A quick thought

Is it a coincidence that the IQ sweet spot for criminality coincides with the IQ threshold for military recruitment (approximately 80), and is it a coincidence that this mirrors the position of the sweet spot for psychologically healthy people and also midwittery (approximately 120)?

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to A quick thought

  1. Tom Kratman says:

    Where did you get that idea?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Thought of it while I was listening to Molyneux interview one of those biosocial criminology guys.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        Well…recruiting-wise, it doesn’t work that way. there are 5 (really 7) mental categories, from the armed forces point of view: I, II, IIIa, IIIb, IVa, IVb, and V. I is very bright. V is essentially retarded. Generally speaking, the cut off is IIIa, which is at or above center of mass, call it an IQ of 100 to about 115 or so. IIIbs are sometimes let in, but don’t count on it. The slots for them are very tight. IIIbs generally don’t qualify for, for example, infantry. They’ll become cooks or cannon cockers, that kind of thing. IVas – who hover around that 80-85 IQ – are almost never allowed in. Just about every recruiter has a little list of IVas who have somehow impressed them enough to make it worth while to go through the trouble on the rare occasions. They’ll be guys who seem brighter than the test scores would indicate, or are the sort of kid who will play three quarters of a football game with a broken arm or whose parents the recruiter knows raised them exceptionally well. But, again, it is rare. We never had an allocation for even one IVa while I commanded a recruiting company, and I can only ever recall one tiny one when I was on brigade staff. In looking, I saw one allocation for 200 for the year, 7 years ago. Given a recruiting mission of, oh, must be about 50k per annum or so, now, that’s what we call statistically insignificant, and also heavily massaged and refined by the natural reluctance of recruiters to put kids in boot who are too dumb to make it through basic.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          I didn’t realize you meant the recruitment part. I took that from Jordan Peterson, who says it’s illegal to draft someone with an IQ below 83.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            I think the legal cutoff is 80. For 83, it’s draft or accept as a volunteer (though he seems to be discounting GT in relation to IQ; an 85 GT would equal an 83 IQ, IIRC). But that’s not generally relevant, because we take so few from near that range – and those fairly carefully selected and vetted – that it’s a statistical outlier and doesn’t really support the thesis you’re trying for. And it’s not, as he thinks, because there’s nothing we can do with them at that range or slightly below. Indeed, we could do quite a bit. It’s that they’re just so much harder to work with to get a useful result from that we’d rather not bother because, ya know, company commanders already have quite a bit on their plates.

  2. aiaslives says:

    So you actually believe in the 30 IQ humor gap?

    >Is it a coincidence

    No it’s not, the state needs thugs that can follow orders.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >So you actually believe in the 30 IQ humor gap?

      More or less. There’s a general rule where if you’re in the top 1% of some trait it makes you blind to the problems of people who are average. Wealth and attractiveness are good examples. A wealthy person has no concept of a normal person’s woes. Game and PUA culturw are probably very confusing to people like George Clooney (“you’re making it too complicated, just say ‘yes, I really am the real George Clooney’ and they’ll sleep with you”).

      Likewise, I majored in math and got the best grade in my class in the hardest course offered (at a 2nd-tier state college), but I’m not particularly interested in the subject. That’s just because I have great talent for quantitative abstraction. Most people struggle with it in ways I won’t understand.

      >No it’s not, the state needs thugs that can follow orders.

      I don’t think you understood the question. Why would 80 and 120 be local maxima for these two different expressions of solipsism?

  3. aiaslives says:

    Can you classify this guy, Aeoli?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I grabbed a side pic from that.

      Some occipital, some parietal, deepish sockets, upward nose, big eyes. receding chin, Amud-shaped orbitals, longish face, and I notice his wrists are surprisingly thick for his frame. I’d put this guy in the Amud neanderthal box, particularly in the face, even though his skull doesn’t really stand out.

  4. Aeoli Pera says:

    The issue is a loss of faith. You can’t trust a faithless spouse, so where there is no faith there is no trust. And where there is no trust, there is no industry.

  5. Tom Kratman says:

    One you detree it, it is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s