Before we get started, I want to pause in memory of Henry Harpending, co-author (with Greg Cochran) of The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution and the blog West Hunter.
ὃν οἱ θεοὶ φιλοῦσιν, ἀποθνῄσκει νέος — he whom the gods love dies young. (Meander)
Harpending wasn’t particularly young, nor was his death unexpected, but I am still sad; I have enjoyed his work for years, and there will be no more. Steve Sailer has a nice eulogy.
In less tragic HBD-osphere news, it looks like Peter Frost has stopped writing his blog, Evo and Proud, due to Canadian laws prohibiting free speech. (There has been much discussion of this on the Frost’s posts that were carried over on Unz; ultimately, the antisemitism of many Unz commentators made it too dangerous for Frost to continue blogging, even though his posts actually had nothing to do with Judaism.)
Back to our subject: This is an attempt to answer–coherently–a friend’s inquiry.
- Why are people snobs about intelligence?
- Is math ability better than verbal?
- Do people only care about intelligence in the context of making money?
We’re going to tackle the easiest question first, #2. No, math ability is not actually better than verbal ability.
Imagine two people. Person A–we’ll call her Alice–has exceptional verbal ability. She probably has a job as a journalist, novelist, poet, or screenwriter. She understands other people’s emotions and excels at interacting verbally with others. But she sucks at math. Not just suck; she struggles counting to ten.
Alice is going to have a rough time handling money. In fact, Alice will probably be completely dependent on the other people around them to handle money for them. Otherwise, however, Alice will probably have a pretty pleasant life.
Of course, if Alice happened to live in a hunter-gatherer society where people don’t use numbers over 5, she would not stand out at all. Alice could be a highly respected oral poet or storyteller–perhaps her society’s version of an encyclopedia, considered wise and knowledgeable about a whole range of things.
Now consider Person B–we’ll call her Betty. Betty has exceptional math ability, but can only say a handful of words and cannot intuit other people’s emotions.
Betty is screwed.
Here’s the twist: #2 is a trick question.
Verbal and mathematical ability are strongly correlated in pretty much everyone who hasn’t had brain damage (so long as you are looking at people from the same society). Yes, people like to talk about “multiple intelligences,” like “kinesthetic” and “musical” intelligence. It turns out that most of these are correlated. (The one exception may be kinesthetic, about which I have heard conflicting reports. I swear I read a study somewhere which found that sports players are smarter than sports watchers, but all I’m finding now are reports that athletes are pretty dumb.)
Yes, many–perhaps most–people are better at one skill than another. This effect is generally small–we’re talking about people who get A+ in English and only B+s in math, not people who get A+ in English but Fs in math.
The effect may be more pronounced for people at the extremes of high-IQ–that is, someone who is three standard deviations above the norm in math may be only slightly above average in verbal, and vice versa–but professional authors are not generally innumerate, nor are mathematicians and scientists unable to read and write. (In fact, their professions require constantly writing papers for publication and reading the papers published by their colleagues.)
All forms of “intelligence” probably rely, at a basic level, on bodily well-being. Your brain is a physical object inside your body, and if you do not have the material bits necessary for well-being, your brain will suffer. When you haven’t slept in a long time, your ability to think goes down the tubes. If you haven’t eaten in several days (or perhaps just this morning), you will find it difficult to think. If you are sick or in pain, again, you will have trouble thinking.
Healthy people have an easier time thinking, and this applies across the board to all forms of thought–mathematical, verbal, emotional, kinesthetic, musical, etc.
“Health” here doesn’t just include things we normally associate with it, like eating enough vegetables and swearing to the dentist that this time, you’re really going to floss. It probably also includes minute genetic variations in how efficient your body is at building and repairing tissues; chemicals or viruses you were exposed to in-utero; epigenetics, etc.
So where does this notion that math and science are better than English and feelings come from, anyway?
A. Math (and science) are disciplines with (fairly) objective answers. If I ask you, “What’s 2+2?” we can determine pretty easily whether you got it correct. This makes mathematical ability difficult to fudge and easy to verify.
Verbal disciplines, by contrast, are notoriously fuzzy:
|riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend||1|
|of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to||2|
|Howth Castle and Environs.||3|
|Sir Tristram, violer d’amores, fr’over the short sea, had passen-||4|
|core rearrived from North Armorica on this side the scraggy||5|
|isthmus of Europe Minor to wielderfight his penisolate war: nor||6|
|had topsawyer’s rocks by the stream Oconee exaggerated themselse||7|
|to Laurens County’s gorgios while they went doublin their mumper||8|
|all the time: nor avoice from afire bellowsed mishe mishe to||9|
|tauftauf thuartpeatrick: not yet, though venissoon after, had a||10|
|kidscad buttended a bland old isaac: not yet, though all’s fair in||11|
|vanessy, were sosie sesthers wroth with twone nathandjoe. Rot a||12|
|peck of pa’s malt had Jhem or Shen brewed by arclight and rory||13|
|end to the regginbrow was to be seen ringsome on the aquaface.||14|
|The fall (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner-||15|
So. A+ or F-?
Or how about:
I scowl with frustration at myself in the mirror. Damn my hair – it just won’t behave, and damn Katherine Kavanagh for being ill and subjecting me to this ordeal. I should be studying for my final exams, which are next week, yet here I am trying to brush my hair into submission. I must not sleep with it wet. I must not sleep with it wet. Reciting this mantra several times, I attempt, once more, to bring it under control with the brush. I roll my eyes in exasperation and gaze at the pale, brown-haired girl with blue eyes too big for her face staring back at me, and give up. My only option is to restrain my wayward hair in a ponytail and hope that I look semi presentable.
Best-seller, or Mary Sue dreck?
And what does this mean:
Within that conflictual economy of colonial discourse which Edward Said describes as the tension between the synchronic panoptical vision of domination – the demand for identity, stasis – and the counterpressure of the diachrony of history – change, difference – mimicry represents an ironic compromise. If I may adapt Samuel Weber’s formulation of the marginalizing vision of castration, then colonial mimicry is the desire for a reformed, recognizable Other, as a subject of a difference that is almost the same, but not quite. Which is to say, that the discourse of mimicry is constructed around an ambivalence; in order to be effective, mimicry must continually produce its slippage, its excess, its difference. (source)
If we’re going to argue about who’s smartest, it’s much easier if we can assign a number to everyone and declare that the person with the biggest number wins. The SAT makes a valiant effort at quantifying verbal knowledge like the number of words you can accurately use, but it is very hard to articulate what makes a text so great that Harvard University would hire the guy who wrote it.
B. The products of science have immediately obvious, useful applications, while the products of verbal abilities appear more superficial and superfluous.
Where would we be today without the polio vaccine, internal combustion engines, or the transistor? What language would we be writing in if no one had cracked the Enigma code, or if the Nazis had not made Albert Einstein a persona non grata? How many of us used computers, TVs, or microwaves? And let’s not forget all of the science that has gone into breeding and raising massively more caloric strains of wheat, corn, chicken, beef, etc., to assuage the world’s hunger.
We now live in a country where too much food is our greatest health problem!
If I had to pick between the polio vaccine and War and Peace, I’d pick the vaccine, even if every minute spent with Tolstoy is a minute of happiness. (Except when *spoilers spoilers* and then I cry.)
But literature is not the only product of verbal ability; we wouldn’t be able to tell other people about our scientific discoveries if it weren’t for language.
Highly verbal people are good at communication and so help keep the gears of modern society turning, which is probably why La Griffe du Lion found that national per capita GDP correlated more closely with verbal IQ scores than composite or mathematical scores.
Of course, as noted, these scores are highly correlated–so the whole business is really kind of moot.
So where does this notion come from?
In reality, high-verbal people tend to be more respected and better paid than high-math people. No, not novelists–novelists get paid crap. But average pay for lawyers–high verbal–is much better than average pay for mathematicians. Scientists are poorly paid compared to other folks with similar IQs and do badly on the dating market; normal people frequently bond over their lack of math ability.
“Math is hard. Let’s go shopping!” — Barbie
Even at the elementary level, math and science are given short shrift. How many schools have a “library” for math and science exploration in the same way they have a “library” for books? I have seen the lower elementary curriculum; kindergarteners are expected to read small books and write full sentences, but by the end of the year, they are only expected to count to 20 and add/subtract numbers up to 5. (eg, 1+4, 2+3, 3-2, etc.)
The claim that math/science abilities are more important than verbal abilities probably stems primarily from high-math/science people who recognize their fields’ contributions to so many important parts of modern life and are annoyed (or angry) about the lack of recognition they receive.
To be Continued.
9 thoughts on “Is Capitalism the only reason to care about Intelligence?”
[…] Source: Evolutionist X […]
Math IQ tests for stable pattern recognition, verbal tests your ability to hit moving targets? If math success has led us to a post scarcity economy, then math will surely suffer.
Verbal skill is necessary to make math discoveries useful. Spatial reasoning locked inside the reasoner’s head can’t benefit anyone.
I have an injury such that I shouldn’t type, but:
ISTM that there are at least two common patterns of “high-V”: The “Alice” type you described (verbal ability *actually is* their strongest neurological subskill, and political talent comes with it), and OTOH a kinesthetic type.
Kinesthetic? Well…I read somewhere that the kinesthetic learning style has the greatest mismatch to standard methods of math instruction / we haven’t yet figured out a good way of teaching them math. My guess is that the kinesthetic type is having to translate their thoughts into both verbal mode and math mode, but it’s easier for them to translate into verbal mode, so they score higher on verbal.
There also may be a third, “NVLD” type (like Deiseach), who are very verbally skilled but have poor social skills and are often clumsy–like Hans Asperger’s original subjects (as opposed to Leo Kanner’s relatively math-strong, “graceful” subjects).
Yes, the positive manifold exists. OTOH, yes, it’s also less prominent as scores go up.
“In reality, high-verbal people tend to be more respected and better paid than high-math people. No, not novelists–novelists get paid crap. But average pay for lawyers–high verbal–is much better than average pay for mathematicians.”
*All* kinds of good writing gets paid crap. Novels, technical writing, editing (same skillset), etc.
What causes…disgruntlement…is that it’s easier to make a living *as an introvert* with “math things” than “verbal things.”
Which is even more of an issue now that the one thing that high-V introverts do just as well as high-M introverts and that is also paid well–programming–has been misidentified by HR departments and college admins as a “math thing.” As in they gatekeep over SAT-M scores. Ed Realist has brought up the same concern.
(Come to think of it this has actually affected my DH. He got into CTD/CTY/TIP on verbal, but not math. He’d have been allowed into a programming class back then–but today, prospective employers have asked for SAT-M/GRE-Quant scores.)
(Speaking of which. CTD/CTY/TIP was also absolutely right back then to let kids into science courses on the strength of combined V+M scores. Science isn’t math; you can do science on verbal ability too. Verbal reasoning is still *reasoning*.)
(Meanwhile it’s also easier to prove to school admins that you need acceleration with math things than verbal things. Because of the greater ambiguity around verbal things that you mentioned.)
Need to stop typing now.
Hope your injury feels better, soon. Bad day on my end; will try to give you a real response soon.
Hello! Sorry for the delay; I hope your injury is feeling better.
To be fair, I think it is difficult for introverts of any sort to make a living; society is not set up for introverts. (As an introvert, I have a lot of sympathy.)
I suspect that, if they can stand it, law is a decent, high-paying path for high-V introverts. Psychiatry and certain medical professions might also be suitable, though i don’t know about the barriers to entry in those fields.
Even writers, crappily paid as they are, need a bit of extraversion–actually selling (and marketing) one’s work requires quite a bit of contact with the outside world. The extroverted authors I know are doing much better (as in actual book deals) than the introverts. The dynamic does seem to be different over in science, where you can get away a little more with being an introvert, so long as your work brings in money for the company. Even still, these guys get paid shittily compared to high-V managers.
HR departments need to burn.
[…] X: The series Is Capitalism the only reason to care about Intelligence? (part one), part two, and part three. A one-stop shop for the role intelligence plays in social status and in […]
Verbal iq is about language and to the pro-social species, language is everything, verbal is a quasi-factor G.
Spatial iq without verbal iq look less usefull,
arythmetic skills no there or no work efficiently without reading compreension,
verbal iq is integrative…
Other possibility is that there are greater proportion of verbally smart people, specially those with spherical g (same quantitative level in most of known or well studied cognitive skills) while advanced levels of math is rare and few people who can do it and do it in the creative way.
Maths seems tend to correlates with less ”empathetic skills”. In conformist and socially hierarchized societies express ”sympathy” and respect for the social rules is important to climb status quo and more income.
“ultimately, the antisemitism of many Unz commentators made it too dangerous for Frost to continue blogging, even though his posts actually had nothing to do with Judaism”
You mean somebody wrote things, of some hundreds that could be cited, like
“Old white people have always been the bad guys… You’re a dying breed, on the endangered list. And you are not worth saving.”
but ‘on the reverse’, I suppose.
If the reversed ones are anti-Semitism, what are the ones the “anti-Semitic” are a reaction to?
Anti-… something, someone, maybe?
Surprise! They are perfectly clean thoughts, expression of advanced progressive libealism, proof of education, sense and open-mindedness.
A is A, -A is B.
To think there still are close-minded people who believe only in logic and not in magic.