Books?

[vnatale]

After finally finishing that Mattis book I picked up this one to read:

The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes

https://smile.amazon.com/Intelligence-T ... l_huc_item

Excellent book so far and will going back to it shortly.

Here is one fact from it: The average IQ of accountants, lawyers, engineers is 125. The range is 97 to 157.

By the way, having started out at a math / science / engineering college and then finally finding that my correct path was in the business school (accounting -- though I always wondered if I'd not been in such a purely theoretical program as a math major but, instead, been in a more practical one that I could have also been an actuary, at the top of the list the ratio to highly paid / low stress)… I come out with this general hierarchy of intelligence...

1) Engineers
2) Lawyers
3) Accountants

Anyone I've known who has an undergraduate degree in engineering and then gone on to get an MBA has given the impression that getting the MBA was "baby" work.

Vinny

I agree that engineers are the smartest.
Of course I might be biased, since I'm a "software engineer".

I think some of the data is flawed. An IQ average of 125 for engineers is way, way too low, unless of course, that is the average of the bottom 1%.

It said the average for those three groups. Therefore, if there were equal numbers of all three then the average for each could be:

120 - accountants
125 - lawyers
130 - engineers

That would fit my preconceptions for each group and would come out to 125 as the average for the three groups combined.

Having gone though part of an intense math / science / engineering regimen and then upper level business / accounting courses I can first person testify that the intellectual prowess is far greater to be able to meet the demands of the former than the latter.

Vinny

[Mountaineer]

After finally finishing that Mattis book I picked up this one to read:

The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes

https://smile.amazon.com/Intelligence-T ... l_huc_item

Excellent book so far and will going back to it shortly.

Here is one fact from it: The average IQ of accountants, lawyers, engineers is 125. The range is 97 to 157.

By the way, having started out at a math / science / engineering college and then finally finding that my correct path was in the business school (accounting -- though I always wondered if I'd not been in such a purely theoretical program as a math major but, instead, been in a more practical one that I could have also been an actuary, at the top of the list the ratio to highly paid / low stress)… I come out with this general hierarchy of intelligence...

1) Engineers
2) Lawyers
3) Accountants

Anyone I've known who has an undergraduate degree in engineering and then gone on to get an MBA has given the impression that getting the MBA was "baby" work.

Vinny

I agree that engineers are the smartest.
Of course I might be biased, since I'm a "software engineer".

I think some of the data is flawed. An IQ average of 125 for engineers is way, way too low, unless of course, that is the average of the bottom 1%.

It said the average for those three groups. Therefore, if there were equal numbers of all three then the average for each could be:

120 - accountants
125 - lawyers
130 - engineers

That would fit my preconceptions for each group and would come out to 125 as the average for the three groups combined.

Having gone though part of an intense math / science / engineering regimen and then upper level business / accounting courses I can first person testify that the intellectual prowess is far greater to be able to meet the demands of the former than the latter.

Vinny

How about 0, 0, and 375? Accountants can add the numbers and calculate the average; lawyers can determine if it is legal to do that, and the engineers ....... will just keep on disguising their smug superiority while others point out no one has ever had an IQ of 375 or 0 ("yet" thinks the engineer as he smugly realizes what the median IQ of the group is and who has it).

[vnatale]

After finally finishing that Mattis book I picked up this one to read:

The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes

https://smile.amazon.com/Intelligence-T ... l_huc_item

Excellent book so far and will going back to it shortly.

Here is one fact from it: The average IQ of accountants, lawyers, engineers is 125. The range is 97 to 157.

By the way, having started out at a math / science / engineering college and then finally finding that my correct path was in the business school (accounting -- though I always wondered if I'd not been in such a purely theoretical program as a math major but, instead, been in a more practical one that I could have also been an actuary, at the top of the list the ratio to highly paid / low stress)… I come out with this general hierarchy of intelligence...

1) Engineers
2) Lawyers
3) Accountants

Anyone I've known who has an undergraduate degree in engineering and then gone on to get an MBA has given the impression that getting the MBA was "baby" work.

Vinny

I agree that engineers are the smartest.
Of course I might be biased, since I'm a "software engineer".

I think some of the data is flawed. An IQ average of 125 for engineers is way, way too low, unless of course, that is the average of the bottom 1%.

It said the average for those three groups. Therefore, if there were equal numbers of all three then the average for each could be:

120 - accountants
125 - lawyers
130 - engineers

That would fit my preconceptions for each group and would come out to 125 as the average for the three groups combined.

Having gone though part of an intense math / science / engineering regimen and then upper level business / accounting courses I can first person testify that the intellectual prowess is far greater to be able to meet the demands of the former than the latter.

Vinny

How about 0, 0, and 375? Accountants can add the numbers and calculate the average; lawyers can determine if it is legal to do that, and the engineers ....... will just keep on disguising their smug superiority while others point out no one has ever had an IQ of 375 or 0 ("yet" thinks the engineer as he smugly realizes what the median IQ of the group is and who has it).

In the book I've been reading the author introduces us to this Terman person:

Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up

https://smile.amazon.com/Termans-Kids-G ... l_huc_item

Over 100 years ago Terman puts great faith in identifying the high IQ as those who were going to be society's greatest contributors. Kids are described with IQs in the low 190s. Kids who had read 1,400 books by the age of 5. But there was no great outlying performances as adults to equal their outlying IQs.

Posssessing rational thinking - https://smile.amazon.com/Rationality-Qu ... l_huc_item - The Rationality Quotient: Toward a Test of Rational Thinking (The MIT Press) seems to be far more predictive of success than does IQ.

You may agree that successful engineers probably possess an abundance of rational thinking.

I've had enough exposure to lawyers, accountants, and engineers that the engineers are, without a doubt, the top of those two groups with the lawyers being a poor second. And, the accountants bringing up the rear.

Vinny

[Mountaineer]

After finally finishing that Mattis book I picked up this one to read:

The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes

https://smile.amazon.com/Intelligence-T ... l_huc_item

Excellent book so far and will going back to it shortly.

Here is one fact from it: The average IQ of accountants, lawyers, engineers is 125. The range is 97 to 157.

By the way, having started out at a math / science / engineering college and then finally finding that my correct path was in the business school (accounting -- though I always wondered if I'd not been in such a purely theoretical program as a math major but, instead, been in a more practical one that I could have also been an actuary, at the top of the list the ratio to highly paid / low stress)… I come out with this general hierarchy of intelligence...

1) Engineers
2) Lawyers
3) Accountants

Anyone I've known who has an undergraduate degree in engineering and then gone on to get an MBA has given the impression that getting the MBA was "baby" work.

Vinny

I agree that engineers are the smartest.
Of course I might be biased, since I'm a "software engineer".

I think some of the data is flawed. An IQ average of 125 for engineers is way, way too low, unless of course, that is the average of the bottom 1%.

It said the average for those three groups. Therefore, if there were equal numbers of all three then the average for each could be:

120 - accountants
125 - lawyers
130 - engineers

That would fit my preconceptions for each group and would come out to 125 as the average for the three groups combined.

Having gone though part of an intense math / science / engineering regimen and then upper level business / accounting courses I can first person testify that the intellectual prowess is far greater to be able to meet the demands of the former than the latter.

Vinny

How about 0, 0, and 375? Accountants can add the numbers and calculate the average; lawyers can determine if it is legal to do that, and the engineers ....... will just keep on disguising their smug superiority while others point out no one has ever had an IQ of 375 or 0 ("yet" thinks the engineer as he smugly realizes what the median IQ of the group is and who has it).

In the book I've been reading the author introduces us to this Terman person:

Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up

https://smile.amazon.com/Termans-Kids-G ... l_huc_item

Over 100 years ago Terman puts great faith in identifying the high IQ as those who were going to be society's greatest contributors. Kids are described with IQs in the low 190s. Kids who had read 1,400 books by the age of 5. But there was no great outlying performances as adults to equal their outlying IQs.

Posssessing rational thinking - https://smile.amazon.com/Rationality-Qu ... l_huc_item - The Rationality Quotient: Toward a Test of Rational Thinking (The MIT Press) seems to be far more predictive of success than does IQ.

You may agree that successful engineers probably possess an abundance of rational thinking.

I've had enough exposure to lawyers, accountants, and engineers that the engineers are, without a doubt, the top of those two groups with the lawyers being a poor second. And, the accountants bringing up the rear.

Vinny

Vinny, I must confess that I've not been totally serious about my implied view of accountants, lawyers and engineers. I have a strong dose of skepticism about the overall worth of IQ as a measure of success or value to society. I've known many people with high and low and everything in between IQs (When I was a senior in High School, I helped the guidance councellor and knew the results of each persons two different IQ test results - they were a couple years apart). I believe the lowest was a 69 and I forget the highest but I think was something over 140. All were functioning individuals with various skills. For me (an engineer) the easy classes were math and the sciences. For others it was English or History or Band or Phys Ed. I think each person has relatively unique aptitudes for different subjects that come together as a society for a variety of useful vocations and endeavors. In religious terms, God does not make junk. It's people that sterotype other people as junk, mainly to make themselves feel superior. I have known several people with Downs Syndrome - kind loving people all. I've known brilliant people (my grandfather - another story for another time) and people with other severe disabilities; there is always some positive aspect to them, even if it is just to allow others to express love for others as they care for the less able. Anyway, sorry for the tweaking of non-engineers - I love you all!

[vnatale]

After finally finishing that Mattis book I picked up this one to read:

The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes

https://smile.amazon.com/Intelligence-T ... l_huc_item

Excellent book so far and will going back to it shortly.

Here is one fact from it: The average IQ of accountants, lawyers, engineers is 125. The range is 97 to 157.

By the way, having started out at a math / science / engineering college and then finally finding that my correct path was in the business school (accounting -- though I always wondered if I'd not been in such a purely theoretical program as a math major but, instead, been in a more practical one that I could have also been an actuary, at the top of the list the ratio to highly paid / low stress)… I come out with this general hierarchy of intelligence...

1) Engineers
2) Lawyers
3) Accountants

Anyone I've known who has an undergraduate degree in engineering and then gone on to get an MBA has given the impression that getting the MBA was "baby" work.

Vinny

I agree that engineers are the smartest.
Of course I might be biased, since I'm a "software engineer".

I think some of the data is flawed. An IQ average of 125 for engineers is way, way too low, unless of course, that is the average of the bottom 1%.

It said the average for those three groups. Therefore, if there were equal numbers of all three then the average for each could be:

120 - accountants
125 - lawyers
130 - engineers

That would fit my preconceptions for each group and would come out to 125 as the average for the three groups combined.

Having gone though part of an intense math / science / engineering regimen and then upper level business / accounting courses I can first person testify that the intellectual prowess is far greater to be able to meet the demands of the former than the latter.

Vinny

How about 0, 0, and 375? Accountants can add the numbers and calculate the average; lawyers can determine if it is legal to do that, and the engineers ....... will just keep on disguising their smug superiority while others point out no one has ever had an IQ of 375 or 0 ("yet" thinks the engineer as he smugly realizes what the median IQ of the group is and who has it).

In the book I've been reading the author introduces us to this Terman person:

Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up

https://smile.amazon.com/Termans-Kids-G ... l_huc_item

Over 100 years ago Terman puts great faith in identifying the high IQ as those who were going to be society's greatest contributors. Kids are described with IQs in the low 190s. Kids who had read 1,400 books by the age of 5. But there was no great outlying performances as adults to equal their outlying IQs.

Posssessing rational thinking - https://smile.amazon.com/Rationality-Qu ... l_huc_item - The Rationality Quotient: Toward a Test of Rational Thinking (The MIT Press) seems to be far more predictive of success than does IQ.

You may agree that successful engineers probably possess an abundance of rational thinking.

I've had enough exposure to lawyers, accountants, and engineers that the engineers are, without a doubt, the top of those two groups with the lawyers being a poor second. And, the accountants bringing up the rear.

Vinny

Vinny, I must confess that I've not been totally serious about my implied view of accountants, lawyers and engineers. I have a strong dose of skepticism about the overall worth of IQ as a measure of success or value to society. I've known many people with high and low and everything in between IQs (When I was a senior in High School, I helped the guidance councellor and knew the results of each persons two different IQ test results - they were a couple years apart). I believe the lowest was a 69 and I forget the highest but I think was something over 140. All were functioning individuals with various skills. For me (an engineer) the easy classes were math and the sciences. For others it was English or History or Band or Phys Ed. I think each person has relatively unique aptitudes for different subjects that come together as a society for a variety of useful vocations and endeavors. In religious terms, God does not make junk. It's people that sterotype other people as junk, mainly to make themselves feel superior. I have known several people with Downs Syndrome - kind loving people all. I've known brilliant people (my grandfather - another story for another time) and people with other severe disabilities; there is always some positive aspect to them, even if it is just to allow others to express love for others as they care for the less able. Anyway, sorry for the tweaking of non-engineers - I love you all!

You are slightly older than me so you may have had some similar educational experiences to mine.

In 6th grade we all took standardized tests for placement for our classes starting in 7th grade at the junior high school.

On the basis of how I scored I was placed in one of two what was then called "accelerated" division. We all started that year taking a language while the "regular" kids did not take a language until 9th grade. We took a different kind of math. Now that I'm writing this I'm seeing that we were a result of the Russian Sputnik embarrassment to our country.

One day in 7th grade I'm shocked by out of nowhere our science teacher castigating us during the class! She tells us we were all "intellectual snobs" for looking down upon the other kids in the "regular" divisions.

I had NO idea any of my classmates had been engaged in this behavior. Keep in mind we are all about 12 years old at this time!

My two best friends at the time (and since elementary school) were in "regular" divisions. It was never an issue or a divider that I was now in the "accelerated" division. I had always been the much smarter one than the two of them all through elementary school. But that was never a factor in all the time the three of us spent together as kids. We did "kid" non-intellectual activities!

To this day when I have to answer that security question "Who was your best childhood friend" I still use the name of one of those two best friends.

Vinny

[Kriegsspiel]

Bonfire Of The Vanities could be a fun read this year.

[dualstow]

Bonfire Of The Vanities could be a fun read this year.

Revisiting this thread, I remember wondering how you can remain inebriated and be such a voracious reader.

[Kriegsspiel]

Some recent recommended reads:

Martin Eden by Jack London
Outlaw Platoon by Parnell
Digital Minimalism by Newport
Deep Work by Newport
Rules For Radicals by Alinsky
The Strange Death Of Europe by Murray
The Coming Neo-Feudalism by Kotkin
Submission by Houellebecq

[Kriegsspiel]

Bonfire Of The Vanities could be a fun read this year.

Revisiting this thread, I remember wondering how you can remain inebriated and be such a voracious reader.

I don't know bro I'm just like... fucking amazing or something.

[Kbg]

Just finished up a great history book...Hirohito's War. It has been out for 5 years or so but it was pretty good if one is up for a very large book on the Pacific War in WW2. I liked it because it dealt with the entire "thing" vs. the American Navy/Marine narrative that is the standard narrative for most WW2 in the Pacific books. For example, I had no idea about the fairly large Dutch/Japanese campaign at the beginning of the war.

Anyway, if you are a war history buff, highly recommended.

One side note, his collection of maps is extensive and you have to access them via the internet. Since I was always going to the maps I decided to download Google earth as well and it was very fun to look at all the locations and see what they looked like now.

[vnatale]

Just finished up a great history book...Hirohito's War. It has been out for 5 years or so but it was pretty good if one is up for a very large book on the Pacific War in WW2. I liked it because it dealt with the entire "thing" vs. the American Navy/Marine narrative that is the standard narrative for most WW2 in the Pacific books. For example, I had no idea about the fairly large Dutch/Japanese campaign at the beginning of the war.

Anyway, if you are a war history buff, highly recommended.

One side note, his collection of maps is extensive and you have to access them via the internet. Since I was always going to the maps I decided to download Google earth as well and it was very fun to look at all the locations and see what they looked like now.

Just added it to my list. Price, though, has to come down dramatically before I buy it. Why is it so expensive all across the board for an older book? High prices for new, used, Kindle. Is it because it's an academic book? Used in college courses?

Vinny

[Hal]

Just finished up a great history book...Hirohito's War. It has been out for 5 years or so but it was pretty good if one is up for a very large book on the Pacific War in WW2. I liked it because it dealt with the entire "thing" vs. the American Navy/Marine narrative that is the standard narrative for most WW2 in the Pacific books. For example, I had no idea about the fairly large Dutch/Japanese campaign at the beginning of the war.

Anyway, if you are a war history buff, highly recommended.

One side note, his collection of maps is extensive and you have to access them via the internet. Since I was always going to the maps I decided to download Google earth as well and it was very fun to look at all the locations and see what they looked like now.

Suspect you will enjoy these sites.
Found the history of Corregidor fascinating (not even mentioned in Secondary School)
https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC/index.html
https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/US ... index.html

https://corregidor.org/heritage_battali ... tents.html

[Kriegsspiel]

Outlaw Platoon by Parnell

Sean Parnell on Tim's podcast right now.

The evidence that we're the same person mounts.

[Kriegsspiel]

.

[vnatale]

Always a Soldier: Service, Sacrifice, and Coming Out as America's Favorite Black, Gay Republican Hardcover – July 21, 2020


https://www.amazon.com/Always-a-Soldier ... l_huc_item

[dualstow]

Outlaw Platoon by Parnell

Sean Parnell on Tim's podcast right now.

The evidence that we're the same person mounts.

[vnatale]

For those of you who do not already have your own copy of Fail Save Investing. Get it free here: http://clearwalksoft.com/personal-devel ... sting.html

Vinny

[dualstow]

{ Daniel Suarez }

Did you read Freedom?

Too many books.
I’ve been reading The Koreas by Theodore Yoo. It covers North and South, back and forth, chronologically. Pretty good.

[Vil]

Get it free here
Vinny

As you said free .. do not know if I am allowed to post it here (though worth a try but one of the best free book sites I've found is pdfdrive.com

[vnatale]

Get it free here
Vinny

As you said free .. do not know if I am allowed to post it here (though worth a try but one of the best free book sites I've found is pdfdrive.com

Thanks! Looks good...

[Kriegsspiel]

On the topic of WW I

All Quiet On The Western Front by Remarque
Storm Of Steel by Junger
World War One by Stone
1917 (movie) by Mendes
Hardcore History: Blueprint For Armageddon (podcast) by Dan Carlin
The Great War by Hart
World War I by SLA Marshall
A Storm in Flanders by Groom
To End All Wars by Hochschild
The Weimar Republic by Snyder
A History Of The Weimar Republic by Hanson & Waite
Germany’s Aims In The First World War by Fischer
Germany And The Two World Wars by Hillgruber
The Beauty And The Sorrow by Englund

[dualstow]

Just ordered ‘Empire of Silver’
↳ viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9680&p=237372#p237372

[Kriegsspiel]

This was on my reading list, too. Good looking out.

[dualstow]

This was on my reading list, too. Good looking out.

I found it because of that supchina site you linked to.

[Kriegsspiel]

I know.