Employment gap less than high school vs. bachelors degree narrows in 2018.
Employment gap less than high school vs. bachelors degree narrows in 2018.

Intelligence Predicts Economic Social Outcome

by Lewis Loflin

In an economy where knowledge and, yes, intelligence leads to power and success, lower-skilled, less intelligent workers are replaced by machines. What do we do with them?

Ability varies, and it varies a lot, and can't be social engineered that much either way. Many attending four-year colleges shouldn't often end up with worthless paper and mountains of debt.

See Why Many People Shouldn't Get a 4-Year Degree.

Now we face the problem of businesses demanding college degrees for non-college jobs but refusing to pay at the level this degree should bring.

See Requiring a College Degree to Clean Toilets

We must see people as individuals who are unequal in many abilities to understand how they can plan a future as productive citizens. Goals should be a realistic measure of skills and intelligence.

The seven definitions of "intelligence" are based on Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences. The seven are bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, spatial, logical-mathematical, and linguistic.

What I present is a guide only. For example, one with a high aptitude for math scores above average in other measures.

A merit-based society with half the population below average creates insolvable problems


Egalitarian social engineers can't fix these problems. We must stop wasting vast amounts of capital on unachievable goals.

We all possess the seven traits to one degree or another. It's essential to understand the "difference in degree" in that the best in any particular intelligence cannot be quantitatively compared to the average, who are often incapable of duplicating that level.

No matter how hard one works at it, one can't come out even close—these traits are due to a complex interaction of genetics and environment.

Bodily-kinesthetic traits encompass physical skills such as those of professional athletes. These skills run from myself, who does poorly at sports, to a professional basketball player I could never compete with, regardless of training and effort. This disparity is a difference in degree.

Musical intelligence, of course, involves sound. One has a highly developed sense of pitch, rhythm, tones, etc. This talent runs from a country music star like Johnny Cash to myself, who can barely hold a note in the church choir. Again a difference in degree.

Interpersonal intelligence involves interactions with other people. One is very good at sensing others' emotions and motivations, and I would add a lot of empathy and an ability to nurture. While good in all occupations, this is most useful in those industries that require a lot of interaction with others.

I'd also add, in my opinion, mothering and the ability to nurture children. I believe women are overall best at this and are attracted to nursing and social work professions. Women are far less likely to be arrested for violent crimes and are the last to want to go to war.

I consider interpersonal intelligence one of the most important for the general society. How we interact with others can make the difference between being a social outcast or a group leader or simply functioning as a valuable community member. This trait is helpful for restraining aggression.

Intrapersonal intelligence involves knowing oneself. One has a realistic grasp of emotions and limitations.

The most important one is to exert self-discipline and, put aside instant gratification and impulsive behavior, exert self-control in stressful situations.

Lack of intrapersonal intelligence can lead to self-destructive behaviors, poor judgment, and criminality.

Intrapersonal intelligence, I believe, is equally essential to interpersonal. Controlling basic urges and restraining oneself from irresponsible behavior goes hand-in-hand with interacting with others.

Free will can control these impulses. These two are the only skills one can manage through individual effort.

A lack of this particular intelligence or restraints to counter impulsive behavior is the driving factor behind the growing welfare state and single motherhood. (Men are just as responsible as single mothers.)

I believe that a large segment of the general public is deficient in intrapersonal intelligence. Too many, if not restrained by laws and social pressure, can be very destructive to themselves and others.

This problem is most pronounced in black communities where the lack of family structure, church breakdown, and inadequate law enforcement create situations such as the black riots recently in major cities.

The following three intelligences are measured on IQ tests and are a good indicator of economic and personal success in a technological and scientific society.

We are willing to accept differences in degree in sports or music, but because this ties into economics and social outcome, the facts become taboo.

But high IQ is not everything - a high IQ combined with low intrapersonal intelligence still leads to adverse outcomes.

Such is the case of an out-of-control child exhibiting self-destructive behavior even though both parents may seem highly successful or normal.

The Unibomber is an excellent example of an intelligent person that went on a personal one-person terrorism spree.

High IQ people often (not always) achieve tremendous economic success, and financial status usually means control over others.

Wealthy activist people have a direct influence on the political system. Rich and successful people control so much of our society because they are brilliant.

Lacking interpersonal skills, people with this kind of power have no connection with or feelings for ordinary people whom they may, in many cases, look down on or are even hostile to them.

This negative view can often create an economically and socially isolated-segregated class from the general public.

This elitism is not a matter of Democrats or Republicans. The power class too often sees the general public as chess pieces to be manipulated or as Lego blocks to be constructed into what they view as best for everybody.

A high-IQ individual lacking intrapersonal intelligence could end up as a political leader that won't listen to reason and destroy the lives of millions. Stalin is an example of a brilliant sociopath.

At the Nuremberg Trials, many individuals who perpetrated hideous crimes lacked remorse and seemed to be perfectly normal people.

Many were quite intelligent and seemed to be good members of their society, but something was missing in their psyche. They could seem to love their children at home and then go out and shoot or gas other people's children.

The critical question is this a result of upbringing, a.k.a. nurture, or innate and genetic? The answer is both about 50/50 with wide variation.

It's essential, according to Dr. Charles Murray, how we raise high IQ children as they can carry their traits into positions of power.

Now let's turn to IQ tests. Again I will emphasize that ability varies and is mainly in the case of the following three genes.

Let's note that forcing those who lack these abilities to perform as if they do leads to frustration, dropping out of school, and low self-esteem.

Spatial intelligence refers to the ability to visualize and manipulate objects mentally. This ability means that one can, within their mind, see the inner workings of a device or grasp the workings of things unseen.

An excellent example is electronics, where one can mentally see current flow through a complex circuit even when the movement of charges is invisible to our senses. We can only sense the electric current flow when a heating element gets hot.

This talent is mainly inherited. Yes, we could train a monkey to place parts on an electrical control panel, but hand that monkey a blueprint with a completely different circuit layout and additional components; they will be unable to do it. Worse, change the diagram for every panel. Watch the chaos.

They must mentally transform abstract symbols and concepts from their minds into the real world to build the finished product that looks nothing like the drawing.

Auto mechanics can also have great spatial intelligence. Still, there is a profound difference in degree between a mechanic that can analyze a complex engine problem from one that swaps components.

This talent also applies to varying degrees of carpentry, architecture, art, etc. But note that the mechanic with a high degree of ability to analyze a complex machine will likely be above average in math and science. According to Dr. Murray, much of this runs together.

So a medical doctor with a high degree of spatial ability will also be above average in verbal and mathematical.

So a mechanic with the high spatial ability and, say, 70 percentile in math and verbal would likely be a much higher paid specialty mechanic as a career as opposed to a lower paid office manager with a 4-year degree awaiting the next layoff - and buried in debt.

Logical-mathematical intelligence, of course, involves numbers, logic, and abstractions. This ability goes hand-in-hand with spatial intelligence in engineering, computer science, and in scientific and technological professions in general on the technician side.

This ability would separate a technician from an engineer. Engineering requires a mastery of calculus, etc. I'm a B student in calculus, and I have no business being at M.I.T. That would not be very smart to attend M.I.T. I can do some engineering and excel at building gadgets, but I can't design a jet fighter even if I can fix it.

Like spatial intelligence, this is hardwired often at the genetic level. One can't do calculus unless without an innate ability to do it - even then outcome varies. This problem is why on standardized tests, so many students have problems with algebra - forget calculus.

Linguistic intelligence involves understanding and manipulating words and language and grasping their meanings. This talent impacts everything from learning a foreign language with correct grammar and word structure to reading this essay. Memory and the ability to store and retrieve information also fall under this.

Everybody has this to a degree, but like all the others, intelligence ability varies, and it varies a lot. Law and journalism are two examples of linguistic intelligence. Many talk show hosts often started as lawyers, as are most politicians.

Nowhere is the public more helpless and disarmed than by rules and regulations they can't read and by the seemingly arbitrary interpretations of judges.

Many of those in government started as lawyers and knew very well that one could usurp power and wealth by burying the public in mountains of rules and regulations they couldn't possibly understand.

They are an example of a lack of intrapersonal skills; they won't acknowledge their limitations and refuse to admit their dogma could be wrong - driven by emotion, not reason. High IQ people lacking intrapersonal skills can be socially destructive.

Compromise, in the political sense, is when the two parties work to each other's mutual benefit and not that of the public. The public and the ruling class don't occupy the same world.

Mass immigration is another sore point for the public. There is no doubt the mass emigration of millions of low-skilled and illiterate peasants drains the welfare system and drives wages through the floor.

While the Chamber of Commerce Republicans is at odds economically with the racial socialism of the Democrats for economic reasons, both will compromise for their mutual benefit. We must note that the general public is locked out of the process and never consulted. They lack empathy for the common man or woman.

To summarize this, IQ and intelligence vary a lot. Thus, people with high IQs are more likely to be successful, which often means power. The power struggle among the elite is essentially Wall Street corporatism versus Democratic racial socialism.

The elite agrees on most things. Think of the massive media consolidation among six giant corporations, yet the press is shilling for the Democratic Party. Wall Street and the left-wing media may seem odd but not really - they work together.

Humans are neither social constructs. Race, reason, or gender are not social constructs. Humans come down to a combination of 50% biology/genetics versus 50% environment. Changing the environment won't change biology. It's time to be realistic and look at the facts - time to end political correctness.

Humans are different, and ability differs; that makes us individuals. How we handle those differences determines how civil society functions - we ignore this to our ruin. Do we defend individual liberty with protections for minorities?

Or do we continue to destroy society's fabric and use more police state tactics to enforce conformity and pursue unobtainable utopian goals?

Ref. Real Education by Charles Murray author of The Bell Curve. PP 18-26.

Web site Copyright Lewis Loflin, All rights reserved.
If using this material on another site, please provide a link back to my site.