There is something bizarre about “high-IQ” as an identity core like with Mensa. Like a trade union of capitalists or a commune of libertarians. Or that South Park joke about the anti-semitic sect of Judaism.
Shouldn’t you be winning Nobels, rather than performing identity?
Conversation
Replying to
1) The IQ required to join Mensa is not that much higher than the average everyday doctor or lawyer so I think you’re asking a little much.
2) People with high IQ do not owe the world their intellectual labor any more than, say, women owe men their emotional labor.
1
1
3
3) Isn’t there enough unhappiness in the world without you mocking one of the few organizations that offer some people othered by their mental traits any sense of community?
4) Why are you wasting your time virtue-signalling your well-adjusted egalitarianism? In other words...
3
3
Replying to
To claim high IQ as an othering trait is as disingenuous as claiming being a billionaire is a burden.
I’m not mocking them because I think IQ is a *dangerous* identity anchor that should be discouraged. A gateway fetish that leads to racial supremacism, eugenics etc.
1
1
1
Replying to
Being a billionaire can be a burden. It can also be a blessing. It’s almost like things aren’t all one way or the other.
In fact it’s not a bad analogy. Being born into wealth should be a blessing. But if a person isn’t raised in a way that helps them avoid the pitfalls of it...
1
1
Replying to
We understand each other now
Sure wealth has its burdens, but do you notice many billionaires giving it all away and choosing actual poverty instead?
1
2
That’s why it’s disingenuous to treat the burden of wealth the same as the burden of poverty. Or the burden of high IQ the same as the burden of say a crippling disease. Or the burden of so-called ‘reverse racism’ the same as that of racism.
2
1
1
I’m eligible for many privilege-based patterns of association, but I neither join privilege based associations, nor give up my privileges where it is possible to.
I think it wisest to be suspicious of our rationalizations of net-privileges as ‘burdens’

