Printable View
People who do not support healthcare reform say people should be responsible and should take care of their health.
Americans "bombarded" with cancer sources: report
Americans are being "bombarded" with cancer-causing chemicals and radiation.
What is the most responsible action? Not to live in USA?
Be responsible: get an education and stop embarrassing Latin America.
While I agree this is a stupid thread based on stupid logic, that *seems* a little harsh Lokster. You really have no basis to call into question his education, afterall. It could be judgement based, drugs, insanity, etc.
Given his posting history, it's either that or an abnormally low IQ. Though it's likely a combination of the two.
I don't think you know how IQ worksQuote:
an abnormally low IQ
He has been brought up in an anti-US environment. He jumps on any article or editorial piece that paints the US in a bad light, regardless of how silly or bizarre or patently untrue that article may be.
Add that background with a small twist of :bulb: and you have our lovable little AR.
It's a distribution based on the overall population. He's probably half a standard deviation away from the median.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Yes Low-key, for some reason I am intimately familiar with Gaussian distributions, among others. I was questioning your use of the word 'abnormal'Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Oh, he's *lovable* now. Yeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
Loki must hate you on some level. And also: You've grown arrogant ya fuckin' egg head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
He's not strong on logical reasoning. That's an education issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
Fuzzy is strong on understatement, however. :o
You really think so? I always thought logical reasoning was one of the cognitive abilities which wasn't really influenced by education. Like memory - either you got it or you don't, and there's not a whole lot that schooling can do to change that.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
I'm pretty sure you can sharply improve your memory over a long enough period of time. Some people might naturally have a better memory than other people, but that doesn't mean it's something that static. Heck, first graders in Russia had to memorize page-long poems, while most American high school students can't manage the same. Ditto for memorizing the multiplication table.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
True, but it's not something you improve (or not) through "education." Sure, you can train your brain, but it's not "education"/schooling that's gonna make the difference.
In large chunks of the world, "education" means memorizing a ridiculous amount of useless information. :o
I think this is a skill you can get really good at with some training. If you're stupid, you can't, likely. But if you're reasonably smart, I don't think you have the ability automatically. You have to learn it from somewhere....Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
From memorizing each of kat's stories and being able to relate them to each other. :o
OK, fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
From everyday life? Sure, someone can probably try to teach logical reasoning and "how to think" or whatever but it seems like this is one of those things you should (and usually do) pick up as a function of surviving to see another day unfold.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Hmm, I wouldn't be so simplistic. I'll ask my wife, but my understanding is that almost every form of "intellect" is fairly plastic, with the caveat that I don't know how rigorously one can test any of that crap. Some kids probably self-teach better, but good teachers pose lots of hypotheticals that a kid needs to reason through. That's above and beyond the three Rs (but goes by the wayside under the exigencies of teaching to tests). As Loki points out, with the regurgitation or rote learning model, you won't get any critical thinking.
All beside the point. It's unwarranted and just mean to call AR a retard. He seems like a nice man, though pretty darned misguided by my lights. It's also elitist. :p
And, it's incompetent to bobble the definition so badly, maybe even retarded, like a whole half SD from the median. :)
Misguided elitists are the worst.
Just read that one SD for IQ is only 15%; I thought it was 34%. I'll have to change my estimate to 1.5 SDs then. :o
:bulb:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Where did you read that it was 34%? In a Kathsung post? :p
I assumed it was normally distributed around the median. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iagram.svg.png
Right. All bell curves/"standard" distributions are normal, but not all "normal" distributions are standard.
It *is* "normally" distributed around the median... but not "standardly" distributed around the median. Or... wait, do I have that backwards? Statistics terminology sucks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68-95-99.7_rule :o I did screw up when I said distribution around the median; it's actually around the mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
That's the same in a symmetrical distribution. (Supposed the sample is large enough)
I think Nessie's problem was your definition of "abnormal."Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I don't think Low-key much cared
Holy Roman Empire! Did your spidey senses tingle, that you answered to quickly?
Um
No?