Talk:603: Idiocracy - Revision history

StapleFreeBatteries at 18:16, 24 November 2024

2024-11-24T18:16:42Z

42.book.addict at 16:48, 5 November 2024

2024-11-05T16:48:05Z

Colt605: two cent addition to comments

2023-09-30T00:23:56Z

two cent addition to comments

FaviFake at 10:42, 16 August 2023

2023-08-16T10:42:10Z

162.158.159.132 at 21:14, 13 November 2020

2020-11-13T21:14:03Z

108.162.212.173 at 18:39, 12 December 2019

2019-12-12T18:39:19Z

Netherin5 at 12:44, 13 February 2019

2019-02-13T12:44:28Z

162.158.93.27: Explained link of another user concerning reverse Flynn effect.

2019-02-13T09:20:03Z

Explained link of another user concerning reverse Flynn effect.

Dgbrt at 19:24, 5 October 2018

2018-10-05T19:24:20Z

172.69.69.28 at 15:24, 5 October 2018

2018-10-05T15:24:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:16, 24 November 2024
Line 44:		Line 44:
	This is not a new form of elitism. Until WWII, there were many elitists who formed a theory based on their perception of Darwin's theories. (Notice that I am not suggesting that Darwin agreed with them.) They were commonly known as Social Darwinists and Eugenicists. Their philosophy fell into disrepute because of Hitler's views on racial superiority and the atrocities which he produced as a result of his form of elitism. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.173\|108.162.212.173]] 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)		This is not a new form of elitism. Until WWII, there were many elitists who formed a theory based on their perception of Darwin's theories. (Notice that I am not suggesting that Darwin agreed with them.) They were commonly known as Social Darwinists and Eugenicists. Their philosophy fell into disrepute because of Hitler's views on racial superiority and the atrocities which he produced as a result of his form of elitism. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.173\|108.162.212.173]] 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
	:Nazis ruin everything.		:Nazis ruin everything.
		+
		+
		+	Honestly, I feel like when people compare the real world to Idiocracy, they mean that the real world is exhibiting the same ''symptoms'' as Idiocracy (i.e. everyone, especially the people is charge, are acting really damn stupid right now), not the cause.
		+	[[User:StapleFreeBatteries\|StapleFreeBatteries]] ([[User talk:StapleFreeBatteries\|talk]]) 18:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 If there is reason for climate change it is almost certainly due to the destruction of trees. Any ridiculous assertions about carbon dioxide can not be confirmed or denied and the political machinations about carbon dioxide stem from Margaret Thatcher's war on the coal miners in Britain.
-It would be a simple matter to replant forests. All we would have to do is pay for that in higher latitudes and send in drones to deal with illegal loggers in lower latitudes. 20 years or so should sort out most of the problems.
+It would be a simple matter to replant forests. All we would have to do is pay for that in higher latitudes and send in drones to deal with illegal loggers in lower latitudes. 20 years or so should sort out most of the problems. [[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 17:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 : I see what you did there... This is the bit where you go "Everything I just said was wrong" --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 17:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:23, 30 September 2023
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Elitism is an eminently more desirable trait than stupidity to breed into one's offspring. An elitist might be hated, but he will be competent; he will accomplish things, while a stupid person will harm themselves and others through their stupidity, often remaining well-liked in spite of being cancerous and toxic to everything nearby. Elitism is the bitter taste of medicine which will make you better; stupidity is the delicious candy to which you will become hopelessly addicted at a formative age, leading to a miserable lifetime of diabetes and an early death by heart failure. I only wish I intended to reproduce, so that I could practice what I preach on this regard. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.52\|173.245.54.52]] 19:28, 30 October 2015 (UTC)		Elitism is an eminently more desirable trait than stupidity to breed into one's offspring. An elitist might be hated, but he will be competent; he will accomplish things, while a stupid person will harm themselves and others through their stupidity, often remaining well-liked in spite of being cancerous and toxic to everything nearby. Elitism is the bitter taste of medicine which will make you better; stupidity is the delicious candy to which you will become hopelessly addicted at a formative age, leading to a miserable lifetime of diabetes and an early death by heart failure. I only wish I intended to reproduce, so that I could practice what I preach on this regard. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.52\|173.245.54.52]] 19:28, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	: This viewpoint is predicated on the false dichotomy between elitism and stupidity. Many elitists are no more intelligent or capable than those to whom they profess superiority. (And frequently this perceived superiority makes them resistant to social cooperation or empathy and therefore effectively ''less'' useful or capable—whereas others may overcome a relative lack of ability with humility and willingness to work with others.) Chances are you're not as smart as you think you are, although you're probably right about being hated... [[User:Colt605\|Colt605]] ([[User talk:Colt605\|talk]]) 00:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

	Changed the text in the first paragraph because the movie never implied that people with lower IQ were more fertile, it clearly stated that they were more likely to reproduce due to lack of education, absence of planning, and general negligence with regards to the consequences of their actions. If you disagree with me on this, go watch the movie again. Or just the first few minutes which explains this in detail. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 05:08, 11 February 2016 (UTC)		Changed the text in the first paragraph because the movie never implied that people with lower IQ were more fertile, it clearly stated that they were more likely to reproduce due to lack of education, absence of planning, and general negligence with regards to the consequences of their actions. If you disagree with me on this, go watch the movie again. Or just the first few minutes which explains this in detail. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 05:08, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 :Eh. He hasn't appeared in any other strips, and it's not too harmful to put him under the umbrella of the real White Hat. I see your point; White Hat is no longer a generic character like [[Hairy]], but an actual recurring one.
 :Also, have Black Hat and White Hat ever appeared in the same comic? (Click and Drag doesn't count.) [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 09:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
-::White Hat is not this Safari Hat guy and this has been corrected recently. Also recently in [[1708: Dehydration]] White and Black Hat appears together and Black Hat actually reacts in a discussion White Hat has begun. See more under the explanation for [[:Category:Characters with Hats|Characters with Hats]]. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
+::White Hat is not this Safari Hat guy and this has been corrected recently. Also recently in [[1708: Dehydration]] White and Black Hat appears together and Black Hat actually reacts in a discussion White Hat has begun. See more under the explanation for [[:Category:Characters with hats|Characters with Hats]]. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 So, does this page qualify for Complete now? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.66|199.27.128.66]] 05:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:14, 13 November 2020
Line 43:		Line 43:

	This is not a new form of elitism. Until WWII, there were many elitists who formed a theory based on their perception of Darwin's theories. (Notice that I am not suggesting that Darwin agreed with them.) They were commonly known as Social Darwinists and Eugenicists. Their philosophy fell into disrepute because of Hitler's views on racial superiority and the atrocities which he produced as a result of his form of elitism. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.173\|108.162.212.173]] 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)		This is not a new form of elitism. Until WWII, there were many elitists who formed a theory based on their perception of Darwin's theories. (Notice that I am not suggesting that Darwin agreed with them.) They were commonly known as Social Darwinists and Eugenicists. Their philosophy fell into disrepute because of Hitler's views on racial superiority and the atrocities which he produced as a result of his form of elitism. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.173\|108.162.212.173]] 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
		+	:Nazis ruin everything.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:39, 12 December 2019
Line 41:		Line 41:
	::The point, from the "Flynn effect" wikipedia article : "Research suggests that there is an ongoing reversed Flynn effect, i.e. a decline in IQ scores, in Norway, Denmark, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, France and German-speaking countries,[4] a development which appears to have started in the 1990s". This kind of nullifies the comic's point.		::The point, from the "Flynn effect" wikipedia article : "Research suggests that there is an ongoing reversed Flynn effect, i.e. a decline in IQ scores, in Norway, Denmark, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, France and German-speaking countries,[4] a development which appears to have started in the 1990s". This kind of nullifies the comic's point.
	:::One, sign your writing, two, format correctly, three, one study proves nothing, especially on Newsweek of all things. Seriously, Newsweek. Four, average IQ can’t decrease, or increase for that matter, five, IQ isn’t the best measure of intelligence anyways.		:::One, sign your writing, two, format correctly, three, one study proves nothing, especially on Newsweek of all things. Seriously, Newsweek. Four, average IQ can’t decrease, or increase for that matter, five, IQ isn’t the best measure of intelligence anyways.
		+
		+	This is not a new form of elitism. Until WWII, there were many elitists who formed a theory based on their perception of Darwin's theories. (Notice that I am not suggesting that Darwin agreed with them.) They were commonly known as Social Darwinists and Eugenicists. Their philosophy fell into disrepute because of Hitler's views on racial superiority and the atrocities which he produced as a result of his form of elitism. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.173\|108.162.212.173]] 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28|172.69.69.28]] 15:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 :What's your point? I can link thousands articles as well. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
-The point, from the "Flynn effect" wikipedia article : "Research suggests that there is an ongoing reversed Flynn effect, i.e. a decline in IQ scores, in Norway, Denmark, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, France and German-speaking countries,[4] a development which appears to have started in the 1990s". This kind of nullifies the comic's point.
+::The point, from the "Flynn effect" wikipedia article : "Research suggests that there is an ongoing reversed Flynn effect, i.e. a decline in IQ scores, in Norway, Denmark, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, France and German-speaking countries,[4] a development which appears to have started in the 1990s". This kind of nullifies the comic's point.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:20, 13 February 2019
Line 39:		Line 39:
	https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28\|172.69.69.28]] 15:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)		https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28\|172.69.69.28]] 15:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
	:What's your point? I can link thousands articles as well. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)		:What's your point? I can link thousands articles as well. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
		+	The point, from the "Flynn effect" wikipedia article : "Research suggests that there is an ongoing reversed Flynn effect, i.e. a decline in IQ scores, in Norway, Denmark, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, France and German-speaking countries,[4] a development which appears to have started in the 1990s". This kind of nullifies the comic's point.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:24, 5 October 2018
Line 38:		Line 38:

	https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28\|172.69.69.28]] 15:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)		https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28\|172.69.69.28]] 15:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
		+	:What's your point? I can link thousands articles as well. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:24, 5 October 2018
Line 36:		Line 36:

	The explanation of the Dunning-Kruger effect is incorrect, insofar as it tries to apply the effect to intelligence, and mention here may be off topic entirely. The Dunning-Kruger effect is refers to bias in self assessment relative to the norm of low-skilled people in a given field to high skilled people in the same field. Proficiency in a field is not intelligence, nor does the theory allow generalization to intelligent people generally versus those less intelligent generally, irrespective of field, and while there is probably evidence of a correlation between IQ and and proficiency within some collection of fields, the Dunning-Kruger effect would require much stronger evidence to generalize to intelligence for specific proficiency, specifically it would require evidence of a causal, not correlative, (from skill to IQ, and not the reverse) link, and evidence that such link exists not just in general or at average, but that such link occurs in any hypothetical, non-specified area if proficiency. The wiki article that is linked is technically correct but somewhat misleading in use of the term 'cognitive ability,' which is in some contexts used to refer to intelligence, but in context refers to the specific, non-IQ domained, mental practice of effective megacognition and self-assessment, as well as a type of social awareness regarding group standards of passable performance. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.100\|162.158.142.100]] 22:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)		The explanation of the Dunning-Kruger effect is incorrect, insofar as it tries to apply the effect to intelligence, and mention here may be off topic entirely. The Dunning-Kruger effect is refers to bias in self assessment relative to the norm of low-skilled people in a given field to high skilled people in the same field. Proficiency in a field is not intelligence, nor does the theory allow generalization to intelligent people generally versus those less intelligent generally, irrespective of field, and while there is probably evidence of a correlation between IQ and and proficiency within some collection of fields, the Dunning-Kruger effect would require much stronger evidence to generalize to intelligence for specific proficiency, specifically it would require evidence of a causal, not correlative, (from skill to IQ, and not the reverse) link, and evidence that such link exists not just in general or at average, but that such link occurs in any hypothetical, non-specified area if proficiency. The wiki article that is linked is technically correct but somewhat misleading in use of the term 'cognitive ability,' which is in some contexts used to refer to intelligence, but in context refers to the specific, non-IQ domained, mental practice of effective megacognition and self-assessment, as well as a type of social awareness regarding group standards of passable performance. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.100\|162.158.142.100]] 22:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
		+
		+	https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28\|172.69.69.28]] 15:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)