Research Shows "grit" more important than IQ

[Zankou]

Yea, lmao it reminds me of when Mr Burns was addressing the kids at Springfield Elementary, and Principal Skinner asked a question about the importance of "sticktoitiveness", and Burns just said "any real questions?'

How can you remember that quote and not my all-time-favorite Simpsons quote, which precedes it, and which used to be my end sig? Full dialogue:


Mr. Burns: I'll keep it short and sweet. Family, religion, friendship. These are the three demons you must slay if you wish to succeed in business. When opportunity knocks, you don't wanna be driving to the maternity hospital or sitting in some phoney-baloney church, or [finger quotes] "synagogue". Questions?
[somewhat long pause, finally Skinner raises his hand]"
Principal Skinner: Well, uh, I'm gonna take advantage of this rare opportunity even if you children aren't interested. Which do you think is more important? Hard work, or stick-to-itiveness?
Mr. Burns: Are there any real questions?
Lisa: Yes. Does your plant have a recycling program?
Mr. Burns: "Re-cy-cling"? [He turns his mental dictionary to "R", and searches but doesn't find "recycle" anywhere] I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that term, you adorable little ragamuffin.
Lisa: You never heard of recycling? It means to reuse things to conserve our natural resources.
Mr. Burns: Oh, so Mother Nature needs a favor?! Well maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys! Nature started the fight for survival, and now she wants to quit because she's losing?! Well I say, hard cheese.

 

[ABACA]

Why we talkin' 'bout practice?

lol

Just to be clear, though, this research measured success by 8th graders' grades, standardized test scores, and high school placement. It was very narrow in scope and attempts to extrapolate the results into other metrics of "success" are dishonest without further research.

There's also the fact that it was a survey study and survey studies alone don't demonstrate causality. This study may have addressed this, I'm not sure - I've only read the abstract.

 

[AgeofEmpires2**]

Depending on the goal I wouldn't doubt it to be true. Two words you all should be familiar with - MATT BROWN. What the researcher is calling grit is what MMA calls confidence, work ethic, and heart.

 

[sangreporsangre]

How can you remember that quote and not my all-time-favorite Simpsons quote, which precedes it, and which used to be my end sig? Full dialogue:


Mr. Burns: I'll keep it short and sweet. Family, religion, friendship. These are the three demons you must slay if you wish to succeed in business. When opportunity knocks, you don't wanna be driving to the maternity hospital or sitting in some phoney-baloney church, or [finger quotes] "synagogue". Questions?
[somewhat long pause, finally Skinner raises his hand]"
Principal Skinner: Well, uh, I'm gonna take advantage of this rare opportunity even if you children aren't interested. Which do you think is more important? Hard work, or stick-to-itiveness?
Mr. Burns: Are there any real questions?
Lisa: Yes. Does your plant have a recycling program?
Mr. Burns: "Re-cy-cling"? [He turns his mental dictionary to "R", and searches but doesn't find "recycle" anywhere] I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that term, you adorable little ragamuffin.
Lisa: You never heard of recycling? It means to reuse things to conserve our natural resources.
Mr. Burns: Oh, so Mother Nature needs a favor?! Well maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys! Nature started the fight for survival, and now she wants to quit because she's losing?! Well I say, hard cheese.

Hahaha nice. It was a gold episode.

 

[HOLA]

The paper is on academic performance of adolescents. You made a bogus extrapolation with your "pick yourself up by your bootstraps" spiel, claiming people should never challenge the 1% and only blame themselves.

Academic performance doesn't necessarily correlate with success in life, especially when you are talking about the ultra-rich. Many of them never even went to college.

My sister got one B+ in her undergraduate and graduate schooling. Everything else was an A. It took her 3 years to get a full time gig. Other jackoffs barely graduated and went to work at daddy's firm, their first job in life.

Case in point:

 

[panamaican]

Why we talkin' 'bout practice?

Humor aside, no one ever questioned his work ethic on the court...just everywhere else in his life, lol. So, maybe not humor aside.

 

[panamaican]

The paper is on academic performance of adolescents. You made a bogus extrapolation with your "pick yourself up by your bootstraps" spiel, claiming people should never challenge the 1% and only blame themselves.

Academic performance doesn't necessarily correlate with success in life, especially when you are talking about the ultra-rich. Many of them never even went to college.

My sister got one B+ in her undergraduate and graduate schooling. Everything else was an A. It took her 3 years to get a full time gig. Other jackoffs barely graduated and went to work at daddy's firm, their first job in life.

Case in point:

What was her degree in?

 

[AgeofEmpires2**]

What was her degree in?

Not just that, but the idea that having a degree will bring success is so fabricated that I still can't believe young kids are signing up in droves while the tuition soars and the opportunity in the economy plunges - this is the education bubble and the problem with progressive credentialism (The actual definition of progressive, not to be mistaken for 'liberal', I know some people on here will think I was stating otherwise.)

Crying that you can't find a job with your degree is the same thing as people crying when they lose their money on stocks that fall flat. YOU chose to invest in something and with investments there's always risk.

 

[James Keith]

Are you sure about this? Don't have the time or urge to find it, but someone posted an article here about a study done by I believe MIT saying studying does nothing to help you get smarter. It just packs your head with info while overall cognitive abilities stay the same. The rate at which information is processed and the complexity of information that a person is capable of processing does not change. Your brain is extremely limited as to what it can do.

This is just a theory interpreting the results a certain way. Perhaps their attempts at improving IQ simply suck because they're going about it wrong? To convince people there's an underlying genetic advantage/disadvantage you need to back it up with the anatomy. We can find the muscle fibers easily. Meanwhile the hippocampus seems to be the most critical element in forming memories, and you can increase its size and likewise your memory, with practice.

I'm not interested in IQ personally. The point of the research the TS cites is that they claim a better metric than IQ. I also think the key component of IQ test success is actually emotions such as motivation that are very hard to teach, especially if you are going about it wrong in the first place.

And I'd say if you have more info in your head you are "smarter".

Yes having expertise is an advantage, but not everything can be taught. And being successful requires so many skills that if you have to focus so much on one you will miss the others. And everyone who succeeds spent serious time on what they do, does that mean you could take Mike Tyson and Albert Einstein, switch their occupations, and turn Tyson into the greatest mind the world has ever known and turn Einstein into one of the greatest knockout artists out there?

One popular "rule of thumb" is it takes 10,000 hours to become a world-class expert at something. Kind of bs, but makes the point about how hard it will be to make that switch you suggest. This is 20 hours per week for ten years. And not just going through the motions for those hours but deliberate practice testing yourself and trying to get better. Tiger Woods didn't just wreck golfballs all day to see how far he could hit. He changed his swing and clubs multiple times trying to get better.

 

[Xplosives]

it is a good article, alot of people have potential but are too lazy to use it.

 

[ultramanhyata]

And the guy who knows nuclear physics spent a serious ton of time to get that expertise. This entire debate is based on naive arguments about shortcuts that don't exist for 99.99% of the world. That geek wasted many hours of his life to build that ability. And it wasn't easy like in Good Will Hunting. He had to struggle and beat his head against the wall. He just did so beyond the point that others gave up. Because unlike them, he probably had nothing to fall back on besides his identity as a "smart person" so he couldn't bear to fail at it.

You should write novels. You are a very imaginative person. The idea that there's no continuum between mental retardation and genius is a super cool one.

Here's a statistic I would like to see if you (or anyone) can find it:

What is the lowest recorded IQ score for a person accepted into MIT on academic scholarship? I would also be curious to see the median income of MENSA members versus the median income of the general population.

 

[ultramanhyata]

it is a good article, alot of people have potential but are too lazy to use it.

Was there really a question in anyone's mind that if there are two people of roughly equal intelligence and aptitude the one who puts in greater time and effort at mastering a skillset will achieve greater mastery of said skillset? Who needed a study to declare that a truism?

 

[OldGoat]

The paper is on academic performance of adolescents. You made a bogus extrapolation with your "pick yourself up by your bootstraps" spiel, claiming people should never challenge the 1% and only blame themselves.

Academic performance doesn't necessarily correlate with success in life, especially when you are talking about the ultra-rich. Many of them never even went to college.

My sister got one B+ in her undergraduate and graduate schooling. Everything else was an A. It took her 3 years to get a full time gig. Other jackoffs barely graduated and went to work at daddy's firm, their first job in life.

Case in point:

And why shouldn't family success be rewarded? You have greater loyalty to some amorphous state than your own family? If so congrats on your compete indoctrination.

 

[sickc0d3r]

IOne of the most oft suggested reasons for the redistribution of income via social programs is the idea that successful people just happen upon their wealth via luck or chance, indicating "unfairness" and the need for government correction. But if people are more successful mostly because they work harder, how fair is it to take their money and give it to someone else who hasn't demonstrated the same pattern of effort?

This is an odd position to take. If anything, the study supports the need for a social safety net. It seems obvious that it is unreasonable to expect a kid to put in extra study time on an empty stomach.

 

[HOLA]

What was her degree in?

I'm not sure. Whatever you have to do to become a HS guidance counselor. I know she took a lot of psychology stuff, not sure what the degree was. She was doing leave replacement and subbing before she finally got the full-time job. And she had the highest GPA of her college class.

Not just that, but the idea that having a degree will bring success is so fabricated that I still can't believe young kids are signing up in droves while the tuition soars and the opportunity in the economy plunges - this is the education bubble and the problem with progressive credentialism (The actual definition of progressive, not to be mistaken for 'liberal', I know some people on here will think I was stating otherwise.)

Crying that you can't find a job with your degree is the same thing as people crying when they lose their money on stocks that fall flat. YOU chose to invest in something and with investments there's always risk.

The point is that the OP tried to extrapolate people putting effort into their studies and doing well with their grades directly corresponding with monetary success in life, and that putting effort towards studying is the most important part of that monetary success. Therefore, income inequality and all its ramifications is a moot point, apparently.

Of the many things this completely ignores is the dodos who find success because of family connections. Or the fact that someone who starts working part-time at 13 to help their family doesn't have the same leisure as someone who gets their first job at 25 and is free to study, with the help of tutors, private schools etc, all before it.
.

And why shouldn't family success be rewarded? You have greater loyalty to some amorphous state than your own family? If so congrats on your compete indoctrination.

I never said parents should not be able to extend their wealth to their children at all.

 

[ben236]

I'm not sure. Whatever you have to do to become a HS guidance counselor. I know she took a lot of psychology stuff, not sure what the degree was. She was doing leave replacement and subbing before she finally got the full-time job. And she had the highest GPA of her college class.

Hate to break it to you, but regardless of her grades... Putting time in subbing comes with the territory of getting a degree in education. She was probably aware of the fact that she'd have to sub for a while before landing a full time gig when she entered her field.

Or at least she should have been.

 

[Uchi Mata]

And why shouldn't family success be rewarded? You have greater loyalty to some amorphous state than your own family? If so congrats on your compete indoctrination.

Then America's not an individual meritocracy anymore, and you end up with nepotistic oligarchy, which is what the GOP establishment seems to want.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

And why shouldn't family success be rewarded? You have greater loyalty to some amorphous state than your own family? If so congrats on your compete indoctrination.

Because thats how things were in the Middle Ages and humanity has progressed past that point. Please come out of the Dark Ages.

Why do you want to be a slave so badly?:icon_twis

 

[VulgarSnaps]

And why shouldn't family success be rewarded? You have greater loyalty to some amorphous state than your own family? If so congrats on your compete indoctrination.

Because it is rewarded.

Let's take for example W.

This schlub fucked up damn near everything he did that wasn't a total gimme to him. You, go fuck up everything, you'll be broke and miserable.

The mega safety net they pass on is plenty.

 

[VulgarSnaps]

Side note : Mensa members earn about average, sometimes a little higher.

Nothing fantastic. IQ is pattern recognition and a few other tidbits, it doesn't measure things like decision making, higher order mathematics, ass kissing, being likeable, or any of the 900 things that could help with success.

140 ain't that impressive.