Why does the statement "some people are simply born more intelligent than others" attract so much controversy?

Why does the statement "some people are simply born more intelligent than others" attract so much controversy?

People don't like to feel limited and sometimes it is mostly due to socioeconomic context and family values.

because then not everyone would be a pretty little special snowflake

Because most of the people saying it are trying to justify the subjugation of a minority.

What if you are seeing "subjugation" where there is none, and the differences in average of minorities are just the result of the differences in average of intelligence?

That's the same, but knowing that the consequences would be violent and could cause social discomfort, it's censored to talk about it.

Also, IQ is not intelligence.
We don't know how intelligence works.

No I mean that a perceived difference is used to justify a subjugation that is already going on. There's a history of trying to argue for white supremacy and slavery because of the intelligence differences between European men and African men, or some shit like that. Some people use the same IQ differences today to support the same claims. They use broad statistics that often overlook upbringing, access to good education, etc.
Even if a difference in intelligence when all other social factors are accounted for did exist, it's no reason to treat people differently. But people whose goal is to treat people differently use this as a justification. If someone brings up studies like this, they're usually trying to make their racist bullshit sound more convincing. Rarely is it an actual researcher, and rarely do they make broad claims like "whites are smarter than blacks."

Also
>IQ accurately measures intelligence
hah

Because it's true, and it's human nature to skew facts to suit the POV.

To make people feel better about this cold fact, though, we need to understand that even the best fighters in the world can be beaten. Accurate spread is more important than outliers.

Rarely are humans entirely worthless. If he's not intelligent, he might be charismatic. Spatial and logical reasoning isn't the be-all and end-all to intelligence.

IQ is proportional to intelligence

>often overlook upbringing, access to good education

>iq is irrelevant

>we can overlook facts because they hurt feelings / have dangerous political consequences
on Veeky Forums of all places

>judging iq by monetary success

top pleb

>subconsciously equating IQ and intelligence

assuming that it's the most widely used system

>all social factors can be accounted for by income
Not even remotely true. Just ask the asians. They work harder than whitey, regardless of household income.
>SAT scores as a measure of intelligence
The only the the SAT measures is how much time you put into studying for the SAT.

>Infographic with no explanation for how cognitive class is established
Not surprised.
>The hierarchy established by the infographic only makes sense after the earth 1980s
Hmmm I wonder why that could be? It might have something to do with the movement out of traditional schooling into private schools and charter schools and such.

If you can't see that interpretation of this kind of data is heavily influenced by your opinion on social classes then you're the one making the mistake. Trying to correlate SAT scores with income and race does not tell us anything about the abilities a person is born with. The potential to be intelligent is diminished very easily, and it's very clear that those diminishing factors are parts of our culture which may have factors like race influencing our exposure to them.

Because people get mad when someone is objectively superior to them in something.

You can't be born 'intelligent', just to argue over semantics. Infants are pretty clueless. But you can be born with more or less genetic predisposition to certain traits, yea. As other anons have said, some of it (a lot? a little? we don't know) is also due to environment or upbringing.

There are also most likely several kinds of intelligence. We all have our strengths and weaknesses. It's a rare group that is genuinely brilliant in all areas of intelligence (linguistic, mathematical, spatial, emotional, musical, social, etc)

I was a precocious reader, apparently. Knew my alphabet at three, and started reading without help by 5. I have old reportcards from grade 1 and 2 that comment on this. At 7 years old, I read my first novel "for adults" (i.e. it was meant for adults, not specifically easier-to-read youth novels). This was Jurassic Park. Not a particularly challenging novel in hindsight, but there you go.

I've always been kinda shit at math though. Basics are fine, but abstract stuff, forget it.

because it enables lazy people not to study at all justifying it as "imma stupid anyway lol"
because it reduces daily studying and reading and self-improvement to "ah, he's just naturally talented lol"

>Stop bullying and mobbing!
>why? because it hurts your feelings?
Because there are always retards who provoke social discomfort and violence. The circle of vengeance is a main problem on third world countries, because the discrimination caused by colonization, and the "INFORMATION" propagated by the government promoted such problems.

Also, IQ is not intelligence.
Says your pseudoscience studies.

I don't give a shit If negros are treated equally, because I don't live in burgerland where every shit-idology is at the same level as "economic liberalism", and they don't live in ghettos.

That's circumstancial, but normally that's true. Just check the threads where anons say asians are superior, and some buttblasted anons who can't accept the truth affirm that they cheat. KEK

This guys gets it. The potential a human baby has is amazing, I started reading at the age of 3.
I knew how to count in english to from 1-100 at the age of 4 and I never did any academic problems, because I didn't need to do so. And that's because I was influentied by the environment where I spend the most time and the enthusiasm for teaching of my parents.

But these brainlets don't care about the future, they just have grudge against some niggers of their neighbourhood. kek

define intelligence
Capacity?
The brain has a very high amount of memory
Speed?

Learning Speed?
Basically how intelligence is tested, pattern finding and association ability / time

How does 'intelligence' as it is defined limit someone in a meaningful way? Does slower learning speed stop someone from being capable of learning? Memory? Processing speed?

Its about definition

>People don't like to feel stupid
FTFY
... but Nature has Bad News for them:
~ they ARE stupid ~
Sorry you talking monkeys,
but you are fckn stupid.
Now get over it.

Kek, I have bad news for you.

Because everyone is the same, so cherish diversity!

What I can't help but notice is that in that graph it takes 6 years before Very Bright is on top.
What's up with that?

It makes me think that the measurement of intelligence is wrong, because if standards come out to measure intelligence and it shows that intelligent people are low earners then suddenly after intelligence starts being measured they're high earners, that would lead one to suspect that what actually happened was that intelligence measurement favoured the less intellgent somehow but due to boons such as high grades they became more successful than those that were once their intellectual superiors.

I, for one, see a lot of very clever people end up being mistaken for the least clever.