics predisposing people to addiction and suicide say otherwise

I never said making choices was easy.

> I made the bad choices based on the available information and influences in the first place

It's always someone else's fault? The Marines have no tolerance for excuses. One takes responsibility. I'm not a Marine, but I admire them. I've had the privilege of working with some, and enjoyed their "no excuses" attitude and behavior. I'm not surprised the Marines are winners.

> it's not like I'm not successful

You also get to choose what success means for you.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#228

Post by neetle »

WalterBright wrote: post #227
neetle wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know lots of people with the same attitudes I have - all have survived failure and went on to success. Yes, however those attitudes aren't derived from the ether are they? They'd be informed by circumstance and background. You can "choose" to take an attitude towards something much like a rock "chooses" to fall when dropped. If your prior beliefs and experiences would have led you down the same rationalisation fo…

> however those attitudes aren't derived from the ether are they? People choose their attitudes. I changed several of mine that were unhelpful. > hormones are a bitch and genetics predisposing people to addiction and suicide say otherwise I never said making choices was easy. > I made the bad choices based on the available information and influences in the first place It's always someone else's fault? The Marines hav…

> People choose their attitudes. I changed several of mine that were unhelpful.

The literal idea that people can change is one you have to learn on either reflection or outside influence. You do realise that, right? If that idea isn't in your vocabulary, it just isn't an option.

>> hormones are a bitch and genetics predisposing people to addiction and suicide say otherwise

> I never said making choices was easy.

When in that position, the most "logical" choice is usually a hit or a noose. It feels like you ignored the point about reasoning capacity being compromised in the first place due to whatever reason. Alternatively - I met a street preacher who was convinced god wanted him to do things he didn't want to (homelessness, etc..). Did he meaningfully have a choice, or does this fall under the "no excuses" doctrine too?

>> I made the bad choices based on the available information and influences in the first place

> It's always someone else's fault?

I'm not asserting fault here. I'm just talking about state diagrams.

Are you implying that people can make choices without knowing they exist? You only learn about possibilities and consequences from either external influence or experience. The mere idea of "no excuses" expects people to grow from their _previous experience_. You know, taking feedback from previous experience and having it inform future ones. Coming to reasonable conclusions based on that experience. It's a feedback loop.

> You also get to choose what success means for you.

I mean, besides my issue with the whole choose thing yeah, expectations for success moderate what you consider successful.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#229

Post by WalterBright »

neetle wrote: post #228
WalterBright wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> however those attitudes aren't derived from the ether are they? People choose their attitudes. I changed several of mine that were unhelpful. > hormones are a bitch and genetics predisposing people to addiction and suicide say otherwise I never said making choices was easy. > I made the bad choices based on the available information and influences in the first place It's always someone else's fault? The Marines hav…

> People choose their attitudes. I changed several of mine that were unhelpful. The literal idea that people can change is one you have to learn on either reflection or outside influence. You do realise that, right? If that idea isn't in your vocabulary, it just isn't an option. >> hormones are a bitch and genetics predisposing people to addiction and suicide say otherwise > I never said making choices was easy. When…

> Are you implying that people can make choices without knowing they exist?

Yes.

> You only learn about possibilities and consequences from either external influence or experience.

You can choose to do research.

Re: The plateauing of cognitive ability among top earners

#230

Post by fsloth »

WalterBright wrote: post #218
fsloth wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that the sampling to enter the highest strata of top earners is also partly lottery. You get to a well paid engineering role by acing studies. But to transit from low-generational wealth to non-low generational wealth status requires you either to marry, found a company or be at the right position of an up and coming company. All of those are partly lottery - yes, you likely need to be of some talent to ent…

> But to transit from low-generational wealth to non-low generational wealth status requires you either to marry, found a company or be at the right position of an up and coming company. Steve Jobs founded the biggest company in the world financed by selling his Volkswagon. Bezos started in a garage. Dell started in a dorm room. The last time I founded a company, it cost me $30.

My intent was not to imply that founding a company is hard or expensive (just that creating a company that results in generational wealth is an unlikely proposition, if we take as the potential founder pool "those that statistically are likely to reach the swedish 60k limit").

It seems the above reads like something else - thanks for the clarification.

Post reply on HN