IQ Differences and Genetic Rot

[Deleted member 12248]

The difference between the average person and a mentally retarded person is about 20 IQ points. Anything less than 83 IQ is considered too low for even the military to accept you. So if the average is 105, then the difference between a genius and yourself is roughly 2 mentally retarded people away. Genius is considered 160 roughly speaking. Some men and women have had IQ's higher, but they have a hard time measuring IQ after 160. This isnt a real thought out post, I just can't stop thinking about that fact.

The US military uses IQ testing to determine potential recruits' cognitive abilities. the military forbids anyone with an IQ under 83 from joining. because their experience has shown that anyone with an IQ under 83 will be more of a liability than an asset to the military.

Smart people according to this system should have a bigger gap between you and them than you do to a mentally retarded individual. At least point-wise.

If it is true that high IQ people struggle more in society it may be a lonely feeling at the top in a sense, and they also tend to be hypersensitive to information and share autistic traits. I don't consider myself to have a high IQ, but stupid people do tend to be incredibly isolating. Its very hard to communicate effectively with a legitimately stupid person. And some stupid people are obviously liabilities.



8:55 Mark on the video

In this video I think Mr. Hyde highlights the insanity of stupid individuals being allowed to roam around in the same environment as genuinely intelligent people, midwits, and above average intelligence individuals. You could be having a conversation with somebody only to realize that the person you are talking to is absurdly slower than you in their processing. Imagine hiring someone only to realize that they are absurdly slow when you lose a day, maybe a week's profits because of an incompetent mistake. Its insanity.

What is even more terrifying to me is that overall IQ scores are going down. If I recall correctly the G-Factors are going down relating to IQ. G-Factors are basically the most signifigant representative of fluid intelligence if I correctly recall. This is likely due to natural selection being essentially removed from humans and allowing for people high in mutational load to reproduce when they otherwise should face harsher selection pressures.

Mutational load is going up in humans, and that literally means the number of genetic mutations in human beings. This is likely due to the industrial revolution because humans now have the ability to subsist off society. 82-84% of the genome goes towards the brain. However, the brain is a black box, and it's infinitely more complex than anything we have yet to study as far as I am aware. The genes that have specific tasks in the brain that become mutated are not getting washed out by natural selection, and therefore we are likely concurrently witnessing the genetic rotting of our species.

The solution to this is obviously:

Spoiler: Solution

Artificial Selection. By doing this we would hypothetically be able to improve the human species magnitudes faster than natural selection. It would be significantly less painful as well. Infinitely less death and suffering would be required to get to an ideal state of civilization. If everyone was walking around with highly conscientious and compassionate personalities, with high intelligence and obviously physically attractive features, everything would improve on a scale that has not been seen before.

Genetic Refinement on a massive scale would improve the quality of life for all future human beings. To get there, however, we collectively must admit that objectively good genes and objectively bad ones exist and that some people need to be prevented from reproducing legally or up the social stigma. Otherwise, we will end up in a worse situation than we are in now. The more intelligent and attractive members of the species will become more attractive and intelligent/genetically superior compared to the ever-increasing genetically inferior "caste" of individuals who are only becoming more spiteful by the day. It is most likely possible to get there as well. Most people agree that genetically deformed people and extreme narcissists should not have kids. Therefore the foot is already in the door. If a country decided to eliminate all genetically ill from their population, they could start implementing newer additions to the list of "You can't reproduce". Especially as the scientists start understanding more deeply how genetics work. Imagine if only people who were one standard deviation higher in IQ could reproduce tomorrow. You would have significantly less waste produced, your population would go down, and you have an excess in infrastructure and facilities left over from the "ghost generation". On top of that, the average individual who makes up the bulk of civilization would die out. Start throwing out unattractive traits like acne, recessed jawlines, balding genes, short stature, bad muscle insertions, and start overly expressing longevity/attractive genes. In 300 years your civilization would be exponentially farther than where it would have been. Even if law can't be passed due to corruption, then we should continue to elevate the difference on a social level. A breaking point must be reached in which only the most genetically fit reproduce and the genetically unfit just live out their lives until death in my opinion. Its not meant to be personal, I just think that only the top percent of people should reproduce honestly. If that means some of my good genes aren't passed on that is fine. I think the future of human experience is worth a lot more than my selfish motivations.

The ironic thing is that those types of people who will take the idea "you shouldn't be able to reproduce" offensively can't rationalize why that is offensive without admitting to the fact that it is their limbic system talking, not their rational mind. They want to reproduce because its a primitive drive that is ancient, not typically because they dream of parenthood.

 

[incel194012940]

low iq

 

[Deleted member 12248]

To be clear however, this all talking in terms of averages. There are exceptions. Sometimes unattractive people carry high intelligence. Sometimes Attractive people carry low intelligence. The general idea is to only throw good genes into the random gene RNG selector so only better and better results occur. This should easily be possible. It took very little time to convert wolves to dogs after all.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

low iq

is it? how?

 

[incel194012940]

is it? how?

because you are so obsessed with IQ you think it’s good enough reason for govt to breed people like cattle

 

[SexuallyAbusive]

 

[UglyGod360]

YOU ARE LITERALLY HITLER

​

NAZI SCUMBAG

 

[Deleted member 19453]

Think of a more creative solution. Breeding high intelligence people is such a basic and simple solution to the problem.

 

[jaw_is_law]

"just genocide people theory"

if your gonna use eugenics based off lookism and IQ that ultimately brings up race and ethnicity.
and what race and ethnicity is the ugliest and has the lowest IQ? eugenics is outdated, archaic and wrong, we have tried eugenics before for hundreds of years and it doesn't work and never will work. genuinely deformed people will never have kids anyway.

plus, we live in the day and age of plastic surgery, this is not the Middle Ages, if you have a recessed jaw, too short, balding, acne, crooked nose, you can fix that. And the scientific consensus regarding IQ has shown by a multitude of studies that IQ is more determined by your environment and epigenetic expressions and prenatal development, than it has to do with just genetics

everybody has good genetics for something, if they didn't then their ancestors would have been removed from the gene pool from natural selection millions of years ago

throughout history Hitler tried to genocide the jews, the European colonizers tried to genocide the native Americans for hundreds of years, America has a long history of eugenics and sterilization, people tried genocide autistic people and mentally ill people, now we are going to genocide uggos?

your idea of eugenics is archaic, wrong and immoral. you cannot sterilize or kill someone based off their looks the same way its wrong to sterilize or kill someone based on their race.

 

[Deleted member 21084]

Don't care

 

[Deleted member 12248]

"just genocide people theory"

if your gonna use eugenics based off lookism and IQ that ultimately brings up race and ethnicity.
and what race and ethnicity is the ugliest and has the lowest IQ? eugenics is outdated, archaic and wrong, we have tried eugenics before for hundreds of years and it doesn't work and never will work. genuinely deformed people will never have kids anyway.

plus, we live in the day and age of plastic surgery, this is not the Middle Ages, if you have a recessed jaw, too short, balding, acne, crooked nose, you can fix that. And the scientific consensus regarding IQ has shown by a multitude of studies that IQ is more determined by your environment and epigenetic expressions and prenatal development, than it has to do with just genetics

everybody has good genetics for something, if they didn't then their ancestors would have been removed from the gene pool from natural selection millions of years ago

throughout history Hitler tried to genocide the jews, the European colonizers tried to genocide the native Americans for hundreds of years, America has a long history of eugenics and sterilization, people tried genocide autistic people and mentally ill people, now we are going to genocide uggos?

your idea of eugenics is archaic, wrong and immoral. you cannot sterilize or kill someone based off their looks the same way its wrong to sterilize or kill someone based on their race.

incoherent response. IQ is undeniably influenced mostly by genetics. poverty causes a difference of roughly 15 iq points on average. So you are wrong and stupid for saying that "IQ is determined more by environment". I didn't have to mention race, it's irrelevant. there is not enough evidence to suggest any one "race" is inferior to another. Ideal phenotypes are achievable by any racial group. Those ideal phenotypes are representative of the ideal for those individual groups obviously. Eastern models have a different appeal compared to western ones. An AI can determine if a person is attractive or not based on the ethnic group they belong to and if enough data is provided.

everybody has good genetics for something, if they didn't then their ancestors would have been removed from the gene pool from natural selection millions of years ago

unbelievably wrong. I think of countless examples of people that exist that have no useful genes and it is because of mutational load. mutational load is determined by selective processes. HUMANS NO LONGER HAVE A SELECTIVE PROCESS. anytime that selective process dissolves, less capable animals are permitted to exist. genetics have been chiseled away by death for millions of years. it is undeniable. now we don't let death take the people who are genetically unfit. And they reproduce with one another. Only the most genetically fit people should reproduce. Its not meant to be mean. We can do it nicely. We don't have to kill anybody, you said that not me. Every ugly ass mofo should enjoy their life to the best of their ability. Same with stupid or ill people. I have known genetically ill people that I love dearly. Dont think they should pass on their genes though.

You clearly do not have a good grasp of how evolution works. The saying "life finds a way" is true in this sense: IF ONLY A CERTAIN TRAIT IS SELECTED FOR, THE SPECIES UNDER THAT SELECTIVE PRESSURE WILL OVER GENERATIONS ADAPT TO SHARE THAT TRAIT

Look man, I hate to break it to you, but most people already believe in eugenics and genocide. It's not meant to be evil or mean. Eugenics happens when organisms don't want to reproduce with another organism. 1 out of 2 of your ancestors were men, the rest obviously women. The reason it is not an equal ratio is that a lot of men did not reproduce and had to die to have those shitty traits eliminated from the gene pool. Men are mainly the ones being selected for by evolution, and that is ok.

"genuinely deformed people will never have kids anyway."



You can't fix a recessed jaw or acne or short stature on a genetic level without cutting it out of the gene pool. You are only crudely masking the problem with surgery. Most of the genetic mutations that really need to get washed out are in the brain, but we don't even know what they are exactly. Only death or not reproducing can fix the problem of genetic mutations in the brain until we fully understand the brain.

I can't kill or sterilize people, I know. Everyone for all of human history (except after the industrial revolution) already practices what I'm actually suggesting. Nobody should support genetically ill people having children, and they should go out of their way to criticize it. It should be illegal for someone who is genetically ill to have children. On average anyways. Some genetically ill people do actually have above-average traits, but not most of them. Ex: Steven Hawking, and many other geniuses. There is actually a link between mental illness and genius nature.

Most genetically ill/ugly/stupid people do not have good enough traits to outweigh their genetic problems. That is objectively true. I have nothing against them, if you are born that way you should live a fulfilling life. But I don't think people that are fucked up in some obviously genetic way should be allowed to spread that terrible illness onto their children for their own selfish reasons. It should be illegal.


What is good about eugenics?


Modern eugenics, better known as human genetic engineering, changes or removes genes to prevent disease, cure disease, or improve your body in some significant way. The potential health benefits of human gene therapy are staggering since many devastating or life-threatening illnesses could be cured.

Did you know that sperm banks carefully select for only the best donors? You aren't able to donate sperm unless you match a good criteria. They literally have a height requirement.

https://reproductivehealthwellness.com/sperm-donor-requirements/

 

[Cidre enjoyer]

"just genocide people theory"

if your gonna use eugenics based off lookism and IQ that ultimately brings up race and ethnicity.
and what race and ethnicity is the ugliest and has the lowest IQ? eugenics is outdated, archaic and wrong, we have tried eugenics before for hundreds of years and it doesn't work and never will work. genuinely deformed people will never have kids anyway.

plus, we live in the day and age of plastic surgery, this is not the Middle Ages, if you have a recessed jaw, too short, balding, acne, crooked nose, you can fix that. And the scientific consensus regarding IQ has shown by a multitude of studies that IQ is more determined by your environment and epigenetic expressions and prenatal development, than it has to do with just genetics

everybody has good genetics for something, if they didn't then their ancestors would have been removed from the gene pool from natural selection millions of years ago

throughout history Hitler tried to genocide the jews, the European colonizers tried to genocide the native Americans for hundreds of years, America has a long history of eugenics and sterilization, people tried genocide autistic people and mentally ill people, now we are going to genocide uggos?

your idea of eugenics is archaic, wrong and immoral. you cannot sterilize or kill someone based off their looks the same way its wrong to sterilize or kill someone based on their race.

Damn you are soy asf I didn’t excpect that
are you black or something

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Think of a more creative solution. Breeding high intelligence people is such a basic and simple solution to the problem.

The obvious solution is obvious. I don't need to get creative. It is a leftover coping mechanism that is preventing humanity from making unprecedented progress. We should naturally be selecting for top genetics. It is a modern phenomenon that we don't remove genetically unfit people from the gene pool. In ancient times we would call it the will of God. An ugly baby that was deformed was the result of something demonic. The societal rejects that were often ugly women made up the majority of Salem Witches. For most of human history, the genetic top selection was normal. Now it isn't. The industry needs workers, and numbers beat quality. The industrial revolution called for population increases and produced enough for that to be possible. However, the waste byproduct of 7 billion people is irreparably damaging. The human race is fat and overweight, and we need to lean out. Only the top people should pass on their genes as the collective humanity goes down in birth rate. Obviously. It's not just intelligence, it is in general genetic fitness. Genetic fitness is determined by the physical and mental capacity to do work, be compassionate and empathetic, and express what humans innately find most attractive. We should have for the next 100 years, no one who is obviously genetically ill be allowed to reproduce. Then in the next 100 years after that, only people who can keep up with average IQ and average healthy fitness markers can reproduce, then the next 100 years after that only the next standard deviation up from those markers should be allowed to reproduce. Because obviously good genes exist and bad genes exist. We should collectively agree to make the next generations smarter, more attractive, and more physically healthy than we were.

We should be striving for harmony and resisting entropy. Entropy is beginning to tear at human civilization and it is starting with genetics.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Damn you are soy asf I didn’t excpect that
are you black or something

I think incels tend to dislike the idea of not being selected, but they are also aware of how the world works to a specific extent. This dude clearly doesn't like the idea of superior genes existing.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Don't care

Why did you comment then

 

[Deleted member 12248]

because you are so obsessed with IQ you think it’s good enough reason for govt to breed people like cattle

I don't think I should breed people like cattle. You don't know how to read if you think I said that. I believe in genetic selection and living harmoniously within civilization and this world. We should take the responsibility of being hyper-intelligent compared to other animals very seriously. The best humans should go on to create the future gene pool so the odds are higher of obtaining geniuses and physically healthy people. If we don't select against genetically ill people the world will naturally become worse.

 

[Deleted member 19453]

We should take the responsibility of being hyper-intelligent compared to other animals very seriously.

Holy shit you said something smart

The obvious solution is obvious. I don't need to get creative.

I prefer solutions that indirectly fix the problem, directly not allowing people with bad genes to have kids is boring af. An example would be how in the purge they allow crime for 12 hours which controls population.

If we don't select against genetically ill people the world will naturally become worse.

True, that's why I think the ultimate end goal in life should be to grow your own food and live in isolation with no reliance on the rest of the world so that no matter how fucked it is, it doesn't effect you.

 

[Kingcel32]

Another day another retarded thread. same old same old looksmax.

Your idea is stupid, because while hypothetically it sounds good and makes sense, it simply will never work in reality. Good luck lmao

 

[Deleted member 8988]

am low iq and agree

 

[Nation]

My iq is certified 79. There isnt anything that raise your iq, nootropics are useless, it could only improve your focus

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Another day another retarded thread. same old same old looksmax.

Your idea is stupid, because while hypothetically it sounds good and makes sense, it simply will never work in reality. Good luck lmao

This is something we are approaching. The only thing preventing genetic selection from taking on the next level is a thin layer of cognitive dissonance. Another problem is that the only people who seem to recognize the objective truth are nihilistic ugly incels, which indirectly makes it nearly impossible to acknowledge the truth of the matter. Humans only care about objective truth when it benefits them. This objective truth will benefit their children. Indirectly, humans benefit from genetic selection. But since it is indirect, it will take longer to fully realize that fact. The faster we recognize this simple truth, the more conscious awareness can be had to surround the topic. It is a slow burning process that can only be sped up by discussing openly the truth without fear. It will happen obviously assuming a meteor or calamity wipes us out tomorrow. Its a matter of how fast that I am concerned with.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

My iq is certified 79. There isnt anything that raise your iq, nootropics are useless, it could only improve your focus

If that is actually true, then you should enjoy the rest of your life. But you shouldn't reproduce because the need for intelligence is going up. It will be very hard for children of yours to do well in the world.

 

[Nation]

If that is actually true, then you should enjoy the rest of your life. But you shouldn't reproduce because the need for intelligence is going up. It will be very hard for children of yours to do well in the world.

I know, I will not reproduce.
My writing skills are good but I cant even learn basic jobs like waiter

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Holy shit you said something smart

I prefer solutions that indirectly fix the problem, directly not allowing people with bad genes to have kids is boring af. An example would be how in the purge they allow crime for 12 hours which controls population.

True, that's why I think the ultimate end goal in life should be to grow your own food and live in isolation with no reliance on the rest of the world so that no matter how fucked it is, it doesn't effect you.

You are part of a network of people and subconscious thoughts affect your behavior and views and humans are highly sensitive to those views and behaviors. Therefore it can be deduced that having a nihilistic perspective on life actively makes things worse through subtle behaviors of yours. You most likely need to go outside more take care of your diet and get proper sun exposure so that your sense of well-being is chemically upregulated. This world is unbelievably beautiful and incredible, and it is better to not live in total isolation as a social creature. The idea that the purge movie is a cool non-boring solution to the problem I am discussing combined with the statement "Holy shit you said something smart" makes it seem like I am talking to a middle schooler/early highschooler that watches CoolHardLogic. I'm sorry but I don't think you are going to be taken seriously until you raise your level of experience on this planet.

 

[Alexanderr]

My iq is certified 79. There isnt anything that raise your iq, nootropics are useless, it could only improve your focus

Your academic history? What type of job do you currently have?

 

[incel194012940]

Too many wall of text

Einstein says you are low iq and should be euthanized

 

[Patient A]

Didn’t mention niggers being retarded even once.

What a shit thread

 

[Nation]

Your academic history? What type of job do you currently have?

Garbage man, I failed first year of high school two times ( EU).
AS i said I have troubles learning basic things, at 29 I have the social experiences of 13 tears old.

Its not related to focus but I have dull absent eyes, OCD about my appereance and people see me as little kid/newbie even if I do this job for years.

Jobs like waiters were too much for me, I didnt remember things , no visual memory, no skills in retain info...also I had lowest score in math. I get lost if I do some mental activity, like i have poor mental energy

 

[HerpDerpson]

, if you have a recessed jaw, too short, balding, acne, crooked nose, you can fix that

I have a long midface.

 

[HerpDerpson]

But actually, I don't care about eugenics since they can't affect me.

 

[Deleted member 19997]

The difference between the average person and a mentally retarded person is about 20 IQ points. Anything less than 83 IQ is considered too low for even the military to accept you. So if the average is 105, then the difference between a genius and yourself is roughly 2 mentally retarded people away. Genius is considered 160 roughly speaking. Some men and women have had IQ's higher, but they have a hard time measuring IQ after 160. This isnt a real thought out post, I just can't stop thinking about that fact.

The US military uses IQ testing to determine potential recruits' cognitive abilities. the military forbids anyone with an IQ under 83 from joining. because their experience has shown that anyone with an IQ under 83 will be more of a liability than an asset to the military.

Smart people according to this system should have a bigger gap between you and them than you do to a mentally retarded individual. At least point-wise.

If it is true that high IQ people struggle more in society it may be a lonely feeling at the top in a sense, and they also tend to be hypersensitive to information and share autistic traits. I don't consider myself to have a high IQ, but stupid people do tend to be incredibly isolating. Its very hard to communicate effectively with a legitimately stupid person. And some stupid people are obviously liabilities.



8:55 Mark on the video

In this video I think Mr. Hyde highlights the insanity of stupid individuals being allowed to roam around in the same environment as genuinely intelligent people, midwits, and above average intelligence individuals. You could be having a conversation with somebody only to realize that the person you are talking to is absurdly slower than you in their processing. Imagine hiring someone only to realize that they are absurdly slow when you lose a day, maybe a week's profits because of an incompetent mistake. Its insanity.

What is even more terrifying to me is that overall IQ scores are going down. If I recall correctly the G-Factors are going down relating to IQ. G-Factors are basically the most signifigant representative of fluid intelligence if I correctly recall. This is likely due to natural selection being essentially removed from humans and allowing for people high in mutational load to reproduce when they otherwise should face harsher selection pressures.

Mutational load is going up in humans, and that literally means the number of genetic mutations in human beings. This is likely due to the industrial revolution because humans now have the ability to subsist off society. 82-84% of the genome goes towards the brain. However, the brain is a black box, and it's infinitely more complex than anything we have yet to study as far as I am aware. The genes that have specific tasks in the brain that become mutated are not getting washed out by natural selection, and therefore we are likely concurrently witnessing the genetic rotting of our species.

The solution to this is obviously:

Spoiler: Solution

Artificial Selection. By doing this we would hypothetically be able to improve the human species magnitudes faster than natural selection. It would be significantly less painful as well. Infinitely less death and suffering would be required to get to an ideal state of civilization. If everyone was walking around with highly conscientious and compassionate personalities, with high intelligence and obviously physically attractive features, everything would improve on a scale that has not been seen before.

Genetic Refinement on a massive scale would improve the quality of life for all future human beings. To get there, however, we collectively must admit that objectively good genes and objectively bad ones exist and that some people need to be prevented from reproducing legally or up the social stigma. Otherwise, we will end up in a worse situation than we are in now. The more intelligent and attractive members of the species will become more attractive and intelligent/genetically superior compared to the ever-increasing genetically inferior "caste" of individuals who are only becoming more spiteful by the day. It is most likely possible to get there as well. Most people agree that genetically deformed people and extreme narcissists should not have kids. Therefore the foot is already in the door. If a country decided to eliminate all genetically ill from their population, they could start implementing newer additions to the list of "You can't reproduce". Especially as the scientists start understanding more deeply how genetics work. Imagine if only people who were one standard deviation higher in IQ could reproduce tomorrow. You would have significantly less waste produced, your population would go down, and you have an excess in infrastructure and facilities left over from the "ghost generation". On top of that, the average individual who makes up the bulk of civilization would die out. Start throwing out unattractive traits like acne, recessed jawlines, balding genes, short stature, bad muscle insertions, and start overly expressing longevity/attractive genes. In 300 years your civilization would be exponentially farther than where it would have been. Even if law can't be passed due to corruption, then we should continue to elevate the difference on a social level. A breaking point must be reached in which only the most genetically fit reproduce and the genetically unfit just live out their lives until death in my opinion. Its not meant to be personal, I just think that only the top percent of people should reproduce honestly. If that means some of my good genes aren't passed on that is fine. I think the future of human experience is worth a lot more than my selfish motivations.

The ironic thing is that those types of people who will take the idea "you shouldn't be able to reproduce" offensively can't rationalize why that is offensive without admitting to the fact that it is their limbic system talking, not their rational mind. They want to reproduce because its a primitive drive that is ancient, not typically because they dream of parenthood.

Where did you get that g-scores have been dropping?

Can you please link the study?

 

[Deleted member 19997]

This is something we are approaching. The only thing preventing genetic selection from taking on the next level is a thin layer of cognitive dissonance. Another problem is that the only people who seem to recognize the objective truth are nihilistic ugly incels, which indirectly makes it nearly impossible to acknowledge the truth of the matter. Humans only care about objective truth when it benefits them. This objective truth will benefit their children. Indirectly, humans benefit from genetic selection. But since it is indirect, it will take longer to fully realize that fact. The faster we recognize this simple truth, the more conscious awareness can be had to surround the topic. It is a slow burning process that can only be sped up by discussing openly the truth without fear. It will happen obviously assuming a meteor or calamity wipes us out tomorrow. Its a matter of how fast that I am concerned with.

Smart guy

It isn't called cognitive dissonance though, it is called ego defense.

Most humans live their lives in denial and try avoid the consequences of their actions by rationalising.

 

[Deleted member 19997]

The difference between the average person and a mentally retarded person is about 20 IQ points. Anything less than 83 IQ is considered too low for even the military to accept you. So if the average is 105, then the difference between a genius and yourself is roughly 2 mentally retarded people away. Genius is considered 160 roughly speaking. Some men and women have had IQ's higher, but they have a hard time measuring IQ after 160. This isnt a real thought out post, I just can't stop thinking about that fact.

The US military uses IQ testing to determine potential recruits' cognitive abilities. the military forbids anyone with an IQ under 83 from joining. because their experience has shown that anyone with an IQ under 83 will be more of a liability than an asset to the military.

Smart people according to this system should have a bigger gap between you and them than you do to a mentally retarded individual. At least point-wise.

If it is true that high IQ people struggle more in society it may be a lonely feeling at the top in a sense, and they also tend to be hypersensitive to information and share autistic traits. I don't consider myself to have a high IQ, but stupid people do tend to be incredibly isolating. Its very hard to communicate effectively with a legitimately stupid person. And some stupid people are obviously liabilities.



8:55 Mark on the video

In this video I think Mr. Hyde highlights the insanity of stupid individuals being allowed to roam around in the same environment as genuinely intelligent people, midwits, and above average intelligence individuals. You could be having a conversation with somebody only to realize that the person you are talking to is absurdly slower than you in their processing. Imagine hiring someone only to realize that they are absurdly slow when you lose a day, maybe a week's profits because of an incompetent mistake. Its insanity.

What is even more terrifying to me is that overall IQ scores are going down. If I recall correctly the G-Factors are going down relating to IQ. G-Factors are basically the most signifigant representative of fluid intelligence if I correctly recall. This is likely due to natural selection being essentially removed from humans and allowing for people high in mutational load to reproduce when they otherwise should face harsher selection pressures.

Mutational load is going up in humans, and that literally means the number of genetic mutations in human beings. This is likely due to the industrial revolution because humans now have the ability to subsist off society. 82-84% of the genome goes towards the brain. However, the brain is a black box, and it's infinitely more complex than anything we have yet to study as far as I am aware. The genes that have specific tasks in the brain that become mutated are not getting washed out by natural selection, and therefore we are likely concurrently witnessing the genetic rotting of our species.

The solution to this is obviously:

Spoiler: Solution

Artificial Selection. By doing this we would hypothetically be able to improve the human species magnitudes faster than natural selection. It would be significantly less painful as well. Infinitely less death and suffering would be required to get to an ideal state of civilization. If everyone was walking around with highly conscientious and compassionate personalities, with high intelligence and obviously physically attractive features, everything would improve on a scale that has not been seen before.

Genetic Refinement on a massive scale would improve the quality of life for all future human beings. To get there, however, we collectively must admit that objectively good genes and objectively bad ones exist and that some people need to be prevented from reproducing legally or up the social stigma. Otherwise, we will end up in a worse situation than we are in now. The more intelligent and attractive members of the species will become more attractive and intelligent/genetically superior compared to the ever-increasing genetically inferior "caste" of individuals who are only becoming more spiteful by the day. It is most likely possible to get there as well. Most people agree that genetically deformed people and extreme narcissists should not have kids. Therefore the foot is already in the door. If a country decided to eliminate all genetically ill from their population, they could start implementing newer additions to the list of "You can't reproduce". Especially as the scientists start understanding more deeply how genetics work. Imagine if only people who were one standard deviation higher in IQ could reproduce tomorrow. You would have significantly less waste produced, your population would go down, and you have an excess in infrastructure and facilities left over from the "ghost generation". On top of that, the average individual who makes up the bulk of civilization would die out. Start throwing out unattractive traits like acne, recessed jawlines, balding genes, short stature, bad muscle insertions, and start overly expressing longevity/attractive genes. In 300 years your civilization would be exponentially farther than where it would have been. Even if law can't be passed due to corruption, then we should continue to elevate the difference on a social level. A breaking point must be reached in which only the most genetically fit reproduce and the genetically unfit just live out their lives until death in my opinion. Its not meant to be personal, I just think that only the top percent of people should reproduce honestly. If that means some of my good genes aren't passed on that is fine. I think the future of human experience is worth a lot more than my selfish motivations.

The ironic thing is that those types of people who will take the idea "you shouldn't be able to reproduce" offensively can't rationalize why that is offensive without admitting to the fact that it is their limbic system talking, not their rational mind. They want to reproduce because its a primitive drive that is ancient, not typically because they dream of parenthood.

Eugenics should only be practiced for intelligence.

Physical appearance and beauty is only cosmetic and serves no real evolutionary purpose.

 

[Deleted member 19997]

The difference between the average person and a mentally retarded person is about 20 IQ points. Anything less than 83 IQ is considered too low for even the military to accept you. So if the average is 105, then the difference between a genius and yourself is roughly 2 mentally retarded people away.

The clinical definition of mental retardation is 70 IQ, not 83 IQ.

In 1959, the American Association on Mental Deficiency (AAMD) set the IQ threshold for retardation at 85. The civil rights movement of the next decade forced psychologists to rethink this boundary, because half of the Black population fell below it. In 1973, responding to this concern, AAMD (by then AAMR) changed the threshold from IQ 85 to IQ 70, a reduction of one standard deviation. The proportion of Blacks below the threshold instantly dropped from 50 percent to 12 percent.

 

[Deleted member 19997]

The difference between the average person and a mentally retarded person is about 20 IQ points. Anything less than 83 IQ is considered too low for even the military to accept you. So if the average is 105, then the difference between a genius and yourself is roughly 2 mentally retarded people away. Genius is considered 160 roughly speaking. Some men and women have had IQ's higher, but they have a hard time measuring IQ after 160. This isnt a real thought out post, I just can't stop thinking about that fact.

The US military uses IQ testing to determine potential recruits' cognitive abilities. the military forbids anyone with an IQ under 83 from joining. because their experience has shown that anyone with an IQ under 83 will be more of a liability than an asset to the military.

Smart people according to this system should have a bigger gap between you and them than you do to a mentally retarded individual. At least point-wise.

If it is true that high IQ people struggle more in society it may be a lonely feeling at the top in a sense, and they also tend to be hypersensitive to information and share autistic traits. I don't consider myself to have a high IQ, but stupid people do tend to be incredibly isolating. Its very hard to communicate effectively with a legitimately stupid person. And some stupid people are obviously liabilities.



8:55 Mark on the video

In this video I think Mr. Hyde highlights the insanity of stupid individuals being allowed to roam around in the same environment as genuinely intelligent people, midwits, and above average intelligence individuals. You could be having a conversation with somebody only to realize that the person you are talking to is absurdly slower than you in their processing. Imagine hiring someone only to realize that they are absurdly slow when you lose a day, maybe a week's profits because of an incompetent mistake. Its insanity.

What is even more terrifying to me is that overall IQ scores are going down. If I recall correctly the G-Factors are going down relating to IQ. G-Factors are basically the most signifigant representative of fluid intelligence if I correctly recall. This is likely due to natural selection being essentially removed from humans and allowing for people high in mutational load to reproduce when they otherwise should face harsher selection pressures.

Mutational load is going up in humans, and that literally means the number of genetic mutations in human beings. This is likely due to the industrial revolution because humans now have the ability to subsist off society. 82-84% of the genome goes towards the brain. However, the brain is a black box, and it's infinitely more complex than anything we have yet to study as far as I am aware. The genes that have specific tasks in the brain that become mutated are not getting washed out by natural selection, and therefore we are likely concurrently witnessing the genetic rotting of our species.

The solution to this is obviously:

Spoiler: Solution

Artificial Selection. By doing this we would hypothetically be able to improve the human species magnitudes faster than natural selection. It would be significantly less painful as well. Infinitely less death and suffering would be required to get to an ideal state of civilization. If everyone was walking around with highly conscientious and compassionate personalities, with high intelligence and obviously physically attractive features, everything would improve on a scale that has not been seen before.

Genetic Refinement on a massive scale would improve the quality of life for all future human beings. To get there, however, we collectively must admit that objectively good genes and objectively bad ones exist and that some people need to be prevented from reproducing legally or up the social stigma. Otherwise, we will end up in a worse situation than we are in now. The more intelligent and attractive members of the species will become more attractive and intelligent/genetically superior compared to the ever-increasing genetically inferior "caste" of individuals who are only becoming more spiteful by the day. It is most likely possible to get there as well. Most people agree that genetically deformed people and extreme narcissists should not have kids. Therefore the foot is already in the door. If a country decided to eliminate all genetically ill from their population, they could start implementing newer additions to the list of "You can't reproduce". Especially as the scientists start understanding more deeply how genetics work. Imagine if only people who were one standard deviation higher in IQ could reproduce tomorrow. You would have significantly less waste produced, your population would go down, and you have an excess in infrastructure and facilities left over from the "ghost generation". On top of that, the average individual who makes up the bulk of civilization would die out. Start throwing out unattractive traits like acne, recessed jawlines, balding genes, short stature, bad muscle insertions, and start overly expressing longevity/attractive genes. In 300 years your civilization would be exponentially farther than where it would have been. Even if law can't be passed due to corruption, then we should continue to elevate the difference on a social level. A breaking point must be reached in which only the most genetically fit reproduce and the genetically unfit just live out their lives until death in my opinion. Its not meant to be personal, I just think that only the top percent of people should reproduce honestly. If that means some of my good genes aren't passed on that is fine. I think the future of human experience is worth a lot more than my selfish motivations.

The ironic thing is that those types of people who will take the idea "you shouldn't be able to reproduce" offensively can't rationalize why that is offensive without admitting to the fact that it is their limbic system talking, not their rational mind. They want to reproduce because its a primitive drive that is ancient, not typically because they dream of parenthood.

Eugenics is already practiced in China.

The skewed sex ratio of 120 males for 100 females at birth makes sure that the bottom 20 percent of genes are eliminated with each generation.

Mating is monogamous and based mostly upon financial status which serves as an excellent proxy for intelligence.

 

[Alexanderr]

Garbage man, I failed first year of high school two times ( EU).
AS i said I have troubles learning basic things, at 29 I have the social experiences of 13 tears old.

Its not related to focus but I have dull absent eyes, OCD about my appereance and people see me as little kid/newbie even if I do this job for years.

Jobs like waiters were too much for me, I didnt remember things , no visual memory, no skills in retain info...also I had lowest score in math. I get lost if I do some mental activity, like i have poor mental energy

That’s actually sad. It’s like being disabled but not as visible and there’s no one solacing you. You're just looked down upon. Perhaps there's some hope for you in the future with genetic alteration technology.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Too many wall of text

View attachment 1801947

Einstein says you are low iq and should be euthanized

You come across as an unintelligent person. good luck

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Eugenics should only be practiced for intelligence.

Physical appearance and beauty is only cosmetic and serves no real evolutionary purpose.

Physical appearance serves as a symbol of genetic health, it also conveys social relevance/importance to an extent. There is no reason not to select for health, and healthier people tend to be attractive. Form follows function, and function follows form.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

The clinical definition of mental retardation is 70 IQ, not 83 IQ.

In 1959, the American Association on Mental Deficiency (AAMD) set the IQ threshold for retardation at 85. The civil rights movement of the next decade forced psychologists to rethink this boundary, because half of the Black population fell below it. In 1973, responding to this concern, AAMD (by then AAMR) changed the threshold from IQ 85 to IQ 70, a reduction of one standard deviation. The proportion of Blacks below the threshold instantly dropped from 50 percent to 12 percent.

The issue with that definition is that while yes you are correct, 83 IQ is the cut-off point where you simply can not operate without being a liability in society. The military always needs people. If they can't use you, most work environments can't either. Obviously, they considered 85 IQ retarded because they were nonfunctional people. For all practical purposes, you should be considered mentally retarded once you clock in at 83-85 IQ. But you are obviously correct and I appreciate the correction.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

That’s actually sad. It’s like being disabled but not as visible and there’s no one solacing you. You're just looked down upon. Perhaps there's some hope for you in the future with genetic alteration technology.

Yeah, I have nothing but love for individuals with good character. However, It just isn't fair to people to have low intelligence. They shouldn't reproduce and should enjoy life, that way we don't have to suffer as much collectively.

 

[Deleted member 12248]

Where did you get that g-scores have been dropping?

Can you please link the study?

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_Genetic_Selection_and_Neurotoxin_Hypotheses

This is an example I found, but I'm having trouble finding the original study. Also, I think this guy covers falling IQ very well.

 

[STEVE GAMING]

Physical appearance serves as a symbol of genetic health, it also conveys social relevance/importance to an extent. There is no reason not to select for health, and healthier people tend to be attractive. Form follows function, and function follows form.

Explain ricecels

 

[height]

None of this shit matters. It´s all cope and fantasies.

 

[LooksOrDeath]

Too many wall of text

View attachment 1801947

Einstein says you are low iq and should be euthanized

based, op's entire thread could just be one paragraph long

 

[LooksOrDeath]

Eugenics is already practiced in China.

The skewed sex ratio of 120 males for 100 females at birth makes sure that the bottom 20 percent of genes are eliminated with each generation.

bottom sixth

Mating is monogamous and based mostly upon financial status which serves as an excellent proxy for intelligence.

jfl at this shit take @incel194012940

 

[LooksOrDeath]

Physical appearance serves as a symbol of genetic health, it also conveys social relevance/importance to an extent. There is no reason not to select for health, and healthier people tend to be attractive. Form follows function, and function follows form.

You come across as an unintelligent person. good luck

lthe fucking irony

 

[incel194012940]

jfl at this shit take @incel194012940

It's kinda an interesting theory tbh but there are too many other factors to take in account

and no evidence directly supporting it

i wonder how many people don't have kids really, 20% is around the number in the US for oldcels

 

[LooksOrDeath]

It's kinda an interesting theory tbh but there are too many other factors to take in account

and no evidence directly supporting it

i wonder how many people don't have kids really, 20% is around the number in the US for oldcels

I think 1 third - 40 percent of millennials/gen. z won't have kids.

 

[anticel]

Some good points but I lots of low iq shit at the end. There is no "narrow jaw" gene. Yes there are lots of bad genes around from the last 10.000 years of society suppressing natural and sexual selection but a big problem is also modern diet/lifestyle. Most people arent ugly because they have "bad genes" but because they ate the wrong diets for their facial development. Tongue-tie and small factors like this also lead to ugliness. Society is just badly educated.

Also eugenics won't work even if it would objectively a good choice. Everyone sees things subjectively and the reason we are here is to spread our genes - anything that would stop that gives us nothing but dread. Masses would reject eugenics if it wouldn't benefit them.
It's necessary to filter out bad genes ofc but only through really liberal societies (we mostly live in socialism rn) where not everyone is a slave to the state. Putting a healthy competition on everyone and not distributing the wealth of the skilled to the unskilled.

High IQ is also related to bad genetics bad- its literally the reason why some humans develop high asf IQs in the first place and why there are male geniuses but no female ones. The genetic pressure sexuality puts on us leads people to cope in some beautiful ways. If Mozart was a chad he would have never needed to make his music and this goes for lots of the people who brought society/humanity forward.

Also it's human nature wanting to feel superior/dominant to others. Not everyone can be on top. There is no utopia. There always need to be winners and losers. Back in 1800s a rich person had less than a poor person has now but the poor person still feels miserable because he knows he is at the bottom of society.
I agree that if everyone was beautiful and smart etc life would be a lot better and most people could flourish and be happy in a family but human nature still puts limits on us. Like there is literally no purpose to life other than out-competing others. Life is meaningless that way.

 

[anticel]

Oh and ig there IQ is related to genetics but we arent sure about everything yet. It's also bad diets that affect it and for example language. If children grow up with unga bunga language they will be way less intelligent than some1 with well educated parents. That way intelligence is also inherited but not through genetics but through the environment.