Is there a positive corelation between smartness and wealth?
Offline Obviously, that depend on how you define smartness.
Feel free to define smartness the best possible logical way you can.
Obvisouly, I am talking about statistical result.
- Login to post comments
Offline In my opinion, I would say a person with a high IQ + EQ is smarter than someone with just a high IQ.
I agree.
[MOD EDIT -fixed quotes]
- Login to post comments
Offline Timf1234 wrote:I think i did mention "Statistical data".http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/04/intelligence_no.php [MOD EDIT - fixed link]
I also wrote: "define smartness the best possible logical way you can."
So in your opinion, IQ is the only measure of smartness?
People who do not know how to or don't or can't manage their money is not the failure on their part on Smartness?
There was a reason why I did not ask for the corelation between IQ and Wealth.
Would you consider EQ and IQ both together make a person smarter or just the IQ?
Tim, do you know what the "moving goalpost" fallacy is, cause you've commited it. Your definition of 'smartness' is completely irrelevant. Know why??? I do. It's because NOBODY is doing any studies where they base definitions on Timf1234's definition.
Also, Timf1234, what evidence have you provided for say.... ANYTHING you've said? NONE. I'm sure a 2 minute google search was enough to answer your question Tim, I would think a genius as yourself would be able to perform google searches to answer your own questions. Oh wait this thread isn't a question, you have an 'answer' already. But you know nobody is going to take your argument seriously as you made it up out of 'personal life experience'.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts
- Login to post comments
Offline Roisin Dubh wrote:Timf1234 wrote:I think i did mention "Statistical data".http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/04/intelligence_no.php [MOD EDIT - fixed link]
Timf1234 wrote:I also wrote: "define smartness the best possible logical way you can."
So in your opinion, IQ is the only measure of smartness?
People who do not know how to or don't or can't manage their money is not the failure on their part on Smartness?
There was a reason why I did not ask for the corelation between IQ and Wealth.
Would you consider EQ and IQ both together make a person smarter or just the IQ?
Tim, do you know what the "moving goalpost" fallacy is, cause you've commited it. Your definition of 'smartness' is completely irrelevant. Know why??? I do. It's because NOBODY is doing any studies where they base definitions on Timf1234's definition.
Also, Timf1234, what evidence have you provided for say.... ANYTHING you've said? NONE. I'm sure a 2 minute google search was enough to answer your question Tim, I would think a genius as yourself would be able to perform google searches to answer your own questions. Oh wait this thread isn't a question, you have an 'answer' already. But you know nobody is going to take your argument seriously as you made it up out of 'personal life experience'.
I did not define smartness up to this point. I asked, how would you define it.
Is only IQ the measure of smartnes or EQ as well?
How do you define or consider it?
Plus, the google such you are reffering to did not yield any data about corelation between smartness and wealth. It talked about IQ and wealth instead.
Now, I put you in a psychological mode that you will disagree with anything I say, just for what the heckm
hey, does electron have negative chage?
You might be tempted to say it has positive charge just to antagonist me.
- Login to post comments
Offline Now, I put you in a psychological mode that you will disagree with anything I say, just for what the heckm
I treat my brother's YEC friend the same way, he never presents any real evidence either.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts
- Login to post comments
Offline Timf1234 wrote:Now, I put you in a psychological mode that you will disagree with anything I say, just for what the heckm
I treat my brother's YEC friend the same way, he never presents any real evidence either.
I can also treat you the same way.
What you wrote above doesn't make any sense.
If you want to see the all the phases of evolution in front of your own eye then that is not going to happen.
therefore, in those situation you will have to apply logical thoughts, chain of logic.
You failed to answer my question that if there any particle in the universe that doesn't follow the laws of nature. How can then be any free will.
If someone claims god, he need to first define it and then prove it.
If you claim there free will. Then first you define it then prove it.
Ball is in your court.
- Login to post comments
Offline No, because it's easy to inherit money or earn it through a talent or luck. Also easy to be very intelligent and poor.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
- Login to post comments
Offline vexed wrote:Timf1234 wrote:Now, I put you in a psychological mode that you will disagree with anything I say, just for what the heckm
I treat my brother's YEC friend the same way, he never presents any real evidence either.
I can also treat you the same way.
What you wrote above doesn't make any sense.
If you want to see the all the phases of evolution in front of your own eye then that is not going to happen.
therefore, in those situation you will have to apply logical thoughts, chain of logic.
You failed to answer my question that if there any particle in the universe that doesn't follow the laws of nature. How can then be any free will.
If someone claims god, he need to first define it and then prove it.
If you claim there free will. Then first you define it then prove it.
Ball is in your court.
You're the one with the 'burden of proof'. Balls in your court.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts
- Login to post comments
Offline Hey guys look... another ambiguous question! Why don't you ask: education vs income. You can measure those 
- Login to post comments
Offline If you want to see the all the phases of evolution in front of your own eye then that is not going to happen.therefore, in those situation you will have to apply logical thoughts, chain of logic.
You failed to answer my question that if there any particle in the universe that doesn't follow the laws of nature. How can then be any free will.
If someone claims god, he need to first define it and then prove it.
If you claim there free will. Then first you define it then prove it.
Did the topic just spontaneously change? What happened?
Polyamory or Promiscuity?
http://www.anopenrelationship.com/2011/02/polyamory-or-promiscuity/
- Login to post comments
Offline Ok...
1st..Do you people know what a positive corrolation is??? there can be 1000 outliers and still be a positive corrolation.
2nd...I was thinking about this today...in terms of living in the USA.
If you have wisdom and money you are golden in this country.
If you are lacking one you can still get by.
If you are lackign both you are in a world of trouble.
I was thinking what makes someone wise? 2 things...experience and/or someone to empart their wisdom unto you.
Both of those things are lacking in the most desolate areas in our country. There is no money to get a head start and there are few positive role models around to tell you what to do once you earn the money.
It is simple to become a millionaire by 30 in this country if you have and average brain, it is just few people have the discipline and influence.
But in reference to the question...yes I think there is a positive corrolation..if there is not that would mean that being smart (regardless of your definition) is either a negative or not a factor at all in becoming wealthy.
"When the missionaries arrived, the Africans had the Land and the Missionaries had the Bible, They taught us how to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the Land and we had the Bible." - Jomo Kenyatta
- Login to post comments
Offline You might want to check out Fooled by Randomness (author: N. Taleb). I found it really good.
- Login to post comments
No.
Proof 1) Paris Hilton
Proof 2) George W. Bush
Also:
3) Michael Vick
4) Jerry Falwell
5) Larry the Cable Guy
Frosty's coming back someday. Will you be ready?
I think i did mention "Statistical data".
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/04/intelligence_no.php
[MOD EDIT - fixed link]
"The powerful have always created false images of the weak."
I also wrote: "define smartness the best possible logical way you can."
So in your opinion, IQ is the only measure of smartness?
People who do not know how to or don't or can't manage their money is not the failure on their part on Smartness?
There was a reason why I did not ask for the corelation between IQ and Wealth.
Would you consider EQ and IQ both together make a person smarter or just the IQ?
There is a book titled: The Emotional Intelligence by Forword By Patrick Lencioni, check it out if you can.
No. However, since there is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes "smartness," you're not going to find any statistical data to support or refute your position.
In my opinion, no.
You also asked for statistical data. There is no statistical data in regards to "smartness."
It's hard to say, considering how subjective the term "smart" is. In my opinion, I would say a person with a high IQ + EQ is smarter than someone with just a high IQ.
I think I may have read this before, but I couldn't say for sure. I'll go pick it up again after I'm done with "Message Board Jihadists; How to Spot Them, and What to do Once You've Found One." It's on Oprah's list this month.
"The powerful have always created false images of the weak."