You seem to be arguing just for the sake of argument. Intelligence isn't a part of physics but again you are making a rather half-assed argument.

IQ is a measure of certain properties of a brain (or rather, a mind), which is a very complex system. Mass, volume and charge are measurements in a different system. That one system has more easily defined rules and easily measured properties doesn't in any way invalidate our way of measuring properties of another, completely different system. If that is your best argument.. well, I can't help you.

You can make whatever outrageous claims you want. It won't change the fact that if you rate someone's ability to solve crosswords you get a score representing.. *drumroll* that person's ability to solve crosswords! *GASP!* The same thing goes for an IQ test, which rates your ability to solve logical, spacial and mathematical problems, memorize and categorize, etc. to give you a score showing how good you are at solving those tasks.

Have you not seen Demolition Man?! The owner of the eye was not killed, hand in your geek card right now!

Excuse me.. who are you to tell me what "moron" means when you don't even know what "sheeple" are? =P Sheeple = sheep people. People who can't be arsed to think for themselves, who readily gobble up any random rumor and hearsay as unequivocal fact. People who aren't strictly speaking stupid, as in lacking mental capacity to learn, comprehend and understand, but for some reason I utterly fail to understand choose to remain ignorant.

I'm no English literature professor so I might very well be wrong, but I don't think "Moron" has a very strict definition? If you do something stupid and foolish, something you should have been able to see would not end well, you are a moron. In this specific case, I had a couple of people I know in mind. People who in all seriousness think the world is coming to an end in 2012, exactly like the movie 2012, because of global warming. They are morons.

Of course intelligence is a made up concept. Exactly like mass, volume, charge, etc. in that they exist but the terms are simply things we have invented to classify information around us. You cannot state that a test designed to rate a persons ability to solve a certain type of task is useless at rating people's ability to, well.. solve that certain type of task! I don't mean to be rude but if you fail to see the logical fallacy of that argument, Sir, I think you might be at the lower end of the Bell curve.

An IQ test is made to evaluate a person's mental ability within a certain set of categories, like logic, language, spatial awareness, math, memory, etc. As such, a high IQ equates to ability within those areas, and opposite a low IQ usually means your general understanding of things logical, mathematical, etc. is low.

Why do we even argue about this? It's perfectly logical.

God Sir, I applaud your insightful post even as I type to tell you how much I appreciate it (before it gets modded into oblivion as flamebait)!

Women keep screaming and shouting about how Hollywood and pop culture in general creates an unhealthy image of what a woman should be (all driven by big, evil dirtbag men of course). What about the fact that this very same culture continues to support the view that men need to support their women and families, pay for dates, open doors and drive decent cars? As a man, I will never have the choice to be a stay-at-home dad. Assuming I make enough money though, it wouldn't be socially acceptable for me to refuse my future wife the choice of quitting her job to be a full time mom. If I don't make money and don't have a car, I am a bum and have roughly nill chance of getting, much less keeping a steady girlfriend. If a woman doesn't make any money though, it isn't just acceptable for her to be with a man who supports her, it would be considered perfectly normal.

Hypocrisy much? Women didn't have much choice 50++ years ago; find a good man, raise and care for your family. Neither did men; get the best job you can and work your ass off to support your wife and family. What has changed for the better? Well, women can choose to work, or to stay at home. Women can do whatever the hell they like (even beating on or otherwise abusing their man) and no one will raise an eyebrow. Men, on the other hand, are still stuck with 1. Get an education. 2. Work until retirement or death to provide for your family.

Goooo equality and equal rights!

Or to paraphrase George Carlin: "Take a minute to think about how stupid the average person is.. now realize that half the worlds population is even dumber!"

IQ tests might not be perfect, but a scale that rates morons at the bottom, sheeple in the middle and Steven Hawking at the high end isn't "fundamentally flawed". So called "emotional intelligence" aside.. You can argue until your face turns blue, but someone with a low IQ will be noticeably dumb while someone with a high IQ will most likely be noticeably smart, at least in the context of understanding how logical things work, spatial awareness, ability to learn and comprehend, and apply said learned information to novel problems.

Until you can prove that IQ tests show no (or a very weak) correlation between IQ score and the properties mentioned above (i.e. the things they are made to quantify) you have no argument and by virtue of logic have no place pushing your rubbish misconceptions on others. (sorry if that sounded a bit harsh)

With regards to your observation of your children, I'd say this fits nicely with the way I perceive things. Females seem better at learning things, thus their general, relative supremacy in subjects such as history, literature and language (at least the basics, as in school) where one needs to learn things. Males do better with things that can be systemized and understood. I was never good at history as this required pure memorization but in physics, chemistry and biology I was a straight A student, because as I gathered info, pieces of the puzzle came together and my understanding, from which I could extrapolate more info, grew.

Aaah, if only I had mod-points! Insightful indeed, good Sir*! *Assuming you are a Sir. If you are a Mrs or a Miss, congratulations. Your sense of self insight and irony just blew my mind.

Are you seriously claiming that a logical mindset nurtures more violence than emotion-based reasoning? As to bringing peace between individuals.. me and my male friends have disagreements form time to time. You know what happens? We discuss it, look up sources if it's a factual topic, and come to a friendly agreement with no anger, embarrassment or resentment involved. Every girl/woman I know though routinely has emotional blowouts with their friends, even close friends. A simple argument sparks emotion, which escalates the argument, which fans the spark into a flame, until the spark becomes a raging fire of insults and vows to never speak to each other again.

Of course there are exceptions. There are males who are completely and irrevocably illogical in their behavior, and I must believe there are sensible women who see tings objectively rather than through a thick veil of emotion lest I give up and stay single for the remainder of my life. Exceptions to a rule doesn't invalidate the rule though, so it's irrelevant.

Also, I'm not saying that emotional intelligence isn't useful, but that having a high level of empathy doesn't make you smart. Like ILongForDarkness said:

What are we discussing..? There is no doubt that men are physically stronger than women. There is also no doubt that in general, men and women use different parts of our brains, and as such men tend to have better spacial awareness and (lacking the correct term) "logic comprehension". Women tend to have better memories and a stronger creative streak. There are many more differences, but I don't remember them at the moment and I'm too lazy to look them all up.

It isn't just weird "group knowledge" or cliques, men are actually better at parallel parking. Women (as I'm sure many of you have noticed) tend to remember things like arguments, what you had for dinner, which movies you've seen and who did the dishes in excruciating detail, even months after it happened. As you said, "the plural of anecdote is not data", but these differences are facts supported by tons of research.

Of course I think women and men are of equal value, that's not what's in question! We are different. Forcing everyone to comply with some equality standard isn't good for anyone. How can equal rights activists justify forcing people to hire a certain percentage of any given gender, even if it means the employer and the best candidate might end up getting the short end of the stick because of some imposed "equality" quota?

Discrimination isn't good at all, but the solution can hardly be said to be forced "anti-discrimination"-discrimination.

Not that I don't agree, but wouldn't you say that it's stupid to remain ignorant? The vast majority of people are, and have probably always been, "sheeple". They can't all be unintelligent, can they..? Scary concept! *shudders*

Still, the choice to remain ignorant is something I find completely incomprehensible. I'm not saying I'm the smartest guy out there (though the official online Mensa short-test I took rated me at ~142 IQ, so I'm no chimp), but to willfully ignore facts and believe moronic hearsay (like heartily arguing that distilling brew made from raw material not containing pectins will invariably produce methanol in lethal doses, or that Megan Fox is in reality a man), instead of at the very least looking something up on Wikipedia before one opens ones mouth.. that is my definition of stupid.

That doesn't change the fact that it's simply wrong to cut of a part of an infants body. If a grown-up wants to do it to his own body, be my guest. I'm not going to care any more than if you feel like cutting off your finger, except to thing it's a completely dumb thing to do.

It really boils down to this: Get snipped when you're an infant and you never have a choice. Go natural, and you actually have a choice to make when you get mature enough to think for yourself.

Also, it is no secret that the foreskin is the most sensitive area of the body, and that the head is meant to be kept protected. It's quite logical that cutting off a part of the penis that contains thousands of nerve endings decreases sensitivity. The fact that pro-circumcision folk claim the opposite just makes me doubt their entire argument even more.

But like I said, if you're an adult who chooses to do this, I'm not going to stop you. If you come near my kids with cutting implements though, I will apply said implements on your person rather than allow you to amputate part of my child's anatomy!

I did, and one thing's for sure. With roughly half the population being male, she sure didn't get elected because she is a woman!

Yes. With great power comes great responsibility.

Why are we all of a sudden talking about game graphics here? I'd imagine $50/hour is a lot for a 3D-designer. $90/$50 = 1.800.000 hours. I think I work about 1900-2000 hours a year, so that means $90 million buys you 900 work years of 3D design. Wait.. what was your argument again..?