The working classes have a lower IQ than those from wealthier backgrounds ! What do you you think?

Question

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pressass/20080522/tuk-working-class-has-lower-iq-6323e80.html

So says a lecturer in Evolutionary Psychology from Newcastle University.
Newcastle University!
Newcastle University?
FFS!
Puuhleease!

Answer 1

Sorry but it’s statistically correct. Depends on the chances generation upon generation of working class kids get; their schooling: the encouragement and example they have from their parents; the degree of exercise they give their brain. In recent years, with mass education, the gap is closing, but it’s still there. We are, however talking about demographics, i.e. statistics, which means average values. Some of the most intelligent (high IQ) people come from a working class environment. So Mr. Worker, don’t despair, train your brain, with whatever subject you like best, just keep it in training and encourage the kids. Some working class families have a perverse satisfaction in keeping their kids "down".

ps we should review all our terms of reference "poverty" is rapidly being passed on to the "office proletariat" - well versed but low earning. Specialised workers are generally much better off.

Answer 2

First of all, any social class will have a range of IQs within it, both classes will have the very intelligent adn both classes will have the very unintelligent.



So, it may be that there is a small difference in average scores between classes, but that doesn't seem to be worth a lot of all this agrro.



Yes, the rich are probably on average slightly more intelligent, just as on average they are fitter, healthier and have longer life spans.



THAT is what we should be getting up in arms about,

Answer 3

IQ has nothing to do with money, ever hear of "common sense" only thing the wealthy have is money to act on intelligence (or lack thereof) a person can have years of schooling, yet not have a lick of sense to use it when needed.

I came from a poor family, and i have a 184 IQ according to the US Marine Corps. should i lower it 40 points because I came from poverty?

Answer 4

Could it be that the working class children just don't want to learn even if they have a reasonably high IQ. I have met loads of people from the upper classes who don't even have a brain never mind an IQ.

Answer 5

Wealth can help buy a good education , but take two children , one working class, one higher class ; then put them through the same education . I would not expect to see any difference.



Edit: Some of the spelling from answerers on here is atrocious. I wonder what their backgrounds are . Sucome for succumb. !

Interlect for intellect , pecting for expecting .Idol for idle . Makes you think .

Answer 6

Disagree! Maybe a case of missed opportunities (through poverty) or a less nurturing environment, than a lack of intelligence.



Also in some of the poorer classes, trading skills - such as engineering, or plastering - may be more desirable than achieving degrees etc.

Answer 7

I have not read the study but IQ only measures what you are capable of learning and though starving your body also starves your brain I would say this is a load of bunk!

Many rich people are idol (brain idol) and many people with less are always striving for more so there is the rub!

Answer 8

I'd like to see his selection process for the testing... I've known some real dullards from both the "Upper" and "Working" class but the most feckless are usually Upper class... to the point of not being able to trust them to make a cup of tea, seriously!



I've just noticed Bruce Charlton's misused the intention behind the word "meritocracy" in his statement on here, it entirely switches the basis of his argument a full 180 degrees and makes the university look like the kind of pandering, simpering institutions that he is apparently defending them from being! Poor, this is not a decent source. x, must try harder. Meritocracy, incidentally, is a pejorative word used, initially by Lord Young in the 50's, to describe a sick and broken society where the "high ranking" think they got where they are by hard work and intelligence and the "low ranking" are where they are due to laziness and stupidity... we should all know the implications of such a society, and it is not somewhere any of us would want to live! It is one of the most mis-used words by the so-called intelligensia and you've gotta laugh when they do so... shows they're generally winging it as much as everyone else!



Firecracker: if only what you say were true... unfortunately class has no relation to IQ, merely, maybe education... and education and IQ have nothing to do with each other, you can educate a dog to do tricks, it doesn't make them intelligent. An IQ test has nothing to do with "achievement", it is an aptitude test... very skewed towards verbal, semantic and mathematical recognition.

Also, class has absolutely nothing to do with success... class, as in Upper and Working (middle is frankly just everybody else, if people within that class want to try to further grade it then that is their own little pecadillo, but saying you are upper middle is still middle!), is all about upbringing and inherited luck, aggression, forebear success and a multitude of other things, but rarely success... possibly expectation has a vague amount of bearing on it but it is only vague, as this can easily be countered by wanting to better yourself. Your inference that rich people are Upper class is as daft as thinking Upper class people are rich and that only intelligent, hardworking people are successful! By inference, are you really suggesting that poor people are stupid or have low IQ's? None of those are true, by the way!

Is IQ hereditary? that's a very bold and as far as I know totally unproven statement.

Answer 9

IQ is very much an achievement test. Working class people don't have as much schooling opportunity or as much friendly academic environments as the upper class people. Also, you can look at it this way, a lot of the rich people got rich because they have higher IQ's and therefore were able to achieve more than the working class people. IQ is also hereditary, so smart people tend to have smarter offsprings and average people generally have average IQ offsprings.

Answer 10

That guy is a relic and he only thinks what he thinks because of the treatment the rich get more are bound to end up in Jobs or schools that need a better I.Q. If you think he's right just look at the house of Lords or The Windsors.

Answer 11

Answering your actual question outright:



It's not a different knowledge. That is to say that if one form of interlect is better or worse than the other.



For example, would you call an engineer or a plumber less clever than that of a business mind - a money maker - an exploitive or a political mind?



In this question we could be referring to the 'meeker mind-set' to that of an 'exploitive and uncaring mind-set'.



Practical skills and the knowledge of this could be far better for a self-sufficient way of living. If you do not wish to be exploited then this is an ideal existential way of progressing with your life and your community/family.

Answer 12

No its not as simple as that. Its about opportunity, people from privileged backgrounds have more opportunity, support and encouragment. People from the working class sucome to social conditioning where they do not expect to rise above their environment. They have less influence from cultural and educational mediums that the priviledged classes. pecting too much

Answer 13

I wonder what his opinion would be if he were on the other side of the fence.. I believe your friend is prejudice and needs a good dose of "everyone has a certain function to preform in this world" and point out how many jobs he sucks at

Answer 14

maybe so, defiantly on my estate lol, but we rule sports/fighting/slang and much more important stuff than iq's

Answer 15

what`s an IQ

Answer 16

Well I'm middle-class but I'm smart. I'm planning to go to uni to become an Architect so I should be in the money when I'm older. =P

Answer 17

ABSOLUTELY UNPROVABLE.