I just love the new, corporate-funded anti-intellectual motif, don’t you? Them eddicated folk ain’t better’n us! Science says so!
I remember when science could lay out hundreds of studies confirmed POC were less human than good white folk. Science has always been the lapdog if the highest bidder.
My astrophysics supervisor at uni always used to say rocket science is easy: you throw stuff out the back of it and it moves forward.
If they don’t have higher than average IQ then who does?
So we’ve scientifically proven some people are just better at some things and others better at others. Glad that’s been proven.
It’s almost like race, class, location and many other factors influence the opportunities you have in life to realise your potential isn’t it – you know, like equality researchers have been showing for decades…
Now do the same for CEOs, Lords, MPs and hedge fund managers.
The study is flawed. Out of 18,000 people, 600 were rocket scientists and 180 were neuro surgeons. That’s not representative of the population of Britain, is it? 1% of the pop. being neurosurgeons and 3.3% rocket scientists? The test is an example of selection bias. We’re comparing these professions against other intelligent people.
The average IQ of people who voluntarily take Mensa tests is around 120. The actual average is meant to be 100 but obviously not everyone wants to take a test if they don’t have to. Only people with above average IQ want to measure it relative to others.
A final point is that when people are younger and less educated, they may be gifted in multiple areas. When they specialise, they only use one or two skills which improve at the cost of neglecting others – the study showed this. Rocket scientists showed above average abilities in cetain areas which are related to their work. If you took these same people at a younger age, their profiles would be different and they’d be stronger in more categories.
Used to work in a transplant immunology lab and I have to say, surgical skills is a bit overrated by the public. Given enough time/practice/effort, dexterity can be taught to an uncoordinated person off the street with no innate ability, like when the lab took me in haha. Seriously though, I know long serving respected lab techs/post docs in the transplantation field who could definitely give consultant surgeons a run for their money in terms of hand eye co-ordination.
It’s the other skills like the performing under pressure, vast anatomy knowledge and real time problem solving etc which really makes or break a surgeon.
8 comments
I just love the new, corporate-funded anti-intellectual motif, don’t you? Them eddicated folk ain’t better’n us! Science says so!
I remember when science could lay out hundreds of studies confirmed POC were less human than good white folk. Science has always been the lapdog if the highest bidder.
My astrophysics supervisor at uni always used to say rocket science is easy: you throw stuff out the back of it and it moves forward.
If they don’t have higher than average IQ then who does?
https://youtu.be/THNPmhBl-8I
We all knew this was going to be here.
So we’ve scientifically proven some people are just better at some things and others better at others. Glad that’s been proven.
It’s almost like race, class, location and many other factors influence the opportunities you have in life to realise your potential isn’t it – you know, like equality researchers have been showing for decades…
Now do the same for CEOs, Lords, MPs and hedge fund managers.
The study is flawed. Out of 18,000 people, 600 were rocket scientists and 180 were neuro surgeons. That’s not representative of the population of Britain, is it? 1% of the pop. being neurosurgeons and 3.3% rocket scientists? The test is an example of selection bias. We’re comparing these professions against other intelligent people.
The average IQ of people who voluntarily take Mensa tests is around 120. The actual average is meant to be 100 but obviously not everyone wants to take a test if they don’t have to. Only people with above average IQ want to measure it relative to others.
A final point is that when people are younger and less educated, they may be gifted in multiple areas. When they specialise, they only use one or two skills which improve at the cost of neglecting others – the study showed this. Rocket scientists showed above average abilities in cetain areas which are related to their work. If you took these same people at a younger age, their profiles would be different and they’d be stronger in more categories.
Used to work in a transplant immunology lab and I have to say, surgical skills is a bit overrated by the public. Given enough time/practice/effort, dexterity can be taught to an uncoordinated person off the street with no innate ability, like when the lab took me in haha. Seriously though, I know long serving respected lab techs/post docs in the transplantation field who could definitely give consultant surgeons a run for their money in terms of hand eye co-ordination.
It’s the other skills like the performing under pressure, vast anatomy knowledge and real time problem solving etc which really makes or break a surgeon.