Supreme Court could take guns case

[joepole]

>Intelligence follows education.

Education has almost no effect on intelligence.

>So do you believe that everyone is evolving backwards? Even yourself? Or just some people are evolving backwards, weaked by the trap of "social programs" which creates a government form of "selective breeding" so to speak? Sounds like a touchy subject and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but you chose an interesting adjective I had not heard before.

Anything that results in the progression of a system to go the "wrong" way is a dygenic force. The word "evolution" has gotten too tied up in politics and people forget that it simply means "change over time." Our country currently has policies that encourage/enable the breeding of people that otherwise (if they were following normal evolutionary protocols) would not.

Our society encourages/enables the best and brightest to have very few children and the bottom of the barrel to have as many as they can. This is a dysgenic pressure on our society. The average felon in this country has almost three times as many children as the average physician.

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by joepole

The average felon in this country has almost three times as many children as the average physician.

I'm agreeing with you in spirit Joe, but since you went the extra mile and provided us with an actual number and a specific population, I'd like to see your source for this data.

Most of the physicians I know have 3-4 children. I don't know all of them, however, and I don't know any felons, so naturally I'm curious about this statistic.

I remember well the "welfare moms" of the 80s-90s, but I thought I remembered reading that this practice had ceased by and large. However, I don't have any proof, and I'm always on the lookout to raise my intelligence by being educated.

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by Morpheus

I'm always on the lookout to raise my intelligence by being educated.

Accordin to Joe, ya cant.

in·tel·li·gence (n-tl-jns)
n.
1.
a. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge.


I would argue that as one's knowledge increases, so too does one's ability to apply that knowledge. But Joe does sound pretty sure of himself, doesnt he?

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by joepole

>Intelligence follows education.

Education has almost no effect on intelligence.

A person with a Ph.D is almost always more intelligent than a high school drop out.

Originally Posted by joepole

The average felon in this country has almost three times as many children as the average physician.

So who is the smarty pants and who is the dummy in the eyes of Mother Nature (evolution)? Perhaps now I see how your prior statement could be right. (Re: Education has almost no effect on intelligence)

[joepole]

>A person with a Ph.D is almost always more intelligent than a high school drop out.

Look at it the other way, someone of high intelligence is more likely to be a PhD holder than a high school dropout. The education didn't make him smart, his brains got him educated.

[joepole]

>Excessive to the point of obsession. Its downright anal, Joe. You are a classic anal retentive. No doubt your folks had some trouble potty-trainin ya.

Since I grew up about three decades after anyone that went to college stopped using expressions like "anal retentive" it never really was much of an issue. Are you going to ask about my bodily humors, too? Perhaps I need some leeches.

Also, if I was the guy on the "The lottery is a good investment" side of the argument, I'd probably go out of my way not to remind people of it. When are you going to start sending me my money? I told you I'd give you better odds than the Powerball. Just send me $100M and I'll send you $20M back.

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by joepole

Since I grew up about three decades after anyone that went to college stopped using expressions like "anal retentive" it never really was much of an issue.

Common usage
Conversationally, the term is often used to describe a person deemed to be overly obsessed with minor details. Its roots are said to be from Sigmund Freud.

The term is often used in a derogatory sense to describe a person with such attention to detail that the obsession becomes an annoyance to others, and can be carried out to the detriment of the so-called anal-retentive person.


Origins
In the psychology of Freud, the anal stage is said to follow the oral stage of infant/early-childhood development. This is a time when an infant's attention moves from oral stimulation to anal stimulation (including the bowels and bladder), usually synchronous with learning to control their excretory functions, a time of toilet training. Freud theorized that children who experience conflicts during this period of time may develop "anal" personality traits, namely those associated with a child's efforts at excretory control: orderliness, stubbornness, a compulsion for control. Those whose anal characteristics continue into later life are said to be "anal retentive" personality types.


Oh but it most definitly is an issue, Joe. Ya say the term is antiquated? Well even if they are an old pair o' shoes, they still fit...and you're wearin em!

[joepole]

That's seriously what you're going to go with? A cut & paste job from Wikipedia that doesn't actually refute anything?

"Often used' doesn't make it right. The word "irregardless" qualifies as "often used." So does "Daylight Savings Time." Neither of those are correct, either.

>Oh but it most definitly is an issue, Joe. Ya say the term is antiquated? Well even if they are an old pair o' shoes, they still fit...and you're wearin em!

They don't fit, Freud is almost completely discredited; especially B.S. like "anal retentive." Like I said, you might as well tell me my humors are out of balance or my chakra needs tuning.

There's a simple solution: Stop saying stuff that is wrong and I can't correct you.

[Al Swearengen]

That's seriously what you're going to go with? A cut & paste job from Wikipedia that doesn't actually refute anything?

I didn't use it to refute anything, I used it to support my contention that your fixation with minutia is annoyin to me and probably everyone else ya interact with...and it drove that point home quite nicely! Besides, the term isn't as outdated as ya say...it's still in the vernacular, as in "Joe is quite anal about everything".

They don't fit, Freud is almost completely discredited; especially B.S. like "anal retentive."

Ha! You're doin it again, and ya dont even realize it...you're completely oblivious to it! Ya just proved my point...the damn shoes fit and you're wearin em! Face it Joe, you're anal, and it's apparent to everyone butt you (pardon the pun)! You're like a guy with halitosis who insists his breath isn't foul since he himself can't smell it. And "Freud is almost completely discredited"... really Dr. Pole? I dont think you're qualified to make that pronouncement. But hey, whatever....knock yourself out.