[M]any Termites failed to become highly successful in any intellectual capacity. These comparative failures were far less likely to graduate from college or to attain professional or graduate degrees, and far more likely to enter occupations that required no higher education whatsoever.
Termites = those with average IQ's of 151 at 11 years of age
Being successful in a capitalistic sense will presumable involve all sorts of factors of which IQ is only one small part. Equally essential is working hard at school, being ambitious, being able to get on with other people, being good looking, being gregarious and social. Most important of all is expressing views consonant with the prevailing consensus (i.e not rocking the boat). Otherwise you won't get promoted, or even land a prestigious job in the first place.
Also I'm not sure how far IQ reflects actual intelligence.
I have no idea why the author and so many others considers this to be remotely surprising. Moreover, I do not get the impression that rich people and those with Ph.D's, tend, on average, to be particularly intelligent. Regular readers of my 2 blogs (if there are any) will understand why I hold this view.
25/04/2020 Edited to add: Another link that supports my contention here.
2 comments:
On the other hand, NOT being "successful" in a capitalist economy could just be one of the most powerful signs of an individual's intelligence!
I have to say that although I got a very high score in my IQ test at age 11 as I was interested and had read about the types of questions used, if I tried it now I would score way below average, because I no longer have any patience for the sort of puzzle questions asked. Also, all it tests is the ability to solve artificially created problems which have little relationship to life, although I suppose there is some correlation to general reasoning powers. And no, I am not 'successful' in the conventional sense, and would never want to be.
Post a Comment