11–20 of 91 posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_...
Would be interesting to plot average IQ against the percentage of population that go to college.
In Poland, the Germans seem to have been selected as both "Most Trustworthy" and "Least Trustworthy".
Not very, points at me.
That said, get a degree if you can. It will help you in the job market, and if you for some reasons don't pursuit a degree for any random reasons - you will still have the background leading up to this point in time which can count as experience.
It's obviously anecdotical but I know both many smart persons without higher level education and many 'not-so-bright' persons with university degrees. However, all those with degrees have parents with degrees and those without come from lower class, for the lack of better term, families. If your parents have never set foot in an university and worked manual labor all their live, you are less likely to even consider h…
> If your parents have never set foot in an university and worked manual labor all their live, you are less likely to even consider higher education. That’s not what I have perceived in developing countries. Usually those kind of parents work very hard precisely to allow their children to go to university and have the life they didn’t have. They don’t want their children to work like their parents.
Conscientious matters most, and I would wager is overly represented in those of average to below average intelligence — compared to above and beyond.
A provocative corollary: “but what about genius PhDs/professors/researchers” I would say being born in the upper middle class, but of middling intelligence, will make the path straight forward, requiring no great intellect.
Is IQ everything that counts? Does the family's social class count or not? Does the socioeconomic situation of the state, country, neighborhood count or not? Does fashions, wars, crises, recessions, mass layoffs, drugs permitted by states, industrial changes, friends, political changes, city councils, police and judges, corruption, monetary funds, teachers, management of study centers, laws, banks and what not... cou…
I think it's a good tool when looking a two groups or looking at performances over time.
But it could be biased, for example when he say PhD IQ fall when enrollment is higher, measuring the quality of the work would've been better.
Also IQ don't give you any hint of causation. Maybe IQ drop because of school quality? Screen time? Physical activity drop? Some widespread chemical? Lack of oportunity given the world environmental crisis?
There are many factors that could play a role.
Interesting, I didn't know about this effect. However the analysis seems to implicitly assume that a person's IQ remains constant as they move up the educational ladder. This does not seem right, assuming that education system works as it should (ie, exposing students to harder and harder issues over time), and also because people should still naturally develop intellectually after high school.
All sorts of side effects would come into play (or as they are already in play be increased) because it would be obvious that the people at the top of the socioeconomic ladder are there just because they are smarter than everybody else and the serfs should stop their whining.
What is actually wanted are
1. a potential score that remains pretty much even as you start to realize the potential, with decrease with age as it is supposed that potential decreases. This is actually pretty much the way IQ works. It would also be nice if potential could identify areas in which you had more potential.
2. an educational score across various areas.
3. an ability to apply 1 and 2 score.
functions that could calculate what education you should have further, cost / benefit analysis etc.
Has your ability to apply what you have learned increased by the amount expected given your potential, would, for example, be an interesting thing to track.
> How smart do you have to be to get a degree?
Not especially, what you have to be is hardworking and committed. You don't even need to show significant improvement; just an understanding of the subject material.
Of course this gets less true as you go up the degrees. (Batchelors requiring a broad rote understanding, Masters requiring a more detailed understanding and PhD requiring some sort of novelty that pushes the field forward).
However there's a saying: "Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard".
I have lived this.
My sister is not smart. That may seem unkind but she would be one of the first to admit this. Things do not come to her easily, she has a hard time recognising patterns and lacks a certain level of "common sense". She is extremely motivated though. Thorough and hardworking.
I have had the fortune of being quite gifted, I test well and have a great propensity to solve novel puzzles. I, however, procrastinate and am easily distractible.
She has a degree, I do not.
Intelligence had nothing to do with it. Being hardworking did.
These results are to be expected, if IQ is normally distributed, but we push more people into obtaining university degrees. The value of a university degree has severely deteriorated since every white collar job essentially requires having one and it will continue getting worse. I would assume that it's worse in the US than in Europe, because in EU it seems that education is less commercialized and you can get a degr…
If you now have to have a degree just to make it to the 40th percentile of the earning bracket that surely means it is more required than ever, and thus worth more.
