Are Philosophers Stupid?

[NotReady]

This site (http://hem.bredband.net/b153434/Index.htm) gives the Cox I.Q. numbers for historical figures. The summary is :

Philosophers (22) average IQ 160; Scientists (39) 159; Fiction writers (53) 152; Statesmen (43) 150; Musicians (11) 149; Artists (13) 153; Soldiers (27) 136.


I personally don't give much weight to I.Q. I also have a low opinion of most philosophy. But one thing I think is true is most "name" philosophers were very smart people. I also think the questions that concern philosophers are important and that most people think about them in one way or another.

Or put another way, never underestimate the enemy.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
Or put another way, never underestimate the enemy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find this interesting.

Why do you consider philosophers to be the enemy?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Why do you consider philosophers to be the enemy?


[/ QUOTE ]

They try to make us believe God is dead.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
They try to make us believe God is dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that's the whole point.

Nobody can MAKE you believe anything!

You can CHOOSE to believe anything you want.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Why do you consider philosophers to be the enemy?


[/ QUOTE ]

They try to make us believe God is dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bwahahahahahahahah.

I'm very sorry you feel this way. Many prominent philosophers have done the *exact* opposite.

Philosophy deals with so much more than 'God' that I think this is a very close minded view of the discipline. You will have a hard time gaining knowledge/insight from *any* work/individual if you already view them as the 'enemy.'

Yugoslav

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

You will have a hard time gaining knowledge/insight from *any* work/individual if you already view them as the 'enemy.'


[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. They give me a very hard time.

[The Yugoslavian]

'Name' anyone will generally be significantly smarter than the 'not name' anyone I'd imagine.

There have been many *extremely* intelligent philosophers throughout history. For a long period of time, all 'scientists' were essentially philosophers anyway. Even fairly recent philosophers such as Wittgenstein and Russell were ridiculously intelligent (very likely with an IQ well above even 2+2s resident genius Sklansky, /images/graemlins/shocked.gif).

Yugoslav

[pzhon]

Why would you believe anyone's estimates of the IQs of historical figures? Doesn't it seem likely to you that successful people, or those the estimator likes or respects, will have their IQs overestimated, at least relative to the others? Further, people do a poor job at estimating the intelligence of those who are smarter than they are.

I know many highly intelligent people who are fantastic at puzzles and games and making sharp observations, yet who have had mediocre success in their professions. I know many extremely successful people whose IQs are below 130, sometimes much lower. Intelligence is not the same thing as talent, and both are merely partly correlated with accomplishments.

I feel dumber after reading your post.

[The Yugoslavian]

Way to be diplomatic!

You get -1 stars!!

Yugoslav
Who does agree that the website linked to seems to be of perhaps little to no use (and why I didn't even bother reading most of it).

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Doesn't it seem likely to you that successful people, or those the estimator likes or respects, will have their IQs overestimated, at least relative to the others?


[/ QUOTE ]

I did say I don't give much weight to IQ. I also wonder how valid an estimate like this is. The reason for the post is DS seems to think philosophers aren't very smart. I can make an opposite case through other means, but since DS places such a high value on IQ I thought this little tidbit would have some interest.

Interesting to note the IQ winner is neither philosopher nor scientist. Goethe, the poet and novelist. Though he was certainly familiar with philosophy and dabbled a bit in science - something about research into color and the human jaw.

[drudman]

No, but I can only speak for myself. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[The Dude]

The philosophy class I took in college was the hardest one for me to sit through, by far. The only part of that class I enjoyed and appreciated was the discussion of ethical models. Not a single other issue brought up in that class was interesting to me.

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
This site (http://hem.bredband.net/b153434/Index.htm)

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a ridiculous site and the "estimated" IQs aren't justified by anything.

The answer to your question is that some philosophers were pretty darn smart; others, not so much.

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Doesn't it seem likely to you that successful people, or those the estimator likes or respects, will have their IQs overestimated, at least relative to the others?


[/ QUOTE ]

I did say I don't give much weight to IQ. I also wonder how valid an estimate like this is. The reason for the post is DS seems to think philosophers aren't very smart. I can make an opposite case through other means, but since DS places such a high value on IQ I thought this little tidbit would have some interest.

Interesting to note the IQ winner is neither philosopher nor scientist. Goethe, the poet and novelist. Though he was certainly familiar with philosophy and dabbled a bit in science - something about research into color and the human jaw.

[/ QUOTE ]
Goethe is not "the IQ winner." He is the "estimated IQ winner." The two probably have very little correlation.