Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84 chuqui version 1.7 9/23/84; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!nsc!srm
From: srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian)
Newsgroups: net.singles,net.social
Subject: Intelligence
Message-ID: <2763@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 25-May-85 16:43:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.2763
Posted: Sat May 25 16:43:53 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 26-May-85 05:19:08 EDT
References: <253@unc.UUCP> <270@looking.UUCP> <371@h-sc1.UUCP>
Reply-To: srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian)
Organization: National Semiconductor, Sunnyvale
Lines: 26
Xref: utcs net.singles:6895 net.social:499
Summary: 

In article <371@h-sc1.UUCP> desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins) writes:

>Why do we judge people on the basis of their intelligence?  Why do intelligent
>people often have it so much better than unintelligent people?

I don't think that people are judged on their intelligence, since I don't
think that most people can tell when "general intelligence" is the principal
factor in behavior that they like or dislike in others.

As to "having it so much better", one would expect that recognition and
application of the techniques leading to success in society would be
facilitated by intelligence.  On the other hand, there seems to be a
contrary factor as well.  A sufficient quantitative difference in
intelligence can actually become a qualitative difference.  People who
differ greatly in intelligence actually think differently and have trouble
empathizing with each other.  From this phenomenon arises what you might
call optimal intelligence.

For any group, the optimal intelligence for leaders, teachers, etc, is 
about 1 standard deviation above the group average.  This helps to 
explain why some people can achieve success among higher intelligence
groups like techies, political leaders, etc, but may not function as well
among "ordinary" people.
-- 
Richard Mateosian
{cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!srm    nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA