Liberals, Athiests: "Smarter"

[grim540]

More intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.

 

The study, published in the March 2010 issue of the peer-reviewed scientific journal Social Psychology Quarterly, advances a new theory to explain why people form particular preferences and values. The theory suggests that more intelligent people are more likely than less intelligent people to adopt evolutionarily novel preferences and values, but intelligence does not correlate with preferences and values that are old enough to have been shaped by evolution over millions of years."

 

"Evolutionarily novel" preferences and values are those that humans are not biologically designed to have and our ancestors probably did not possess. In contrast, those that our ancestors had for millions of years are "evolutionarily familiar."

 

"General intelligence, the ability to think and reason, endowed our ancestors with advantages in solving evolutionarily novel problems for which they did not have innate solutions," says Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science. "As a result, more intelligent people are more likely to recognize and understand such novel entities and situations than less intelligent people, and some of these entities and situations are preferences, values, and lifestyles."

 

An earlier study by Kanazawa found that more intelligent individuals were more nocturnal, waking up and staying up later than less intelligent individuals. Because our ancestors lacked artificial light, they tended to wake up shortly before dawn and go to sleep shortly after dusk. Being nocturnal is evolutionarily novel.

 

In the current study, Kanazawa argues that humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends, and being liberal, caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers they never meet or interact with, is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals.

 

Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) support Kanazawa's hypothesis. Young adults who subjectively identify themselves as "very liberal" have an average IQ of 106 during adolescence while those who identify themselves as "very conservative" have an average IQ of 95 during adolescence.

 

Similarly, religion is a byproduct of humans' tendency to perceive agency and intention as causes of events, to see "the hands of God" at work behind otherwise natural phenomena. "Humans are evolutionarily designed to be paranoid, and they believe in God because they are paranoid," says Kanazawa. This innate bias toward paranoia served humans well when self-preservation and protection of their families and clans depended on extreme vigilance to all potential dangers. "So, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become atheists."

 

Young adults who identify themselves as "not at all religious" have an average IQ of 103 during adolescence, while those who identify themselves as "very religious" have an average IQ of 97 during adolescence.

 

In addition, humans have always been mildly polygynous in evolutionary history. Men in polygynous marriages were not expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate, whereas men in monogamous marriages were. In sharp contrast, whether they are in a monogamous or polygynous marriage, women were always expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate. So being sexually exclusive is evolutionarily novel for men, but not for women. And the theory predicts that more intelligent men are more likely to value sexual exclusivity than less intelligent men, but general intelligence makes no difference for women's value on sexual exclusivity. Kanazawa's analysis of Add Health data supports these sex-specific predictions as well.

 

One intriguing but theoretically predicted finding of the study is that more intelligent people are no more or no less likely to value such evolutionarily familiar entities as marriage, family, children, and friends.

 

 

Discuss:

[lord_casek]

Conservatives are Dumber—And Smarter—Than Liberals

 

Sociologist Markus Kemmelmeier compared college students' self-professed political views to their SAT and ACT scores (which are imperfect but useful measures of cognitive ability.) First, he did find a general trend that social conservatives (those who wanted to ban abortion and gay marriage) weren't as gifted as students with a more progressive take on gender roles. But he found the exact opposite pattern with anti-regulation attitudes: The conservatives/libertarians (yay guns boo taxes) appeared to be smarter than their commie compatriots. Kemmelmeier found this crossover "particularly surprising" and says, "It highlights (yet again) that ‘conservatism' is not necessarily a coherent construct, but that you have to distinguish at minimum social conservatism and economic conservatism (libertarianism). If you think about it: Jerry Falwell and Milton Freedman are worlds apart."

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.american.com/archive/2009/october/are-liberals-smarter-than-conservatives

Liberal elites could easily be in the minority politically, but different social circles keep them insulated from finding that out.

[.hopeless.]

i just...dont care.

[.hopeless.]

fuck you casek.you took away my spot as first to post...i hate you!

[lord_casek]

fuck you casek.you took away my spot as first to post...i hate you!

 

 

I did it to make you mad. It worked.

 

 

GREAT SUCCESS!!

[TheoHuxtable..]

[.hopeless.]

Conservatives are Dumber—And Smarter—Than Liberals

 

Sociologist Markus Kemmelmeier compared college students' self-professed political views to their SAT and ACT scores (which are imperfect but useful measures of cognitive ability.) First, he did find a general trend that social conservatives (those who wanted to ban abortion and gay marriage) weren't as gifted as students with a more progressive take on gender roles. But he found the exact opposite pattern with anti-regulation attitudes: The conservatives/libertarians (yay guns boo taxes) appeared to be smarter than their commie compatriots. Kemmelmeier found this crossover "particularly surprising" and says, "It highlights (yet again) that ‘conservatism' is not necessarily a coherent construct, but that you have to distinguish at minimum social conservatism and economic conservatism (libertarianism). If you think about it: Jerry Falwell and Milton Freedman are worlds apart."

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.american.com/archive/2009/october/are-liberals-smarter-than-conservatives

Liberal elites could easily be in the minority politically, but different social circles keep them insulated from finding that out.

 

 

so does this mean that because im cool with gays getting married,and also love guns.that im twice as smart as the rest of you jackoffs?

 

 

 

fuck yes. score one for hopeless!

[.hopeless.]

I did it to make you mad. It worked.

 

 

GREAT SUCCESS!!

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU BASTARD!!

[lord_casek]

so does this mean that because im cool with gays getting married,and also love guns.that im twice as smart as the rest of you jackoffs?

 

 

 

fuck yes. score one for hopeless!

 

 

You missed the end of the article where it says "everyone except for .hopeless."

[.hopeless.]

casek..your just a hater.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[lord_casek]

I left a present for you in your toilet. Hope you has plunger.

[.hopeless.]

:(

 

 

 

.

[christo-f]

 

Who the fuck shaved that turkey and put a suit on it??!

:eek: :confused:

[Tavaruawon]

[TheoHuxtable..]

[Tavaruawon]

[TheoHuxtable..]

[Tavaruawon]

[Tavaruawon]

[PITOFZOMBIES]

fuck my pops paying for some slacker piece of shit to feed his fam. dude worked his way up from the top. liberal taxes, in many situations, are fucking WEAK...

 

 

and i believe that there is no god.

 

 

there are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics... get over this shit. you're perpetuating the two-party system that we need too eradicate to badly.

[TheoHuxtable..]

[lord_casek]

 

there are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics... get over this shit. you're perpetuating the two-party system that we need too eradicate to badly.

 

 

Step 1: Divide

Step 2: Conquer

 

That's how it works.

[Tavaruawon]

[DonCheadle]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[christo-f]

 

Liberal by name

Conservative by agenda

Dickhead by nature

 

 

I moved to his electorate just so I could vote against him.

 

He still won that election but lost the next one. Only the second PM to ever lose an election AND his own seat. Bitch almost fucking cried. Dude was way too fucking proud and wouldn't move over for the next crew to move in. Costello, his treasurer let him have it afterwards too. Was great to watch. Dude may have been fiscally sound in policy but was a slimy lying prick that treated the electorate like they were fucking stupid.

 

/rantowner.

[vanfullofretards]

I'm libertarian and atheist because I use logic. That is all.

 

Oh, and Bill Maher may say it, but he's not libertarian.

[abcs]

i cant even have a conversation with someone with creationist religious beliefs...

or for that matter any hardcore religious believer. Way i see it they believe

shit that isnt real. Like if someone was to try and argue with me that by

eating a bowl of fruit pebbles a day you are guaranteed admission into

heaven. First of all. Who is to say Heaven even exists. There is no proof,

Second, Read the nutrition facts. Nowhere in there does it say anything to

support your suggestions. I could only picture that nut thats tryin to say

that shit countering with some shit like.... well god created fiber, vitamin

c, riboflavin, sugar, corn.... ect.... ect... I just cant talk to those people.

To me their IQ is only slightly higher than that of a orangutan

[lord_casek]

i cant even have a conversation with someone with creationist religious beliefs...

or for that matter any hardcore religious believer. Way i see it they believe

shit that isnt real. Like if someone was to try and argue with me that by

eating a bowl of fruit pebbles a day you are guaranteed admission into

heaven. First of all. Who is to say Heaven even exists. There is no proof,

Second, Read the nutrition facts. Nowhere in there does it say anything to

support your suggestions. I could only picture that nut thats tryin to say

that shit countering with some shit like.... well god created fiber, vitamin

c, riboflavin, sugar, corn.... ect.... ect... I just cant talk to those people.

To me their IQ is only slightly higher than that of a orangutan

 

 

Perhaps you are limiting yourself? May be that people feel that way about you, as well.

It's funny that people are so wrapped up in themselves that they would discount anything

anyone else says just because of religious views.

[abcs]

maybe you are right casek. I just roll with what the scientific community

has proven to be real. Before something becomes a theory its a hypothesis

a proven hypothesis is a theory. Man descended from lower forms.

The religious types think that God got busy and in 7 days and 7 nights

or some shit he put this shit together. Fossil records have pretty much

discredited that shit. It was basically absurd in the first place

[abcs]

im not above discussing or arguing the shit

but when someones mind is set in stone and they

are unwilling to accept proven scientific discovery.

Well i dont kno. Its just frustrates me and i ignore them