Continuing Rant Thread - Get it Off Ya Chest here

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
gas guyz
Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum

Help Support Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I've no problem with the votes and how they were counted.

I do have a problem with the foreign interference and money used to drive the campaign.
 
good4whatAlesU said:
Human politics are intertwined with our evolution as a species (physical and mental) and our progress (or lack there of) are inextricably linked.

Advanced capitalism and democracy are poor bed-fellows. Equal rights for all are not compatible with the mega- money makers.
Click to expand...


Again, you've missed me. I'm not disputing what you are saying - I'm suggesting that developing political and social systems based on a flawed interpretation of a biological phenomenon are fundamentally suspect.
 
good4whatAlesU said:
Advanced Capitalism thrives in despite of democracy, not because of it. That's because the democratic process is broken.

I need not point out the obvious example.
Click to expand...

If the obvious example you allude to is the US, then as we know, its technically a republic, not a democracy. The fact that we're holding a plebiscite, and have done through out Australian history, is as democratic as it gets. At least at face value.
Though in reality its just a case of 'the people have spoken' no matter what the result. Hence a giant, expensive gay wank.
 
The US is both a republic and a democracy:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...public-or-a-democracy/?utm_term=.be62df99d9a8

Survival of the fittest is biological selection based on suitability to the physical environment. My analogy is that we have an "environment" where greed and money gets you places. The ruling class is "selecting' people to govern who have those characteristics (or who can be influences to rule in favour of the desired characteristics).
 
Like I said - I wasn't disputing your analogy. I also got it so no need to explain the detail.
 
good4whatAlesU said:
The US is both a republic and a democracy:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...public-or-a-democracy/?utm_term=.be62df99d9a8

Survival of the fittest is biological selection based on suitability to the physical environment. My analogy is that we have an "environment" where greed and money gets you places. The ruling class is "selecting' people to govern who have those characteristics (or who can be influences to rule in favour of the desired characteristics).
Click to expand...

The bottom line is greed and money do get you places. But it always seem to be the other guy / country / group whos greedy.
You should, if you haven't already, read Coming Apart and The Bell Curve by Charles Murray and Richard Herrnsteinn- or cheat like me and do the audiobook thing.
When we say 'ruling class' we're really saying the "cognitive elite" - dumb people dont typically govern countries.. The uncomfortable truth is the divide between the classes more to do with the incontrovertible link between intelligence and personal success, higher income, social stability and so on. Like it or not, countries with the lowest IQ scores also tend to share the lowest standards of living for their citizens.
Wealth distribution or Marxism wont save you if your country is still at the level of public executions, medieval theocracy and tribalism.
 
Not sure I entirely agree on the intelligence argument. Money can be inherited .. Consider George Bush for example ... intelligence is not a word I would use in reference to that individual, yet he had great influence.

An intelligent person can go after 'money and influence' if they desire. But they could also go after other things.

A greedy person will always go after money. Not only that, they will use influence to create a non-level playing field.

Edit: Put it this way, rich greedy people can buy intelligence (lawyers, advisors). They don't, per se, need to have it themselves.
 
For what you're talking about above, intelligence = education.
"Natural" or genetic intelligence is somewhat of a fallacy. Across the human population there's definitely variance, but the vast majority of the population is fairly equal. Access to good education/resources and a supportive/encouraging (home) environment is what differentiates who ends up with what level of "intelligence".
So in terms of the nature/nurture debate, the nature side has been largely debunked in terms of "intelligence" outcome. (Eg: studies showing parents of high IQ don't necessarily produce children of high IQ).

So forms the basis of prioritising a good education system to the *entire* population, rather then a/any select group.

But hey, let's endlessly debate whether everyone should be allowed to have equal rights for marriage instead.
(Re: General reality, not necessarily the convo on here)
 
Yup. Greedy people (not necessarily incredibly intelligent people), hiring in (paying big money) to get the intelligence and strategy to win. Money talks. Puppets can be placed in strategic positions.

Look at the NSW Water Issue (Murray Darling Issue) .. puppets were in place. The politically correct words were said .. the wrong deeds were done.
 
technobabble66 said:
For what you're talking about above, intelligence = education.
"Natural" or genetic intelligence is somewhat of a fallacy. Across the human population there's definitely variance, but the vast majority of the population is fairly equal. Access to good education/resources and a supportive/encouraging (home) environment is what differentiates who ends up with what level of "intelligence".
So in terms of the nature/nurture debate, the nature side has been largely debunked in terms of "intelligence" outcome. (Eg: studies showing parents of high IQ don't necessarily produce children of high IQ).

So forms the basis of prioritising a good education system to the *entire* population, rather then a/any select group.

But hey, let's endlessly debate whether everyone should be allowed to have equal rights for marriage instead.
(Re: General reality, not necessarily the convo on here)
Click to expand...

Actually the opposite is true. Intelligence strongly correlated with hereditary, estimated up to 80%. Genetic variation, malnutrition and disease aside, environment plays little to no role in IQ. The jury isn't out on this, its simply a conclusion based on mountains of evidence and years of research.
If you could truly influence intelligence to a meaningful degree via environmental factors, we would be up to our necks in nobel laureates.
No amount of high pressure parenting and after school tutoring will turn a child with perfectly ordinary smarts into the next Stephen Hawking.
 
Dave70 said:
Actually the opposite is true. Intelligence strongly correlated with hereditary, estimated up to 80%. Genetic variation, malnutrition and disease aside, environment plays little to no role in IQ. The jury isn't out on this, its simply a conclusion based on mountains of evidence and years of research.
If you could truly influence intelligence to a meaningful degree via environmental factors, we would be up to our necks in nobel laureates.
No amount of high pressure parenting and after school tutoring will turn a child with perfectly ordinary smarts into the next Stephen Hawking.
Click to expand...


Would a car accident do it?

Yeah, I know.
 
The reality is that the major proportion of the world's population is at or below average intelligence levels.
If Hawkins is 200 or more IQ, than it takes a lot of dumbos to drag the average back up to 90 or 95, seeing as those down in the 60s or less are sadly Downs or just plain idiots.
Do the maths.
I know what my IQ is, and I'm not saying.
 
warra48 said:
The reality is that the major proportion of the world's population is at or below average intelligence levels.
If Hawkins is 200 or more IQ, than it takes a lot of dumbos to drag the average back up to 90 or 95, seeing as those down in the 60s or less are sadly Downs or just plain idiots.
Do the maths.
I know what my IQ is, and I'm not saying.
Click to expand...

Can I say Warra, don't underestimate the nous of those with Down Syndrome and other disabilities.....they may not be able to give the IQ test a good go, but they have a great instinctual understanding of what may be going on in their lives and around them. And from observations in the field, even those who may be considered 'just plain idiots' can be victims of circumstances, where lack of an achieving and supportive environment growing up does have an impact on their intelligence.
 
warra48 said:
The reality is that the major proportion of the world's population is at or below average intelligence levels.
If Hawkins is 200 or more IQ, than it takes a lot of dumbos to drag the average back up to 90 or 95, seeing as those down in the 60s or less are sadly Downs or just plain idiots.
Do the maths.
I know what my IQ is, and I'm not saying.
Click to expand...
The average IQ is always 100 warra.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top