Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent

[320 Years of History]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

LOL...yeah sure

 

[The Great Goose]

 

[OldLady]

This is MY prediction: This thread will be deemed "baiting" and moved out of the CDZ.

I love me a strong liberal, don't get me wrong, but .... really. Have mercy on conservatives; they know not what they do.

 

[2aguy]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

And that is why some of the greatest scientific discoveries were made by men who believed in God......right?

And mass graves, 100 million men, women and children......filled by atheists who believed in science un checked by religious belief...... yeah...tell us again how smart atheists are....

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

Man, this stupid "study" comes around a couple times a year, like a case of herpes.

Can people please stop acting like this pseudoscinetific twaddle has any basis in objective facts?

 

[Onyx]

Liberals in my experience know more, but they understand nothing. Conservatives know less, but they.... nah, most of them do not really understand anything either.

While you are all dumbass tools, I would by lying if I told you that liberals were not generally more intelligent than conservatives.

 

[Onyx]

LOL...yeah sure

Your presence is only building upon his case.

 

[320 Years of History]

Thread Note/Reminder:

As implied in the OP, this is not the thread for you to internalize the findings of the paper. This is not the thread to do anything other than directly address the facts and conclusions drawn from them with equally rigorous arguments, not mere pronouncements of dissent. What that means is this thread exists for you to offer corroborating or dissenting ideas that directly pertain to :

• The study's methodology
• The interpretations applied to specific findings

....and that are supported with credible methodology and analysis of your own.

 

[sealybobo]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

And that is why some of the greatest scientific discoveries were made by men who believed in God......right?

And mass graves, 100 million men, women and children......filled by atheists who believed in science un checked by religious belief...... yeah...tell us again how smart atheists are....

How do you know they really believed? People didn't admit disbelief back then. Similar to how gays were in the closet.

And what about all the scientific discoveries by atheist?

And even if a theist discovers or invents something or is intelligent. Perhaps their experiencing cognitive dissonance and wishful thinking

 

[2aguy]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

And that is why some of the greatest scientific discoveries were made by men who believed in God......right?

And mass graves, 100 million men, women and children......filled by atheists who believed in science un checked by religious belief...... yeah...tell us again how smart atheists are....

How do you know they really believed? People didn't admit disbelief back then. Similar to how gays were in the closet.

And what about all the scientific discoveries by atheist?

And even if a theist discovers or invents something or is intelligent. Perhaps their experiencing cognitive dissonance and wishful thinking

the international socialists and national socialists were atheist.......some of the German version were pagan's but the greatest mass murderers were atheist socialists....

 

[320 Years of History]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

And that is why some of the greatest scientific discoveries were made by men who believed in God......right?

And mass graves, 100 million men, women and children......filled by atheists who believed in science un checked by religious belief...... yeah...tell us again how smart atheists are....

That one or several atheists or theists, liberals or conservatives exhibits or fails to exhibit intelligence is not the point of the study nor of this thread. Please offer remarks or thoughts that are in keeping with the context and scope of the study.

 

[esthermoon]

Honestly I don't think intelligence has anything to do with political and religious views
Scientists can be mistaken like anybody else.
Maybe Dr. Kanazawa's study is wrong.

 

[2aguy]

Honestly I don't think intelligence has anything to do with political and religious views
Scientists can be mistaken like anybody else.
Maybe Dr. Kanazawa's study is wrong.

Not maybe...is wrong.

 

[sealybobo]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

And that is why some of the greatest scientific discoveries were made by men who believed in God......right?

And mass graves, 100 million men, women and children......filled by atheists who believed in science un checked by religious belief...... yeah...tell us again how smart atheists are....

How do you know they really believed? People didn't admit disbelief back then. Similar to how gays were in the closet.

And what about all the scientific discoveries by atheist?

And even if a theist discovers or invents something or is intelligent. Perhaps their experiencing cognitive dissonance and wishful thinking

the international socialists and national socialists were atheist.......some of the German version were pagan's but the greatest mass murderers were atheist socialists....

Atheism had nothing to do with it. Unless they were killing annoying theists or perhaps defending themselves.

And the German sheep were Catholics. Hitler may have believed in pagens but the Germans who killed for him were Catholics and last I checked those are Christians.

If not, tell us the time in German history where the German people left Catholicism and then when did they come back to it? Never saw this on the history channel

 

[320 Years of History]

Honestly I don't think intelligence has anything to do with political and religious views Scientists can be mistaken like anybody else. Maybe Dr. Kanazawa's study is wrong.

Red:
Well, what credible basis have you for thinking that? Gut feelings alone -- no matter what engenders them -- are not credible bases for refuting that which has been empirically established and gone through the double-blind peer review process that is required by manuscripts submitted for publication in Social Psychology Quarterly.

 

[OldLady]

Thread Note/Reminder:

As implied in the OP, this is not the thread for you to internalize the findings of the paper. This is not the thread to do anything other than directly address the facts and conclusions drawn from them with equally rigorous arguments, not mere pronouncements of dissent. What that means is this thread exists for you to offer corroborating or dissenting ideas that directly pertain to :

• The study's methodology
• The interpretations applied to specific findings

....and that are supported with credible methodology and analysis of your own.

320, you can take all the fun out of the most interesting topics.

Scientific journals once published studies on phrenology, too. Anti-feminism articles by scholars abounded:
Opponents of women's entry into institutions of higher learning argued that education was too great a physical burden on women. In Sex in Education: or, a Fair Chance for the Girls (1873), Harvard professor Edward Clarke predicted that if women went to college, their brains would grow bigger and heavier, and their wombs would atrophy.[26]

Just because it's in a scholarly journal doesn't make it right, is my point.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

Honestly I don't think intelligence has anything to do with political and religious views
Scientists can be mistaken like anybody else.
Maybe Dr. Kanazawa's study is wrong.

Intelligence is broadly distributed throughout all political affiliations and religious beliefs, through no more complicated measure than the law of averages.

This tired old hogwash "study" makes the rounds a few times every year, on numerous social media platforms. It's no more true today than the day it was squeezed out the sphincter of it's author.

 

[320 Years of History]

The data Dr. Kanazawa used and analyzed clearly show a material and positive correlation between intelligence and atheism/liberal political ideology. Dr. Kanazawa, in addressing the correlation between intelligence and atheism and liberal political stances, plainly states, "behavior genetic explanations, while undoubtedly true, cannot explain the origin of covariance between general intelligence and certain values."

It is worth noting that Dr. Kanazawa's research does not establish causation between general intelligence** and liberalism, atheism or monogamy. Instead, what his study did was test the Savanna Principle, which broadly speaking states that increased intelligence, like physiological or morphological changes, is an evolutionary adaptation in humans and it's one that allows the species to meet/best the circumstances that we face.

I found the study interesting in that the hypothesis Dr. Kanazawa tested to determine whether there is a correlation between general intellect and liberalism, atheism or monogamy is borne out anecdotally.

• States ranked by the combination of IQ, SAT and ACT scores
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Ten Smartest States in the U.S.
  The data presented in this analysis come from the American Community Survey from the Census (2010-2014). The dimensions used are:
  • Percentage of adults with at least a college education (Higher is smarter)
  • Percentage of teenagers that are high school dropouts (Lower is smarter)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Most and least educated cities in America (2016) -- This listing is interesting in that some of the cities listed almost certainly gain placement on the list as a result of their being (1) small as cities go and (2) so-called college towns. Provo, for example, strikes me as such an area for it's population is ~115K, but ~33K of those folks are Brigham Young University students, thus the proportionate quantity of individuals who have some education beyond high school is going to be far higher than one would find in a larger city. The same dynamic is surely in play with Ann Arbor and Durham-Chapel HIll. By comparison, D.C. and Silicon Valley earn their places on the list by having industries that demand large quantities of workers who have advanced degrees.
  
  Why any given city has more or fewer well educated people notwithstanding, the fact remains that one's being more educated demonstrably shows a level of general intelligence** that is formally and empirically proven for folk who are not formally educated beyond high school. (If that were not so, there'd be no point in assigning grades to measure academic performance in school; merely having been in school would be sufficient.)
  
  The list:
  • 10 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
  • 9 Austin-Round Rock, TX
  • 8 Provo-Orem, UT
  • 7 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA
  • 6 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH
  • 5 Madison, WI
  • 4 Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
  • 3 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA (essentially Silicon Valley)
  • 2 Washington, D.C.
  • 1 Ann Arbor, MI

Looking at the facts gathered using a variety of measures and observations of the populace (not sample, even very large ones, such as the ones Dr. Kanazawa used) and then comparing those observations with similarly high level political ideology maps, one sees a very similar pattern of correlation to the one Dr. Kanazawa and his team found extant in his far more precise and empirically sound research.




Does the anecdotal or empirical evidence indicate there are no intelligent conservatives or that liberals are universally intelligent? Of course not. I think at best, the data and research show that liberals are more likely to arrive at their conclusions via logical/sound reasoning rather than via emotionally driven reasoning. I think another implication is that rationally based arguments are more likely in general to resonate with liberals than with conservatives. Of course, poorly educated and/or unintelligent liberals are no more likely to apply sound reasoning nor more likely to be swayed by rational arguments than are poorly educated and/or unintelligent conservatives. Thus at the end of the day, it's merely a matter than liberals overall and by quantity happen to, in general, be smarter and/or better educated than conservatives, which in turn yields the results shown in the study and anecdotally.

**Note:

General intelligence refers to the ability to reason deductively or inductively, think abstractly, use analogies, synthesize information, and apply it to new domains.​

 

[Uncensored2008]

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa has spent a his life researching the correlation between intelligence and a wide variety of vastly more demonstrable human traits and behaviors. Even the most cursory look at his CV reveals that he is not at all reticent to critically examine the socio-psychological behaviors that to many are deemed sacrosanct, and he doesn't mind stirring the pot by titling his papers controversially, often using blunt laymen's language rather than arcane academic lingo.

• Intelligence and physical attractiveness
  
• Intelligence and homosexuality
  
• A longitudinal study of sex differences in intelligence at ages 7, 11 and 16 years
  
• Why night owls are more intelligent
  
• Mating intelligence and general intelligence as independent constructs
  
• De gustibus est disputandum [I particularly like this paper's title.]
  
• Why we love our children
  
• Why father absence might precipitate early menarche: the role of polygyny
  
• Why monogamy?
  
• Theories of the value of children: a new approach

But, as interesting be the papers noted above and others he's written, the one this is about is the one noted in the title. Read the paper to find out why it's title as it is and what Dr. Kanazawa found and how he found it. His work speaks for itself.

If you have some credible basis for refuting his findings, by all means do share. If you just don't agree because you don't like his findings, or for a different vacuous reason, this is not the thread for you to share that about yourself.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Obvious troll post is obvious...