He was the Milton Friedman scholar at the Hoover Institute but he didn’t teach classes, basically he was held there to research to his hearts content and that also became the source of his books and how he was able to gather so much data for all the books.
Well there's no substitute for experience. You can tell a child that the stove is hot, but they won't really understand until they touch it with their hand.
True. When he tells the story it makes me laugh because the look on his face when he explains the shock he felt when he realized the government wasn’t trying to solve anything
Can’t blame you. In the Air Force I witnessed that you really don’t want the govt to do a lot of things. I would say I have retained my idealism from youth but I understand reality even if I want to see things differently and personally try to make a difference where I can
Oh, you mistake me my friend. While I'm not going to get into specifics, I'll give you a general idea of what I meant.
I did five years active Army and seven as a contractor. I worked for and with numerous agencies and I held more keywords than I have fingers and toes.
I saw, heard, read of, and witnessed things that would convince most people that the government should be destroyed and most of the people in it sealed in a shipping container and dumped into the sea.
To explain my seriousness, all of that would be true, and they would still deserve that punishment... even if fully half the political spectrum of this country wasn't compromised of satanic pedophiles.
They could be completely innocent of crimes against little ones, and never have had a thought of worshipping the dark one, and it would be absolutely necessary to pitylessly destroy them on an industrial scale.
I think I read that in his biography maverick which was pretty well written. But he essentially saw the writing on the wall with students in the 60s and didn’t want to be hamstrung by universities to pass midwits.
I once found a list of requirements to get into University in the 1800s. If we had the same standards now as then, I imagine 99% of people with university degrees today wouldn't even have been able to get into University. The standards were way higher in the 1800s. Like absurdly higher.
It reminds me of when I used to read about entrepreneurs, inventors, and noblemen in the old days. Invariably, when discussing their schooling, there would be some sort of comment that went along the lines of "in the 8th grade, Cornelius Bumblesworth finished his calculus course and discovered a new way to write differential bullshit, blah blah blah..."
It always made me wonder if the guy in the textbook was a super genius, or if everyone was expected to do that by such a young age. I never even got past pre-calc as a high school senior. Looking at the quality of education now compared to when I was in school, it seems like it is falling off a cliff into a black hole.
Back then people were smarter with long form communication because it’s all they really had. The Lincoln-Douglas debates went on for hours with everyone on the edge of their seat, and they all engaged with it at the time after as a casual thing to do.
Nowadays, most people have few moments where they’re not consuming some kind of drivel. Novels back then used to have untold depths because someone might only have a handful of books that they might read dozens of times over the years.
Kids back then were also raised by adults, not other children. They worked from an early age too because everybody had to help out. We’ve really fallen quite a bit since then. Now most kids are raised by other children and iPads and public school teachers being forced to teach a bunch of Common Core nonsense.
Reminds me of a story of how an elementary school teacher made the class add consecutive numbers up to 100 (1+2+3+4+etc.) as busywork, but one student solved it with a formula and spent the rest of the time sleeping at his desk.
At the turn of the 20th Century, to graduate your primary education (8th grade), you had to sit for a day long test on subjects from household finances (you need to burn x cubic feet of wood a day to heat your house, this will be a long winter, how many cords of wood will you need to buy) to world geography to knowledge of Greek and Roman history.
the decline is a necessary consequence of increasing educational attainment
College used to be for middle class and above. If you let dumb people into college and lower the standards so they don't fail, of course the average IQ of college students will drop.
It’s the lowest common denominator factor. This is why “college” has become a printing press of degrees that range from “basically a ged” to “actually requires talent so we have to force DEI initiatives”.
Yeah. Them getting rid of looking at the SATs for admissions isn’t going to help, either. The test is a lot of things but it does correlate very well with people that do well in school in real degree programs.
I got into an argument with one guy about that. He said it’s a stupid test because they don’t teach it in school and it doesn’t mean anything. I told him it’s a test about reading, writing, and math, and asked him what they taught in schools. He said he used to sub and they didn’t teach any of that. I asked him what they did teach and he got flustered and said nothing.
We have a very significant chunk of population when it comes to university who don't understand how wealth and job creation actually works and think that a piece of paper magicks it all into existence.
As a former college professor, I can say that this is true. College has become four years of daycare/extended adolescence with a quarter-million dollar cover charge. Even some of the best schools are turning into diploma mills. An alarming number of students go through thinking that if they just take the right classes, they'll get a magical piece of paper that will give them a comfy six-figure laptop-class job, despite the fact that they have acquired no useful skills in the process.
Colleges have become hedge funds that can hide inside of the school to use their tax exempt status.
It began after WWII with the well-intended GI Bill of Rights, which in part granted tuition and housing $ to veterans, "democratizing" higher ed, but not yet compromising admissions criteria.
Around 1980, higher ed changed from the monastic to the "corporate" model--colleges catering to students as if they are consuming an education like any other commodity by constructing posh student activities facilities and housing, providing the consumer advocate service of "evaluating instructor effectiveness," and, of course, lowering admissions standards to allow entry of dumbasses who've been told all their lives that only losers don't attend college.
All this is on top of the affirmative action fiasco that lowered standards even further in pursuit of "Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity."
so was the internet, by the way (same for other network that predated the popularity of the internet, such as Usenet).
the built-in barrier of entry was that you needed a semi-functioning brain, a certain amount of inherent geekiness, and did not require instant gratification.
That's part of it, but opening up "higher" education to lower IQ demographics enriches the Student Loan industry, and everyone involved with the system. So corruption, basically.
I feel like this is what happens when you associate higher education with "the basic requirement to get any sort of decent job". before you go to college to become an engineer, a lawyer, a doctor, etc etc. now, you need some sort of college degree if you want to be any sort of paralegal, nurse, even many technicians.
I bet, as degrees got more attainable, a snowball effect was created where employers had more of an appetite for people with degrees, so more students sought college, colleges got more funding, and therefore laxed their standards to invite even more students. repeat until we have what we have today.
instead of more people getting smarter, the reverse effects happens where the seal of academic achievements simply means less until it basically means nothing. the academic industry is due for a serious collapse.
Right, but at some point it had a much-celebrated assortative mating aspect. Democracy was doomed because the 115 IQers kept marrying. So you report on the change.
according to one chart - people who study math/physics have an iq +25 higher than people who study 'african grievance studies' / sociology / early childhood grooming education
So if the average is the same as the general population, we can probably expect certain subjects students to be borderline retarded
At first, college professors were like "students can't do high school math" then they were like "students can't write". The standards are definitely out the window and not just for athletes, the traditional beneficiaries of special higher education.
In 1947 when undergraduate men outnumbered women 2.3 to 1.
The Homecoming of American College Women (2006)
In the fall of 2022, about 8.3 million women were undergraduate college students, versus 6.1 million men. Women also outnumbered men in graduate programs — 1.8 million versus 1.1 million.
National Student Clearinghouse Research Center (2022)
In terms of percentages:
1947 : 69.7% (M) / 30.3% (F)
2022: 41.6% (M) / 58.4% (F)
Correlation is not causation, but also consider that access to higher education was restricted to those who were either wealthy or smart, and men are over represented in the upper IQ ranges.
Thomas Sowell quit teaching in the 70s because the academic standards were too low.
Really? I thought he kept teaching. Then again that would explain all the books he has written since then
He was the Milton Friedman scholar at the Hoover Institute but he didn’t teach classes, basically he was held there to research to his hearts content and that also became the source of his books and how he was able to gather so much data for all the books.
Still boggles my mind that being a student of Friedman didn’t cure him of his Marxism but what did was working for the government
Well there's no substitute for experience. You can tell a child that the stove is hot, but they won't really understand until they touch it with their hand.
It's a pity that it happens to so many adults.
True. When he tells the story it makes me laugh because the look on his face when he explains the shock he felt when he realized the government wasn’t trying to solve anything
I was right wing before I worked for the DoD.
I became an extremist from what I witnessed.
Can’t blame you. In the Air Force I witnessed that you really don’t want the govt to do a lot of things. I would say I have retained my idealism from youth but I understand reality even if I want to see things differently and personally try to make a difference where I can
Oh, you mistake me my friend. While I'm not going to get into specifics, I'll give you a general idea of what I meant.
I did five years active Army and seven as a contractor. I worked for and with numerous agencies and I held more keywords than I have fingers and toes.
I saw, heard, read of, and witnessed things that would convince most people that the government should be destroyed and most of the people in it sealed in a shipping container and dumped into the sea.
To explain my seriousness, all of that would be true, and they would still deserve that punishment... even if fully half the political spectrum of this country wasn't compromised of satanic pedophiles.
They could be completely innocent of crimes against little ones, and never have had a thought of worshipping the dark one, and it would be absolutely necessary to pitylessly destroy them on an industrial scale.
Oh wow! I didn’t get that deep in my military experience. I dont blame you. My idealism is more so people and life in general
That's what I figured, too, without any special clearance.
Is falling down your biopic
Apparently that's a movie?
yeah it was meant to make fun of white conservative, turned out unintentionally based, I'm surprised you haven't seen it
I think I read that in his biography maverick which was pretty well written. But he essentially saw the writing on the wall with students in the 60s and didn’t want to be hamstrung by universities to pass midwits.
I once found a list of requirements to get into University in the 1800s. If we had the same standards now as then, I imagine 99% of people with university degrees today wouldn't even have been able to get into University. The standards were way higher in the 1800s. Like absurdly higher.
It reminds me of when I used to read about entrepreneurs, inventors, and noblemen in the old days. Invariably, when discussing their schooling, there would be some sort of comment that went along the lines of "in the 8th grade, Cornelius Bumblesworth finished his calculus course and discovered a new way to write differential bullshit, blah blah blah..."
It always made me wonder if the guy in the textbook was a super genius, or if everyone was expected to do that by such a young age. I never even got past pre-calc as a high school senior. Looking at the quality of education now compared to when I was in school, it seems like it is falling off a cliff into a black hole.
Back then people were smarter with long form communication because it’s all they really had. The Lincoln-Douglas debates went on for hours with everyone on the edge of their seat, and they all engaged with it at the time after as a casual thing to do.
Nowadays, most people have few moments where they’re not consuming some kind of drivel. Novels back then used to have untold depths because someone might only have a handful of books that they might read dozens of times over the years.
Kids back then were also raised by adults, not other children. They worked from an early age too because everybody had to help out. We’ve really fallen quite a bit since then. Now most kids are raised by other children and iPads and public school teachers being forced to teach a bunch of Common Core nonsense.
Reminds me of a story of how an elementary school teacher made the class add consecutive numbers up to 100 (1+2+3+4+etc.) as busywork, but one student solved it with a formula and spent the rest of the time sleeping at his desk.
It would be clever if the teacher did that to identify smart kids, but that's not what she had in mind.
At the turn of the 20th Century, to graduate your primary education (8th grade), you had to sit for a day long test on subjects from household finances (you need to burn x cubic feet of wood a day to heat your house, this will be a long winter, how many cords of wood will you need to buy) to world geography to knowledge of Greek and Roman history.
Now we get 12th graders who can't read or write.
College used to be for middle class and above. If you let dumb people into college and lower the standards so they don't fail, of course the average IQ of college students will drop.
It’s the lowest common denominator factor. This is why “college” has become a printing press of degrees that range from “basically a ged” to “actually requires talent so we have to force DEI initiatives”.
Yeah. Them getting rid of looking at the SATs for admissions isn’t going to help, either. The test is a lot of things but it does correlate very well with people that do well in school in real degree programs.
I got into an argument with one guy about that. He said it’s a stupid test because they don’t teach it in school and it doesn’t mean anything. I told him it’s a test about reading, writing, and math, and asked him what they taught in schools. He said he used to sub and they didn’t teach any of that. I asked him what they did teach and he got flustered and said nothing.
As a former college professor, I can say that this is true. College has become four years of daycare/extended adolescence with a quarter-million dollar cover charge. Even some of the best schools are turning into diploma mills. An alarming number of students go through thinking that if they just take the right classes, they'll get a magical piece of paper that will give them a comfy six-figure laptop-class job, despite the fact that they have acquired no useful skills in the process.
Colleges have become hedge funds that can hide inside of the school to use their tax exempt status.
This has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with social status.
A degree is an official stamp of approval and women characteristically outsource mate selection.
It began after WWII with the well-intended GI Bill of Rights, which in part granted tuition and housing $ to veterans, "democratizing" higher ed, but not yet compromising admissions criteria.
Around 1980, higher ed changed from the monastic to the "corporate" model--colleges catering to students as if they are consuming an education like any other commodity by constructing posh student activities facilities and housing, providing the consumer advocate service of "evaluating instructor effectiveness," and, of course, lowering admissions standards to allow entry of dumbasses who've been told all their lives that only losers don't attend college.
All this is on top of the affirmative action fiasco that lowered standards even further in pursuit of "Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity."
so was the internet, by the way (same for other network that predated the popularity of the internet, such as Usenet).
the built-in barrier of entry was that you needed a semi-functioning brain, a certain amount of inherent geekiness, and did not require instant gratification.
There was a reason college degrees used to be valued during the hiring process. It was a proxy for an IQ test. No one wants to hire brain dead idiots.
All by design, of course. Properly educated people are harder to enslave
That's part of it, but opening up "higher" education to lower IQ demographics enriches the Student Loan industry, and everyone involved with the system. So corruption, basically.
I feel like this is what happens when you associate higher education with "the basic requirement to get any sort of decent job". before you go to college to become an engineer, a lawyer, a doctor, etc etc. now, you need some sort of college degree if you want to be any sort of paralegal, nurse, even many technicians.
I bet, as degrees got more attainable, a snowball effect was created where employers had more of an appetite for people with degrees, so more students sought college, colleges got more funding, and therefore laxed their standards to invite even more students. repeat until we have what we have today.
instead of more people getting smarter, the reverse effects happens where the seal of academic achievements simply means less until it basically means nothing. the academic industry is due for a serious collapse.
It's a business selling products. Why not sell to retards if they are willing to buy?
Right, but at some point it had a much-celebrated assortative mating aspect. Democracy was doomed because the 115 IQers kept marrying. So you report on the change.
according to one chart - people who study math/physics have an iq +25 higher than people who study 'african grievance studies' / sociology / early childhood
groomingeducationSo if the average is the same as the general population, we can probably expect certain subjects students to be borderline retarded
At first, college professors were like "students can't do high school math" then they were like "students can't write". The standards are definitely out the window and not just for athletes, the traditional beneficiaries of special higher education.
In terms of percentages:
Correlation is not causation, but also consider that access to higher education was restricted to those who were either wealthy or smart, and men are over represented in the upper IQ ranges.
In the late 20th-century, higher ed was feminized along with the entire business world.
Duh. It's cargo cult mentality.
The general population's IQ has fallen 5-10 points as well.
Does this mean college students are borderline retarded? Probably.
You don't say.