Here’s some related points, which might seem a little far out:
1: Weak people are more intelligent, as they have a higher need for intelligence. Edit: What you lack in power you must make up for with strategy. Anxiety leads to overthinking and confidence leads to direct approaches.
2: “Chad” types of people are simple, honest, straightforward, shallow. They have little need for being indirect, little need to overthink, little need to strategize.
By the way, I expect there to be differences in spatial and verbal IQ here. While autism seems to correlate the most with spatial intelligence, I find that social behaviour (and skillful manipulation of it) correlate with verbal intelligence. Also that pattern recognition correlates with anxiety, and that working memory and processing speed seems important in social situations (witty people are fast, and people who are socially skillful seem to have great working memory).
Strong upvote, because even if you didn’t get the exact factors something wrong here, coming up with counter-examples is difficult. I do think the trade-off principle is being understated here though:
If a set of genes make you less beautiful, how are these genes not elimited from the gene pool yet? If a condition like autism makes life so much harder for you, why do genes which result in that still exist? Whenever I find people who seems to have aspects of life against them, I also see factors which help make up for this deficit. As intelligent and looks aren’t aspects which you can influence consciously, I don’t think this mechanism is driven by conscious necessity. I think they’re actually genetic tradeoffs.
Here’s some related points, which might seem a little far out:
1: Weak people are more intelligent, as they have a higher need for intelligence. Edit: What you lack in power you must make up for with strategy. Anxiety leads to overthinking and confidence leads to direct approaches.
2: “Chad” types of people are simple, honest, straightforward, shallow. They have little need for being indirect, little need to overthink, little need to strategize.
By the way, I expect there to be differences in spatial and verbal IQ here. While autism seems to correlate the most with spatial intelligence, I find that social behaviour (and skillful manipulation of it) correlate with verbal intelligence. Also that pattern recognition correlates with anxiety, and that working memory and processing speed seems important in social situations (witty people are fast, and people who are socially skillful seem to have great working memory).
Strong upvote, because even if you didn’t get the exact factors something wrong here, coming up with counter-examples is difficult. I do think the trade-off principle is being understated here though:
If a set of genes make you less beautiful, how are these genes not elimited from the gene pool yet? If a condition like autism makes life so much harder for you, why do genes which result in that still exist? Whenever I find people who seems to have aspects of life against them, I also see factors which help make up for this deficit. As intelligent and looks aren’t aspects which you can influence consciously, I don’t think this mechanism is driven by conscious necessity. I think they’re actually genetic tradeoffs.