There is extensive research showing that more educated people tend to have more extreme beliefs than the less educated, suggesting that education increases rationalization ability, rather than correctness, or else the beliefs would narrow towards the truth. 1/2
-
-
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @Kajel96536401 and
Yet opinionated beliefs are not the same as the ability to perform a task. This is why it's important to have democracy to set the agenda, but give the jobs to those who are most capable of doing them.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @Kajel96536401 and
I do not believe that testing for the ability to perform a task without actually observing someone performing the task for real is a trivial task And I believe the idea that one can test *generally* for the ability to "perform tasks" (the g-factor) is false
3 replies 1 retweet 25 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Kajel96536401 and
You may not believe it, but the scientific evidence is extremely strong that the correlation between the g-factor and the ability to perform cognitive tasks is large. The problem that observing someone is often extremely costly and/or hard. 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @arthur_affect and
When you demand the unreasonable, people usually start cheating (as a Stalinist, that should be familiar to you). We pretty consistently see that the alternative to general testing is influence peddling, benefiting the rich and powerful. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @Kajel96536401 and
Yup, the problem with all other methods of social sorting is they're all "subjective" and "irrational" and therefore benefit the already-powerful But standardized testing just measures objective truths and puts the people in power who objectively should be there Awesome
2 replies 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Kajel96536401 and
The true positions of power are not usually achieved through testing, but through other means. Your entire argument is false for that reason, because you fail to distinguish between the workers who just do what they are told (most of us) and the few with significant power.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @Kajel96536401 and
Yes, under a Marxist analysis a highly paid software engineer in San Francisco is in the "working class" the same as a burger-flipper in Wichita, and the members of the "ruling class" are indeed very few However, the idea that the engineer *has no power* is horseshit
3 replies 2 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
If nothing else, on the small-scale day-to-day level where we live most of the time, *money is power* (I'm still kind of seething over Scott's incredibly headass post where he tried to deny this fact and be like "Hey money is only useful for, like, buying stuff")
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Kajel96536401 and
Yes, but that power is far different than what you probably mean. Money is how we coerce people into pro-social behavior and how we create win-win situations. Basically, we reward it when people provide high benefits to others, at relatively low costs to themselves. 1/2
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yeah you don't need to explain the exchange theory of value and the invisible hand, we've all gotten 8th-grade civics at an American school
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.