Marilyn vos Savant on suing gun manufacturers
- Thread starter Frandy
- Start date
- Status
Lupinus
Member
we need a clapping smilie
thats a +1
thats a +1
mordechaianiliewicz
Member
I get very tired of people blaming others for their ills. If a corporation dumps chemicals that cause cancer, sue the 
out of them. If you are hit by a drunk driver sue the out of them.
If you take heroin, or get drunk all the time you brought it on yourself. A little self-responsibility is called for here. Everyone knows that fast food is bad for you. This is not new news. If you get fat, and have heart attacks b/c of it, you knew what was gonna happen.
Holding McDonalds liable for people's poor diet is like holding Jack Daniels responsible for alchoholism. When will people realize everything on the planet has a market even the most destructive vices. Get over it.
I totally support this legislation.
out of them. If you are hit by a drunk driver sue the out of them.If you take heroin, or get drunk all the time you brought it on yourself. A little self-responsibility is called for here. Everyone knows that fast food is bad for you. This is not new news. If you get fat, and have heart attacks b/c of it, you knew what was gonna happen.
Holding McDonalds liable for people's poor diet is like holding Jack Daniels responsible for alchoholism. When will people realize everything on the planet has a market even the most destructive vices. Get over it.
I totally support this legislation.
71Commander
Member
Here you go.
River Wraith
Member
Sweet...and she's hot too.
B
boofus
Guest
She's got a brain to match her looks too. She has the highest recorded IQ of any person in the world. She took a monitored IQ test when she was 10 and scored high enough to beat most 22 year olds.
Of course the liberal so-called 'intellectuals' like kennedy, kerry, schumer, brady, feinstein, chomsky and streisand will call her a mouth breathing idiotic redneck for not supporting their gun grabbing, regardless of her 228 IQ.
In American Mensa, which is she is a member of, many of the letters written in the national magazine take a decidedly libertarian slant. Ayn Rand quotes abound. Granted there are a few kumbaya, world peace idiotic liberal arts types that manage to score well enough in language tests to join but the vast majority are libertarian/conservative.
Of course the liberal so-called 'intellectuals' like kennedy, kerry, schumer, brady, feinstein, chomsky and streisand will call her a mouth breathing idiotic redneck for not supporting their gun grabbing, regardless of her 228 IQ.
In American Mensa, which is she is a member of, many of the letters written in the national magazine take a decidedly libertarian slant. Ayn Rand quotes abound. Granted there are a few kumbaya, world peace idiotic liberal arts types that manage to score well enough in language tests to join but the vast majority are libertarian/conservative.
bumm
Member
>Granted there are a few kumbaya, world peace
> idiotic liberal arts types that manage to score
> well enough in language tests to join but I'd
> wager most of the Mensa members with really good
> math, logical and analytical skills are solidly
> libertarian/republican.
I have my doubts about that. It's takes a slightly different type of person to make note of their own intelligence, and want to belong to Mensa, then go to the trouble of taking tests and joining. The few members I've known have been intelligent people, but not very "wise."
It would be so fun to see the mail she gets from that column.
Marty
> idiotic liberal arts types that manage to score
> well enough in language tests to join but I'd
> wager most of the Mensa members with really good
> math, logical and analytical skills are solidly
> libertarian/republican.
I have my doubts about that. It's takes a slightly different type of person to make note of their own intelligence, and want to belong to Mensa, then go to the trouble of taking tests and joining. The few members I've known have been intelligent people, but not very "wise."
It would be so fun to see the mail she gets from that column.
Marty
B
boofus
Guest
Most people get in with their SAT, GRE, or MCAT score, which you gotta take to get into a decent school anyway. Hell they even accepted US Army proficiency tests a while back. It's mostly just ordinary people with ordinary lives that noticed they happened to score really high on some test a long time ago that get curious and apply.
The egotistical, self proclaimed 'intellectuals' that toot their own horn are people like ward churchill, howard zinn, noam chomsky, and barbra streisand and they most certainly are not members.
The egotistical, self proclaimed 'intellectuals' that toot their own horn are people like ward churchill, howard zinn, noam chomsky, and barbra streisand and they most certainly are not members.
beerslurpy
member
IQ tests have difficulty measuring above 140. The tests arent meant to measure the top 1% of test takers accurately. There are specialized tests you can take for the higher levels of intelligence, but the takers are obviously self-selected and they prep for the tests beforehand.
Remember that IQ is your relative intelligence compared to everyone else, with 100 being at the middle. Every 15 points is another standard deviation. There is practically no one with a 200 IQ in the world. The high 190s is already 1-in-a-billion, so you are already talking of a group of people with only 6 members. Good luck finding a general test that only 6 people can pass without factoring in differences based on preparation or environment or language.
Here is something for you to ponder:
Remember that IQ is your relative intelligence compared to everyone else, with 100 being at the middle. Every 15 points is another standard deviation. There is practically no one with a 200 IQ in the world. The high 190s is already 1-in-a-billion, so you are already talking of a group of people with only 6 members. Good luck finding a general test that only 6 people can pass without factoring in differences based on preparation or environment or language.
Here is something for you to ponder:
B
boofus
Guest
Well the point is she recognizes that penalizing the manufacturer for the actions of an unrelated individual is absurd.
Either way it works out.
If you think she doesn't have "street smarts". Then as naive as she is, she still recognizes that the very concept of holding a 3rd party responsible for something they have no control over is absurd.
If you think she is absolutely brilliant, then she sees something most liberals can't wrap their little minds around.
Like I said either way it works out in our favor.
Either way it works out.
If you think she doesn't have "street smarts". Then as naive as she is, she still recognizes that the very concept of holding a 3rd party responsible for something they have no control over is absurd.
If you think she is absolutely brilliant, then she sees something most liberals can't wrap their little minds around.
Like I said either way it works out in our favor.
beerslurpy
member
Mensa is stupid because it's too easy to get in and anyone that would want to join such a club is probably an ass-hat. Just join a club doing something that interests you. Joining a club for "smart people" just seems like a bunch of empty self-congratulation.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
When they raised the dues to $59/yr I dropped out. From a money's-worth standpoint, that was wise.
Art
From a money's-worth standpoint, that was wise. Art
unspellable
Member
IQ distribution
The distribution above appears to be non-skewed. This surprises me. Let's assume that for normal healthy individuals the distribution would be non-skewed. Then there are people who have various medical conditions that can result in a lower IQ. For example people with Down's syndrome tend to have lower IQ's, very few of them would score as high as 100 on an IQ test. It would seem to me that becasue of people with various conditions the distribution for the population as a whole ought to be skewed towards the low side. or are we to assume the distribution applies only to the normal healthy population with all the people with related problems not being included? I don't know of any medical condition that causes a higher IQ.
The distribution above appears to be non-skewed. This surprises me. Let's assume that for normal healthy individuals the distribution would be non-skewed. Then there are people who have various medical conditions that can result in a lower IQ. For example people with Down's syndrome tend to have lower IQ's, very few of them would score as high as 100 on an IQ test. It would seem to me that becasue of people with various conditions the distribution for the population as a whole ought to be skewed towards the low side. or are we to assume the distribution applies only to the normal healthy population with all the people with related problems not being included? I don't know of any medical condition that causes a higher IQ.
Librarian
Member
ESSENTIALS OF STANFORD-BINET (SB5) ASSESSMENT (Google 'show .PDF as HTML link)
Asperger's Syndrome is heavily skewed towards higher IQ's, although that's not absolute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger's_syndrome
"Good luck finding a general test that only 6 people can pass..."
IQ tests are not a pass-fail test. They are a set of questions, mostly logic based, with a distribution of complexity. Given the time limit, if you have to think about some fraction of the questions you will not have time to answer the remainder.
Given enough time you could probably work out even the hardest. The difference is that higher IQ people can solve even the more complicated problems quickly.
Over a large population, the scores are very evenly distributed along a normal ('Bell') curve.
Certain groups have a higher mean than others, but group distributions do not tell you anything about the next person you meet.
High range IQ tests do have a larger error distribution, but if you are at 180, it is not very important if you are actually 160, or even 200.
IQ tests are not a pass-fail test. They are a set of questions, mostly logic based, with a distribution of complexity. Given the time limit, if you have to think about some fraction of the questions you will not have time to answer the remainder.
Given enough time you could probably work out even the hardest. The difference is that higher IQ people can solve even the more complicated problems quickly.
Over a large population, the scores are very evenly distributed along a normal ('Bell') curve.
Certain groups have a higher mean than others, but group distributions do not tell you anything about the next person you meet.
High range IQ tests do have a larger error distribution, but if you are at 180, it is not very important if you are actually 160, or even 200.
beerslurpy
member
Boofus
First off, there is no available stereotype of mensa members that I was drawing upon. This is my opinion, based off the likely choices one would have to make to want to join mensa. You may think mensa is awesome, which I dont begrudge you this in the slightest. I just dont think it means anything.
Brickeye
Way to intentionally miss the point. The standard IQ test cant measure above 140 accurately. Also, it doesnt measure intelligence, it measures RELATIVE intelligence. This is a huge distinction. If everyone got lead poisoning tomorrow and you didnt, you would probably leap up 30 or 40 IQ points immediately. It also isnt a linear scale. 50 percent of the population is between 90 and 110. 1 percent of the population is between 132 and 135. .04 percent is above 150. Get the idea?
If you are going to go that many standard devs from average, you are going to need some sort of test that divides people accurately into that group or the groups beneath it. Either you are one of the 6 people that can occupy the 200+ group or you are not. That sounds like pass fail to me.
Consider that:
-Except chinese, there aren't any languages spoken or read by more than a billion people that could take a single test. So much for fairness.
-Even if everyone understood the same language, the test would have to be of such difficulty that it would be as much a test of your ability to take that test as it would be a test of general intelligence. Somone could devote their whole life to acing that test and have no useful knowledge outside of the knowledge for that test. What was the test measuring then?
Do you begin to appreciate why testing for IQ in the one-in-a-billion groupings is inherently pointless?
First off, there is no available stereotype of mensa members that I was drawing upon. This is my opinion, based off the likely choices one would have to make to want to join mensa. You may think mensa is awesome, which I dont begrudge you this in the slightest. I just dont think it means anything.
Brickeye
Way to intentionally miss the point. The standard IQ test cant measure above 140 accurately. Also, it doesnt measure intelligence, it measures RELATIVE intelligence. This is a huge distinction. If everyone got lead poisoning tomorrow and you didnt, you would probably leap up 30 or 40 IQ points immediately. It also isnt a linear scale. 50 percent of the population is between 90 and 110. 1 percent of the population is between 132 and 135. .04 percent is above 150. Get the idea?
If you are going to go that many standard devs from average, you are going to need some sort of test that divides people accurately into that group or the groups beneath it. Either you are one of the 6 people that can occupy the 200+ group or you are not. That sounds like pass fail to me.
Consider that:
-Except chinese, there aren't any languages spoken or read by more than a billion people that could take a single test. So much for fairness.
-Even if everyone understood the same language, the test would have to be of such difficulty that it would be as much a test of your ability to take that test as it would be a test of general intelligence. Somone could devote their whole life to acing that test and have no useful knowledge outside of the knowledge for that test. What was the test measuring then?
Do you begin to appreciate why testing for IQ in the one-in-a-billion groupings is inherently pointless?
mountainclmbr
Member
The Mensa members I have known were all social reject and wierded out types. I don't think crazy=smart. All Mensa members I have known also had terribly complicated lives which I have always thought was their fault. Glad I never joined.
I believe that cigars can be used without abuse, but that cigarettes are so damned vile that they cannot.
I used to smoke a pack a day, despite the fact that I have a Mensa-level IQ, or at least I did before I smoked it away...
Now I just shoot trap. No stupid addictions here.
I don't know if I've met many or any Mensans, though I certainly have known many people who could have joined. But I'm an LP member, which is at least as bad and likely far worse, and unquestionably as masturbatory.
Libertarian Party is an oxymoron. I guess so is a social club for those who are "differently abled", socially.
Maybe we should start the American Stereotyping Association.
I used to smoke a pack a day, despite the fact that I have a Mensa-level IQ, or at least I did before I smoked it away...
Now I just shoot trap. No stupid addictions here.
I don't know if I've met many or any Mensans, though I certainly have known many people who could have joined. But I'm an LP member, which is at least as bad and likely far worse, and unquestionably as masturbatory.
Libertarian Party is an oxymoron. I guess so is a social club for those who are "differently abled", socially.
Maybe we should start the American Stereotyping Association.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Now, mountainclimbr, there ya go, generalizing from not much data.
Lessee: There are some 120 million people involved with gun ownership in the U.S. The NRA has some 3+ million members.
Mensa is open to the top 2% of IQs, or in the U.S. some six million people. Yet, the membership is around 30,000 or so.
Seems to me that one could make nasty generalizations about the NRA, just as easily as about Mensans.
And I just really do have difficulty seeing myself as any sort of social reject.
Heck, I might generalize that people judge others by themselves!
Halfway serious but of no particular importance: My mother was an assoc. prof. in the UT Psych Dept when the folks at Stanford were working up the Binet IQ Test. This was cooperative, nationwide effort as I understand the deal. My junior high school provided a bunch of the guinea pigs. I guess this was around 1946.
Mostly because of the time factor, I blew out the curve. A bunch of grad students had to go back and re-do a bunch of stuff. I got griped at for years on account of my embarrassing her. The ancient, "My son did WHAT?" Hey, I couldn't help it if the test was easy!
What I gather about it all, basically, is that IQ is best regarded as a capability for learning. It has zilch to do with common sense, practicality or wisdom. And it sure doesn't mean that bright folks will actually learn.
Art
Lessee: There are some 120 million people involved with gun ownership in the U.S. The NRA has some 3+ million members.
Mensa is open to the top 2% of IQs, or in the U.S. some six million people. Yet, the membership is around 30,000 or so.
Seems to me that one could make nasty generalizations about the NRA, just as easily as about Mensans.
And I just really do have difficulty seeing myself as any sort of social reject.
Heck, I might generalize that people judge others by themselves!
Halfway serious but of no particular importance: My mother was an assoc. prof. in the UT Psych Dept when the folks at Stanford were working up the Binet IQ Test. This was cooperative, nationwide effort as I understand the deal. My junior high school provided a bunch of the guinea pigs. I guess this was around 1946.
Mostly because of the time factor, I blew out the curve. A bunch of grad students had to go back and re-do a bunch of stuff. I got griped at for years on account of my embarrassing her. The ancient, "My son did WHAT?" Hey, I couldn't help it if the test was easy!
What I gather about it all, basically, is that IQ is best regarded as a capability for learning. It has zilch to do with common sense, practicality or wisdom. And it sure doesn't mean that bright folks will actually learn.
Art
- Status
