[extropy-chat] Re: Intelligence correlations

David Lubkin extropy at unreasonable.com
Sat Dec 6 04:07:36 UTC 2003


At 05:33 PM 12/5/2003 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:

>I have been wondering for some time now whether there
>is any research to correlate 'intelligence' with
>'various cultural parameters'.  For example religious
>belief, with sub correlations to specific religions
>and degrees of fundamentalism.  Or along political
>lines: Repub, Dem, Liber, Green, Indep, Commie,
>non-voter.  Or say, liberal vs conservative.  Or gay
>vs straight.  Not to mention along gender lines.
>
>I've googled in search of this data, but so far no
>luck.  Any of y'all got any tips for me?

As you might expect, the higher the intelligence level, the harder it is to 
get a decent sample.

Myers-Briggs personality --

Overall population is (75% E,  25% I), (75% S, 25% N), (55% T, 45% F), (50% 
J, 50% P).

Mensa (1:50 IQ) came out at (27% E, 73% I), (10% S, 90% N), (75% T, 25% F), 
(75% J, 25% P) in a 1993 study.

The Triple Nine Society (1:1000) only had a couple dozen data points in an 
on-line poll.  Almost everyone was NT.  More I than E and slightly more J 
than P.

Triple Nine seems to be largely agnostics who are either libertarian or 
conservative but there are notable exceptions.  I suspect the connection is 
between personality and politics (libertarians usually being NT's) and 
between personality and intelligence, rather than directly between 
intelligence and politics.

By the way, it appears that people in the extropian community are pretty 
similar to Triple Nine in politics, intelligence, and personality.

Intelligence distribution of men vs. women *has* been extensively studied, 
and you should be able to find a lot of links.  You might start with Kevin 
Langdon, "Sex Differences in the Distribution of Mental Ability" ( 
http://www.polymath-systems.com/intel/essayrev/sexdiff.html ).

I'm not aware of any studies of gay vs. straight.  I would be skeptical, 
though, of how representative any gay sample would be of the overall gay 
population.

>Clearly, such 'data' is controversial and subject to
>a high bogosity coefficient (cf The Bell Curve).
>Never the less, inquiring minds want to know.

Have you actually read _The Bell Curve_?  I'm finally getting around to 
it.  The level of documentation and rigor for its assertions is far greater 
than its critics would have you believe.  It seems roughly on par with 
Thomas Sowell's best although not as much fun to read.  I do know that it 
is considered a credible work by people who are both skilled in 
psychometrics and members of high-IQ communities with 3 to 5 S.D. entrance 
requirements (that is, one-in-a-thousand to one-in-a-million).

The bogosity seems to be mostly in criticism by people who haven't actually 
read the book.  Much like what _More Guns, Less Crime_ received, for 
similar reasons.


-- David Lubkin.





More information about the extropy-chat mailing list