Real Time with Bill Maher: New Rules; March 07- 2008

[DutchLiberal]

Run time: 06:01 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zct9P2Q5NuY   Posted on YouTube: March 08, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: March 10, 2008 By DU Member: DutchLiberal Views on DU: 1653

 
In this 'New Rules', Bill is finally addressing the one point that is irritating me for years now: how come that, in the 'information age', it's so hard to get real information? How come so many people still pass facts for opinions, in order to keep believing in their own misguided worldview?

Examples: "Obama is a muslim", "Saddam was behind 9/11". These are opinions you can still easily find on the Internet, and people pass them off as fact; and they pass the right facts off as opinions.

[bluerum]

1. "Obama is a muslim", "Saddam was behind 9/11" are NOT opinions.

They are falsehoods. Blatant attempts to mislead. The fruits of ignorance and laziness. Twisted attempts to sow fear and distrust.

They are not IMO, opinion. Opinion is typically the result of reasoned thought and has at least some relationship with reality.

on edit: But IMHO Bill Maher is a hoot.

[DutchLiberal]

14. You're saying the same as I did.

I meant, like Maher, that people hold some facts to be opinions (and vice versa), because they don't fit their worldview.

[selador]

2. because of human psychology

we have never had a more democratic and open system to be able to access information, in the history of mankind.

anybody with access to the internet can read news, blogs, etc. from all over the world.

years ago, even very extensive libraries didn't offer access to anywhere NEAR the amount and diversity of information.

the REASON is that , to a large extent, people latch on to information (whether true or false) that confirms their own biases and what they want to believe.

this is true to lesser or greater extent, with every single person on earth. it is limited to no party, ideology, gender, race, etc.

it's simply an aspect of human psychology.

i think there is this view (on the left AND on the right) that if only people had access to the same information, that they'd come to the right conclusions ... and of course for these people the right conclusion is the one held by oneself.

clearly, that is not the case.

i'll defer to russell...

If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way

The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way.

Every man, wherever he goes, is encompassed by a cloud of comforting convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day

[murray hill farm]

3. And the problem with democracy, it has been said...

Is that half of the voters have an IQ of under 100...(100 being the average IQ). Not something I like to think about too often or for very long.

[selador]

4. but i disagree

i think it is the conceit of many that if only people were smarter (iq wise) that they would come to better political conclusions

i find that totally unsupported.

first of all, assuming a "normal distribution" of iq, no matter how much smarter we get, we will still have roughly half below and half above.

but that's tangential

the idea that if only people were smarter... is simply not supported by evidence imo

i have seen zero evidence that smart people come to better political conclusions etc.

i think that's a basically elitist conceit that is not supported by evidence.

i also find it consistent that we tend to think that people who think LIKE us are in fact the smarter ones.

let me put it this way. do i find any evidence that those with an iq of 120, ceteris paribus would vote "better" and or have "better" beliefs than those iwth an iq of 100?

absolutely not.

viscerally, i also detest elitism, the idea that the nation would be better off if pople would only listen to the intellectual elites.

not only is that strongly contrary to democratic principles, but i don't think it would be a good thing either way.

i've also seen plenty of evidence that among the smartest (iq-wise people) are the most dogmatic, prejudiced, dismissive of evidence, and lack of common sense having people there are.

i want diversity, and that includes diversity of IQ.

[Tyler Durden]

6. No, you're describing a MEAN not an average.

There are many, many people under 100 IQ.

Let's say you want to obtain the number of Americans who would balance out one Einstein @ IQ of 150. It looks like this:

100=(150+(x*IQ))/(x+1)

If you want the number of say, IQ 90 persons you'd need to balance out Albert, you sub in 90 for IQ and solve for x.
If you want the IQ you'd need to balance him out given a number of persons, sub in that for x and solve for IQ.

Then it gets REALLY SCARY.

If you want to know what MY IQ is, it would take almost 7 people (6.7) with a 90 IQ to balance me out to 100. Do the math.

[selador]

7. i lurv stats nerds

way to go.

fwiw, there is a fair amount of evidence that when it comes to distribution of IQ's men have fatter tails.

larry summers got in trouble for mentioning the research :)

[Tyler Durden]

8. Yeah, well I screwed up!

I got thinking Mean vs Arithmetic Mean when I should have been thinking MEDIAN.

That's the upper plus lower divided by 2, and that's what they were describing. IQ is an Arithmetic Mean or Average, weighted to have the average always be 100.

[drmeow]

11. What is IQ

IQ score is really only relevant in childhood as it reflects age development. The famous bell-shaped IQ with 100 as the center is a child whose mental age equals his/her physical age. It measures knowledge or certain skills rather than intelligence. The Binet or Stanford-Binet test includes age-specific questions. If a 10 year old can answer the questions that (theoretically) all 10 year olds would know but none that an 11 year old would know, that child has an IQ of 100 (mental age / chronological age X 100). If a child is 10 and can answer questions that a 12 year old would know, that child's IQ is 120. If they can't answer questions past those that an 8 year old could answer, their IQ is 80. Large scale IQ testing suggests that IQ is distributed on a bell-shaped curve with the majority of children having a mental age that equals their chronological age.

The knowledge and skills assessed by IQ tests (even according to their supporters) are more properly measures of mental ability that are needed to succeed in school. In adulthood I would argue that IQ measures abilities that are needed to succeed in certain aspects of Western culture, in particular certain jobs or careers.

[drmeow]

12. delete

[DutchLiberal]

15. But really smart people make horrible decisions all the time.

I have no doubt Dick Cheney is a very intelligent man. If he were stupid, he wouldn't have "achieved" what he has now.

[bluerum]

5. That cloud of comforting convictions obscures our vision as we move

through life, causing us to trample the truth under our feet, and leave behind a trail of destruction.

One of the gifts of education and learning, is to open the mind to the "comforting convictions" of others so that we can at least be more inclusive in our delusions. Choosing to believe simplistic lies because they support ones myopic view of life is an unforgivable laziness. On the other hand, if one is so simply deceived, then indeed their intelligence is suspect.

[DutchLiberal]

13. Then how come I have changed my opinion on a whole range of issues...

based on irrefutable facts?

For example, there are still people who believe Iraqis flew the planes into the WTC. It is a proven fact they were Saudis. How come a part of the people can't acknowledge this fact?

How come they work so different from me?

(These questions are of course pure rhetorical, but if you want to take a shot, be my guest.) ;)

[ryanmuegge]

9. This one is funnier than hell.

[progressoid]

10. ...or you're a Baptist!

:rofl: