Why there are so many “smart” unsuccessful people.

[hopelessnormielit69]

In order to be at the top of society, it isn’t enough to simply be smart, skilled, hardworking or whatever. You also need to take advantage of and exploit as many people as possible. This is why women like guys that are manipulative and/or physically abusive. Because manipulative and/or physically abusive guys tend to be successful.

 

[kcarrots]

Making it in life is mostly with networking and having connections it’s less about being smart

 

[Fluoxymesterone]

Because your genes determine wether you are successful or not. IQ is only one of many factors.

 

[Fluoxymesterone]

Actually, looks are far FAR superior when it comes to success than IQ. It's not even close. IQ barely matters at all, Looks is (almost) EVERYTHING.

 

[Fluoxymesterone]

But yeah part of this is you having this normie view of "success". Careers are not success. Success is reproducing and doing this as many times as possible while creating the fittest offspring possible.

 

[Fevet]

IQ barely matters at all

Surreal cope. Looks prevail over it, but to downplay the importance of iq is ludicrous.

 

[TheGrayWolf]

Actually, looks are far FAR superior when it comes to success than IQ. It's not even close. IQ barely matters at all, Looks is (almost) EVERYTHING.

Most of the time but there are exceptions. See Musk, Zuckerberg … although, of course, they mog looks-wise by a huge margin (and money-wise too)

 

[Fluoxymesterone]

Surreal cope. Looks prevail over it, but to downplay the importance of iq is ludicrous.

No, the only measure of success is mating success, where IQ doesn't really matter.

 

[Fevet]

No, the only measure of success is mating success, where IQ doesn't really matter.

Having a higher iq has been positively correlated with being happier upto a certain threshold (120-129).

https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1367728/1/Strydom_Relationship%20between%20Happiness%20and%20IQ%20final%20version%20AA.pdf

 

[Fevet]

Having a higher iq has been positively correlated with being happier upto a certain threshold (120-129).

https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1367728/1/Strydom_Relationship%20between%20Happiness%20and%20IQ%20final%20version%20AA.pdf

That's not to say that looks and having a steady access to sex ISN'T significantly more important. I'm merely pointing out how a higher iq can be conducive to your quality of life, especially if you're a sperg.

 

[Fluoxymesterone]

Having a higher iq has been positively correlated with being happier upto a certain threshold (120-129).

https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1367728/1/Strydom_Relationship%20between%20Happiness%20and%20IQ%20final%20version%20AA.pdf

You either get laid or you don't, how normies measure their happiness doesn't mean much. Yeah everyone would rather be 130 IQ than 80 IQ but IQ will not have a big effect. Also correlation doesn't equal causation. You're right tho, it will help with career which would help even incels affording copes and such

 

[LeFrenchCel]

Making it in life is mostly with networking and having connections it’s less about being smart

 

[LeFrenchCel]

Rich people aren't rich because of their intelligence.

They're rich because they were lucky enough to grow up in a privileged environment.

There's also the case of foids who can get rich in modern society just by existing.

Meanwhile many clever people who have the abilities to run high paying jobs never get there because they don't have the connections.

That's why you have so many clever proletarians and so many stupid richfags.

 

[eye4139]

Rich people aren't rich because of their intelligence.

They're rich because they were lucky enough to grow up in a privileged environment.

There's also the case of foids who can get rich in modern society just by existing.

Meanwhile many clever people who have the abilities to run high paying jobs never get there because they don't have the connections.

That's why you have so many clever proletarians and so many stupid richfags.

>implying intelligence isn't mostly luck
intelligence is almost just as much luck as the wealth of the family you're born into.
there's nothing "unfair" about this, just innate differences that are a fact of life, be it the wealth of your parents, your looks, or your intelligence.
besides wealth it is a combination really. if you want to acquire great wealth, you're going to need innate advantage of some sort.
there's plenty of dumb scions who end up amounting to nothing and destroying their families wealth, just like there's plenty of really smart people.
and even then, IQ can predict income, and IQ is partly inheritable meaning there's a higher chance that a richer person is smarter, which means there's a higher chance that their children will be smarter too, and so on.

 

[blackpillednigga]

Making it in life is mostly with networking and having connections it’s less about being smart

 

[based_meme]

Nobody gives a fuck about how smart you are. The only thing people care about is what you can do for them and what they can get out of you.

 

[outerdarkness]

Rich people aren't rich because of their intelligence.

They're rich because they were lucky enough to grow up in a privileged environment.

There's also the case of foids who can get rich in modern society just by existing.

Meanwhile many clever people who have the abilities to run high paying jobs never get there because they don't have the connections.

That's why you have so many clever proletarians and so many stupid richfags.

 

[Roastie Crusher]

There's a limited supply of pain you can exploit. Most "high IQ" people aren't exploiting consumer pain but researching undiscovered phenomena to mog other high IQ people.

 

[Emba]

Brutal

"If you're so smart why aren't you rich" pill.

 

[sasuke]

because looks are the only thing that matters

 

[Zetta]

Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money Genes and money bones and money


learn it fuckwitt

 

[Solid State]

There are a lot of people who were very intelligent in history but were not recognized until years after their deaths because they were considered "eccentric" or "weird" when they were still alive.

It is not enough to be "smart" to be successful, you also have to be in a society or workplace that appreciates your intelligence and contributions. You can be the most intelligent person in the world but if nobody around you cares or listens then you are not going to get anywhere. This is especially true in many jobs where your superiors do not want to hear about your latest theories or conjecture on things, they just want an obedient worker who just does their job and does not question their authority.

There are also many wealthy idiots in life, but their money allows them to be foolish or careless and lets them get away with things ordinary people cannot.

 

[eye4139]

Nobody gives a fuck about how smart you are. The only thing people care about is what you can do for them and what they can get out of you.

you're contradicting yourself there.
intelligence is a tool, and the more powerful that tool is, the more you can do. you are, ceteris paribus, more valuable to others if you are smarter.

 

[based_meme]

you're contradicting yourself there.
intelligence is a tool, and the more powerful that tool is, the more you can do. you are, ceteris paribus, more valuable to others if you are smarter.

That's where the "what you can do for them" part comes in. It's not the intellect that they care about qualitatively, but the utility and output that it can provide for them. Sure, you could argue that, by extension, it would mean that they care about the trait itself, but that falls apart when it you break it down to skills and actions performed to provide that utility, since a lesser intelligent - but more skilled - individual will replace them.

The point is that people, in general, are results-oriented, and not process-oriented. This is for good reason in most cases. For example, would you really care that a heart surgeon is better than all of his available peers that you have access to, if he has a very bad day due to external factors when he's operating on you? Of course, not. All you care about is the job he does on you, all else be damned.

 

[Mecoja]

They're trained to serve the rich from early on.

 

[Diddy]

Those unsuccessful smart people are non-NT and don't know how to network.

 

[UglyVirgin]

Looks = success in life

 

[Butane]

Have charisma (be chad) and get everything handed to you or kiss ass and climb the ladder.

 

[eye4139]

That's where the "what you can do for them" part comes in. It's not the intellect that they care about qualitatively, but the utility and output that it can provide for them. Sure, you could argue that, by extension, it would mean that they care about the trait itself, but that falls apart when it you break it down to skills and actions performed to provide that utility, since a lesser intelligent - but more skilled - individual will replace them.

The point is that people, in general, are results-oriented, and not process-oriented. This is for good reason in most cases. For example, would you really care that a heart surgeon is better than all of his available peers that you have access to, if he has a very bad day due to external factors when he's operating on you? Of course, not. All you care about is the job he does on you, all else be damned.

of course they don't care about intellect for intellect's sake. what use does a tool have if it can't be used for anything?
being smarter means you acquire skills much more quickly than the average person, i.e. you can become valuable in the eyes of others more quickly. you can do stuff that others aren't capable of doing.
the cope of "selective intelligence" is really just that: a cope.
it is midwits mostly who are at or below +1sd who overestimate their intelligence but have nothing to show for it.

that's where the ceteris paribus comes in. the example you provided ignores that part of my statement and changes other circumstantial conditions.


besides to get rich, you don't just need to be instrumental to others as in having a job. if real riches (i.e. more than a handful of millions per year, which is what some job provide if you're both very lucky and have gifted level IQ) is what you wish to pursue, there's close to no job which offer that.
The less capped and more likely mean is that in which you need to re-allocate productive means into more efficient configuration in order to obtain profits, and to do that, you either need some really good intuition, or a really large brain and a STEM degree to build something new better, or both.


the bottom line is, for really high earnings you will need incredibly advanced skills and problem solving abilities provided you don't have some other innate advantage or unlikely stroke of luck, and to reach those levels of ability, you will need at least above average intelligence.

 

[eye4139]

what matters is the difference in innate advantage you have (intelligence, looks, intergenerational wealth), and other environmental luck. there's not much escaping from this.

 

[based_meme]

of course they don't care about intellect for intellect's sake. what use does a tool have if it can't be used for anything?

Intellect/intelligence is not a tool, it's a trait, as are skills. You don't use somebody's intelligence the way you do a machine. You have a very loose definition of tool.

being smarter means you acquire skills much more quickly than the average person, i.e. you can become valuable in the eyes of others more quickly. you can do stuff that others aren't capable of doing.

Which is the utility of intelligence. You can have two numerically equal intelligent people, but with different skills. The intelligence of the person with the skill set of no use to you and your needs will be functionally worthless. You may or may not be able to train that person to do what you want or need them to do, but it's sub-optimal. You'd be better off simply recruiting the more skilled person or one with a closer affinity to the competencies you need.

Yourself in particular may care about a person's raw intelligence, but people in general typically don't (employers, the market etc.).

the cope of "selective intelligence" is really just that: a cope.

Not all intelligence is equal. People have strengths and weaknesses. Not everybody of equal intelligence is the exact same blank slate.

it is midwits mostly who are at or below +1sd who overestimate their intelligence but have nothing to show for it.

You're veering off from your main point of, "people care about your intelligence, because they can use it as a tool."

that's where the ceteris paribus comes in. the example you provided ignores that part of my statement and changes other circumstantial conditions.

Just say "all else being equal." The Latin is unnecessary and doesn't strengthen your point.

The example illustrates that it's the results and skills that you ultimately should (and do) care about out in the world, not the intrinsic trait of intelligence. We measure and value competence by effectiveness, efficiency, and success rate of a job's tasks, not IQ scores (or similar and related metrics).

besides to get rich, you don't just need to be instrumental to others as in having a job. if real riches (i.e. more than a handful of millions per year, which is what some job provide if you're both very lucky and have gifted level IQ) is what you wish to pursue, there's close to no job which offer that.
The less capped and more likely mean is that in which you need to re-allocate productive means into more efficient configuration in order to obtain profits, and to do that, you either need some really good intuition, or a really large brain and a STEM degree to build something new better, or both.


the bottom line is, for really high earnings you will need incredibly advanced skills and problem solving abilities provided you don't have some other innate advantage or unlikely stroke of luck, and to reach those levels of ability, you will need at least above average intelligence.

All of this is unrelated to the points either of us are making wrt to valuing intelligence in others.

 

[eye4139]

Intellect/intelligence is not a tool, it's a trait, as are skills. You don't use somebody's intelligence the way you do a machine. You have a very loose definition of tool.

I mean it is your own tool, the tool of the haver.

Yourself in particular may care about a person's raw intelligence, but people in general typically don't (employers, the market etc.).

they do by proxy. I'll take employment for now, but I'll come back to other forms later: really high paying jobs (>1m per year) require particular sets of skills, true, but these are usually not acquirable by the average person, or by someone with average intelligence. if they were, these jobs wouldn't be high paying.

Not all intelligence is equal. People have strengths and weaknesses. Not everybody of equal intelligence is the exact same blank slate.

true there are differences in specific pre-dispositions, but intelligence is generally observable across various markers. that's why the concept of the g factor exists, because there's strong correlation between vastly different markers of intelligence.

You're veering off from your main point of, "people care about your intelligence, because they can use it as a tool."

that is an explanation of the existence of people who profess to be intelligent but have nothing to show for it, no skills, no success in any field. In other words, I believe that many of the people claiming to be smart and yet unsuccessful, are not that smart to begin with.

Just say "all else being equal." The Latin is unnecessary and doesn't strengthen your point.

it is a common expression, much shorter and to me much more familiar than "all else being equal"

The example illustrates that it's the results and skills that you ultimately should (and do) care about out in the world, not the intrinsic trait of intelligence. We measure and value competence by effectiveness, efficiency, and success rate of a job's tasks, not IQ scores (or similar and related metrics).

Again, they care about it by proxy.
it's not much about what others have you doing, but much more about what you yourself do out of your own initiative, and that requires intelligence and intuition.

All of this is unrelated to the points either of us are making wrt to valuing intelligence in others.

it isn't, since you were originally claiming that others not perceiving intelligence as useful explains the existence of "smart" unsuccessful people, as if intelligence isn't important for the pursuit of wealth. It points out that in attempting to reach these ambitious goals, one, virtually without any exception, needs that innate advantage, and intelligence is a great innate advantage. Just having a "skill" as an average person won't get you far, as there's no path to wealth which involves the passive use of some set of skills which the average person can just acquire and use. it is a much more pro- and interactive pursuit, which bars people (ignoring obscene strokes of luck in re-allocating productive means at random, but that's less likely than winning the lottery) without innate advantage