The fact that you correlated Jordan Petersons' statement with the unemployment rate and understood that those numbers are in dispute. You are definitely over 70 IQ.
Look up what unemployment rate doesn't include. Individuals who are not included in the unemployment rate include those who are not actively seeking work, such as retirees, stay-at-home spouses, full-time students, and individuals who are unable to work due to disability or personal obligations. Additionally, people who have given up looking for work are also not counted as unemployed. If you counted all those groups (minus perhaps students and retirees) as unemployed for purposes of measuring unemployment rate then the metric is well over 25% in Ireland; more than enough room to fit everyone with an IQ of less than 70.
@RealLifeIronMan your statement relies on an assumption that a large portion of people not actively seeking work are also people with an IQ under 70. You correctly pointed out in your comment that this group is composed of people who are studying, caring for children or family members on a voluntary basis and retired people. I think you would having to provide some evidence that those groups are significantly representing lower IQ than the general population which I seriously doubt.
Did you take an official Mensa IQ test? If you were to take one now, i would be surprised if you end up with a score below 85. You are clearly able to think abstractly, and you have good problem solving skills. You are also pretty articulate.
Big +1 on this. I appreciate Mark's channel for the positivity and hard work, and I don't doubt that he's had learning difficulties and such growing up. But I have strong strong doubts of his IQ of 70 unless it was either a faulty test, or a score from when he was a child. The thought to even compare unemplyment rate to IQ distribution to refute JPs argument is not something I'd expect most people below 100 to come up with. Beyond that, as everyone points out, Mark is quite articulate, and able to stick to grander narratives over the course of his videos, just tons of signs of at least reasonable intelligence. Maybe one other explanation - he might just be a poor test taker
@@ferreus At the extremes, definitely. There's also a bunch of different tests with different scales and shortcomings, and most of the stuff online isn't properly administered in a way to ensure consistency. There's just a lot of reasons to not believe he's actually at 70
@@RyanCacophonyI have never taken an IQ test, but if I had to guess, 100-95, in other words, I'm probably average. Probably not below 90, but also probably not above 105. Anyway, the idea to compare unemployment rates and IQ is an extremely obvious idea, Jordan Peterson's point is about unemployment and the IQ, to compare the two yourself is common knowledge. So I disagree with your comment that most wouldn't think to do so.
The "Mensa test" does two versions - the std Cattell III B test and a 'culture-fair' version. At least it did when I joined about 40 years ago. The std test involves a lot of verbal questions (eg. Duck is to water, as candle is to (a) fire, (b) flame, (c) Earth, (d) Wax) and since Mark is 'improving his IQ' by reading 20 mins a day I think he would probably score higher on the 'culture fair' IQ test (which is more based on sequence of pictures, number series etc). I'd guess he had literacy/education issues (that are being rectified by regular reading practice), and that his 'true' IQ is around 90ish. ps. I'm a non-financial Mensan - I found the meetings incredibly boring and pointless. The original conception of Mensa as a gathering place for 'high IQ' people to use their natural mental gifts to help improve the world seems to have never been implemented (I think government 'think tanks' actually fill in this role in the real world), and the Mensa 'club' is simply a place for high IQ individuals who are often under-achievers to go feel good about themselves. High IQ people who are actually effective in the work are usually too busy with their 'day job' to bother going to Mensa functions. But the lapel pin is cool ;)
I honestly think you should consider if you might have dyslexia, adhd or some other related neurodiverse condition and get an assessment. A significant component of the IQ tests relate to executive functioning which neurodiverse people struggle with and thus could explain depressed IQ scores in otherwise intelligent individuals. Wishing you all the best.
Hard agree, i got diagnosed with ADHD recently, and part of that process was taking an IQ test and a general abilities index test that removed the weighting of stuff ADHD affected. The results were like night and day
Yeah, I've been wondering if I have ADHD. Oftentimes I make little mistakes that cause me to feel like I'm stupid, but a lot of the small mistakes I make seem to be related to ADHD
Agree. I've done badly on every exam I've ever taken. Teachers told me I was useless. But I went to uni and worked my ass off and got a first class degree. Eventually got diagnosed with Autism and ADHD as an adult.
When I was young, I had a teacher who said less intelligent people can acheive more than more intelligent people by doing small things consistently. Consistency is key. Just keep doing it.
This RUclips channel would be a perfect example. If he just keeps posting and working on content creation he increases his chance of success month by month. Great advice btw.
I don't know what my IQ is but I find learning anything new and remembering to be a struggle. I did small steps to improve my communication skills and mindset and this led me to learn programming and find a job. Working was also a struggle but I put hard work and received good feedback. I have lost my job recently and jobmarket is at crazy stage now but I will not give up and will continue learning new skills/technology to be more competitive candidate
What if more intelligent people also do small things consistently? Lol. Like if both people did the exact same amount of work, wouldn’t the more intelligent one come out “on top” ?
The unemployment rate is only the percentage of people looking for work but don't have any work. It's not the actual percentage of people that don't have any work. A lot of people with a low IQ (and I think you're underestimating yours) are not counted in this as they're on benefits and excempt from any obligation to look for work.
I think Mark’s argument is if 15% of the working population are unemployable why do we have 3.8% unemployment rate, and despite disabled people not working this still doesn’t explain the discrepancy. I think Mark has a fair point
@@jimbodimbo981Didn't op say this, the unemployment of 3.8% doesn't refer to the amount of people who don't work, it refers to people who look for work but don't have any. It doesn't mean the actual percentage of people that don't work.
@@jimbodimbo981 Like the other's say, Mark Molly isn't interpreting the statistic properly. You can absolutely have a low unemployment rate (the "workforce" not employed and not looking) while having a large portion of the "workforce" that is capable of working but not doing so. And Ireland has exactly this. If anything, this demonstrates that what Peterson is asserting is more true, not less. And if you drill down into the particulars, these rates are respective of the "workforce", whereby people with an IQ of less than 70-75 aren't even actually part of said workforce nor the statistic; These statistics only include those on the cusp of so-called "employability" and up, no one below. Finally, these statistics aren't truly standardized, rather difficult to discern that much without really digging into how they are tabulated on a per country basis.
@@alexwestconsulting That indeed is correct, it’s not an Apple with an Apple comparison. As you say there is the possibility that those with a lower IQ are hidden in the not participating in the workforce category, but there is no direct evidence for this presented and so Peterson’s assertion isn’t more true. Using Mark as an example, anecdotally challenges Peterson’s view, as Mark at an IQ of 70 has successfully maintained a job, paid at a market rate. Therefore Mark’s success is admittedly one example (data set) to disprove Peterson
Mark, you act as a lighthouse to all. I rarely comment on RUclips but I was so impressed with your videos, your attitude, your work ethic and your positivity. Keep up the reading. With practice, regularity and time it will become more fluent and easier. After that it can become a joy (and if you’re not careful an addiction!). You have buoyed my day. Thank you.
1. Your argument is somewhat clever. Your mathematical reasoning was good. But it is wrong. The disabled (physically or mentally) who are not looking for work are outside these statistics. Furthermore, many disabled people are employed to help them, not because they are very useful at work. 2. You should not take those statements of JP as absolute. They refer to a general rule. There are exceptions. There are some jobs where low IQ individuals can perform well. But they are not enough and are frequently occupied by others with slightly higher IQs. Statistically, it is observed that those with lower IQ end up in prison and live less. (they are not unemployed) 3. JP's concern is that societies have moved forward (and faster every day) in eliminating roles for the less intelligent. A big reason is excessive labor rights. These high labor rights mean that unprofitable workers are not elected. To put it easy: A (hypothetical) incompetent individual produces 5usd per hour. (hypothetical) Labor laws require paying a minimum of 8usd per hour. Result: Nobody hires him. This applies to a lesser extent where there are no minimum wages. He can get a job but it is still true that the incompetent does not produce enough to cover an acceptable lifestyle. While in their surroundings things become more expensive.
I don't think JBP was trying to hate on low IQ people. He was worried for the future as automation takes jobs from low skill workers and creates more high skilled jobs. He''s worried that we will be letting an entire segment of the population slip between the cracks. This would also lead to some weird things for society. We'd get some Gattaca type stuff where you are automatically selected for careers based on IQ and stuff like that.
@@douglasjamesmartin Its a horrible point, just because they're employed doesn't mean they're doing a good job and wont be fired in the near future. Mark totally misunderstands Jordan's point, mark is committing a strawman fallacy.
@@ggaz683 You just assume they are doing a bad job to make your point? It would be great if Mark actually used a JP quote so we could do a post mortem but going back and forth about what JP meant is not going to be fruitful. The fact that the unemployment rate is commonly lower than the % of people below IQ 80 is a decent indication that these people are getting employed and your suspicion, as is, adds very little to the conversation
@@douglasjamesmartin no... it's an indication they don't understand what unemployment measures. Unemployment only measures the people who actually want a job and are actively searching for one. Otherwise the number of unemployed is way higher than 3.8% with old retirees, rich people, kids... Are you sure you have 130 IQ? you don't sound very smart.
Unemployment is a measure of those seeking work who don’t have jobs. Those not seeking jobs are excluded. A better measure is labor force participation, though even that excludes the institutionalized population. The labor force participation rate in Ireland is 65%, meaning fully 35% of non-institutionalized adults are not employed.
The issue with that number is that it includes people over 65 and under 25, which means pensioners and students impact this number. LFPR for men 30-45 is over 90% so while a secondary statistic was a good idea, your interpretation of the data was lacking and a proper interpretation actually seems to back up OPs hypothesis.
@@IzzyIkigaithey don’t actually care, they’re a bunch of conservative losers who only use statistics to justify the claims they want to make before they even look at the statistics. Same as Jordan Peterson, who somehow hates Marxism but has never once read Marx
@@IzzyIkigai What he said didn't back up what the OP said at all, even if you don't count in people over 65 (don't know why you included under 25, lots of people work under 25) the number is well over 3.8% meaning a lot more people don't work than he initially claimed by looking up the unemployment rate alone. It was a good use of a second statistic, also Jordan peterson didn't say that there's nothing people under 85IQ can do, he said it's counterproductive to teach them how to do those jobs, the time and effort spent teaching them would not be worth it economically. But they can still find jobs if they really want too which is where I think the OP got it wrong.
The unemployment rate refers to the percentage of the labourforce who is unemployed but is currently seeking work and is of working age. This means that people living on welfare are not included in this percentage.
Yes, it's a very misleading definition, one that is also stretchable by redefining 'people looking for work'. A person who loses his job, and his house, and ends up addicted in the street is not included in the employment figure. If someone put him in rehab and helped him look for work, then the number of 'unemployed' people would increase.
@@Trazynn the figure is designed to capture the state of the labor and employment market. That is, if someone seeks, employment, is the market in a state to make use of them? this is the question it seeks to answer.
@TheEarthStoodStill "living on welfare" implies someone who is not actively seeking employment, thus would not be counted to the figure. If they are on an "unemployment" welfare program, this is another matter.
Have you considered that you could have a learning disability that could be eased up by better accommodations? Not only that, but Sometimes struggles in the workplace can be linked to with things like implicit rules (rules that are not clear, or instructions that are not clear) that can make it difficult for people with ADHD or other neurodivergencies to perform compared to neurotypical peers. I know for me personally I need extremely specific instructions to complete a task confidently, and not every employer is willing to do that I also haven’t heard about your background. Sometimes a lack of a good academic school base can make the rest of learning throughout life much harder! Great channel and great message. Love the motivation you’re sending others Cheers
Unemployment rates dont include people who arent actively looking for work. So people who cannot work aren't counted. So, it is possible that the employment rate of those with iq's below 85 is very low. That being said, work ethic is probably more important than iq when it comes to employment. So keep it up!
You’re very articulate, man. I don’t know you, so I haven’t seen how much you have improved your intelligence over the years, but I think you are probably underestimating yourself. Either way, good on you for striving to be better - we all should do that.
I bet Dr. Peterson would be interested in interviewing you. Your perspective is very interesting and valuable. You should tweet him and link to your RUclips video about your work ethic at McDonalds. I think you could change his mind.
If memory serves, what Jordan said that IQ measurement was developed for military purposes and under those circumstances if your IQ was less then 83 then you weren't intelligent enough to do anything of worth for the military. That being said there are jobs way simpler then being in an infantry and can be learnt trough trial and error. IQ is not simply just about that you can't do something, it is also about how long you learn and get a grasp of things. Fortunately this means that given enough time, even if you have lower IQ then 83 you can still do work. Of course there was some information regarding the necessary IQ to be able to take care of yourself, but I don't remember that value. IQ less then 70 is a point where life gets difficult, but behavior can be learnt and if you learn enough you can still live a decent life. However that requires you to not differ from the norms and things you learn because otherwise it can create obstacles that you can't pass wihtout help.
this exactly! he isn't saying people whose iq is lower than 83 cannot function. if my memory is right he only really talks about how life is much more difficult and keeping a job is a challenge
Im not the biggest jp fan but I’m pretty sure he was saying the military was trying to take as many human bodies as possible and the military declared that threshold to be the lowest before anything they would do would be more detrimental than supplemental to the war effort. So yes he was saying whatever threshold he quoted was the lowest to be productive in society, not that i really agree with it.
@@pipichi8441 you are correct on the first half but I do not understand how you come to the conclusion you do. the military is highly efficient in its operations. that is true but it also means that it is not willing to waste money and training on people. it doesn't mean that people with a lower iq are useless to society if they aren't adaptable enough for the military.
@@Kolaotse im going to cover my ass and say that i disagree with him on not just this but a ton of other stuff, though he says "if you imagine that the military is approximately as complex as the broader society, which I think is a reasonable proposition, then there is no place in our cognitively complex society for one in ten people."
@@pipichi8441 oh! i then i stand corrected! there has been quite some time from when i saw that interview so i guess my memory failed me. guess I'll have to re-watch it since I am quite interested in what he precisely meant by that. not to search excuses for him but because i often find that the things that he says need some thought before i can grasp the full meaning of his words. i myself are going to cover my ass (or probably do the opposite) by saying that many of the things he speaks about are not topics in which i am knowledgeable enough to have my own opinion but i do find myself agreeing with him on many things. obviously there are many things that i also disagree on with him but to be honest they are much more rare than those that i do agree with.
Mate you are an inspiration, as someone who feels they have a relatively high IQ im blown away by your emotional intelligence, good attitude and your ability to articulate your thoughts into well constructed sentences. I would of never guessed you were low IQ as you say.
Very interesting to hear you say that high IQ people think everyone else on the planet is as intelligent as they are, because in my experience most people with a high IQ believe theyre smarter than everyone else, and yet I understand what you mean perfectly. People expect everyone to be of the same competency level as they are, and can't understand how someone could struggle to learn or do something they find easy
I'd agree with him regarding high IQ individuals expecting others to be on their level of understanding (obviously this wouldn't always be the case, as there's always exceptions to all rules). I've personally found it difficult to navigate this sometimes, as I do have a high IQ and have had many conversations where you believe the person you are conversing with is understanding and following your discussion along fully, only to realize that they lost you halfway there or that what you thought information "everybody knows/understands" are beyond their comprehension. A lot of people "judge" others based on what their own competency in a specific subject/matter is, and thus think that's the "normal" level of understanding in that subject matter, which is very seldom the case (others often know more/less than yourself in most matters - experience / exposure / upbringing / interests all have a heavy influence on what people know, and how well they know what they know). I work in IT and have worked with people that can't follow basic instructions like "do you see this thing on the left of your screen", and because I'm more proficient in specific IT maters than most non-technical individuals, it's quite easy for me to over-estimate what others know/understand in the field etc. But the other side is also true, where individuals that are more intelligent / experienced in the same subject have left me stumped midway through a discussion, and have given me the "how could you not know that look" when I expressed my lack of understanding. I think the "how you perceive" someone else tends more to levels of narcissism or ego than "intelligence" levels. My reasoning for it is due to many "less intelligent" individuals believe they know more than they do, and thus would state half truths / misunderstood facts as 100% truth, as they believe they are experts in a subject when they might actually have very little or no knowledge on the matter being discussed. Dunning-Kruger effect for example Flat Earthers that believe they know more about science than all the scientists in the world, many of which has spent years or decades researching / testing the subject at hand.
You can have the highest iq in the world and still know nothing the people you converse with probably just didnt take the time to learn their trade properly whereas you did doesnt mean theyre low iq @TheSpike911
This is exactly how the term common sense has become a fallacy! The term common sense is entirely subjective, because good sense that seems common knowledge to some has no reason to be common sense to someone in a different town, family, country, etc. the term common sense assumes that everyone has the same starting gate, or is even running in the same race. There can't be common sense without equality in education and exposure to experience.
Nah I know exactly what he is talking about. I did it for years without ever knowing. It basically comes down to speaking and making statements that your audience functionally can't relate to due to a lack of critical thinking skills. Even if you literally walk down a line of reasoning, some of these people just don't put 2-2 together. It hurts because for a long time I thought I could speak well and communicate with everyone, I even started Special Ed programs in my community, but I found that many people just failed to see how my program was beneficial for a variety of reasons I tried to explain. These are parents that directly use my program. I completely switched to a much more laid back approach and kinda gave up on trying to explain myself. Rather I just write out my overall line of reasoning for a variety of topics within my program, then I just direct people to those write ups. It lets the reader go at their own pace, it also lets them look up anything they don't understand. It genuinely killed any motivation I had to work on the program, even though the write ups solved almost every communication problem. I ended up quitting and moving on to a full on career in something adjacent, and now I avoid having to explain how my methodology supports comprehension. (Now I get to point and gesture at state standards and explain how my methodology is integrated with those)
Worst of all worlds is the thought that "everybody is stupid, but they had all the same ability/opportunity as me to be smart/rich/succesful". I mean, I am rich, but I am well aware that that is mostly luck (being born in the west, being born to parents who took a lot of time to teach me, being able to go to good schools, being born with a high IQ, none of those things are I got to pick)... and despite knowing that rationally, it's easy to emotionally forget in some situations.
Dude, Jordan Peterson referred to the military research and how they started only recruiting people with an IQ over 83. He also added that it would be difficult for such people to work as a cashier for example, and didn't say that there are no jobs for them.
You are wrong about the 3.8% that’s because that’s not how unemployment is measured. Unemployment is measured by individuals able and willing to work. There are always portions of the population that don’t want to work or aren’t looking for work, they don’t count.
Proof that low IQ doesn’t mean a low intelligence human. You are smarter than Peter in so many ways, and i can see you know that too! Confidence is half the battle, and thank you for inspiring others to not be discouraged just because they have a low IQ
Hi Mark, yes you have some of the traits of a below average IQ, such as (by your admission) your slowness in learning new tasks. I can't comment on your pen and paper abilities but your verbal and organisational abilities demonstrated in your videos indicate something rather higher than IQ70. Thanks for posting your insights. Very interesting channel.
I like it that a man with an IQ of 70 has presented a good reasonable argument against one of JP's ideas, without resorting to hysterics and character assassination, he puts the spoilt children at our elite universities to shame. I actually think JP would welcome an intelligent debate with this guy. He's an interesting guy, interesting to listen to but also interesting psychologically. It's hard to believe that someone so articulate, fluent, could struggle with a menial job, indeed the IQ of 70 could be way off, I wonder if the low score is down to inability to concentrate, too many ideas flying around his head. But I watch a lot of RUclips, and I get fed up with people who just can't TALK properly, by this I don't mean regional accents, Estuary English, UPTALK! I mean they can't present their ideas clearly, they can't utter a sentence without mangling the English language, every sentence contains a cliché. This dude is definitely better than the majority of RUclipsrs.
what he say is 85 and below is not a specific job like the others IQ. but if you train one skill you can do it even better than the average of that skill. (and is easier if it is some repetitive task like training specific movements(that get ingrained with time)) practice a lot and make it a habit.
I found the trending viral video today about working at McDonald’s. I will now binge lots of this channels content. I find your wisdom very refreshing.
It AMAZES me how people still underestimate humans. Even the "dumbest" people you know, theyre still the most intelligent and capable life on earth. Even the lowest IQ humans are still humans, and humans are fucking crafty. (yes i know there's people who are fully disabled but i think my point is clear)
Also IQ as a concept of measuring intelligence is nonsense. Intelligence is far more complicated than a score you get on any one or even multiple tests so don't put much weight into your score.
The unemployment rate you are talking about is not the TRUE unemployment rate, mate. Think about it this way: As far as the job market goes, nobody cares if little kids and old retired grannies don’t have a job, so they don’t count them. That’s a bigger percentage of those people than 3.8 of everyone, right? Well they also do not count other people who just aren’t looking to go work somewhere. Can’t count a guy in a coma as actively looking for work, right? It’s the same thing with others, Mum at home with the kids is not looking to work at the Tesco, nor are the folk on benefits. They do a lot of “correcting” the numbers to be as accurate as possible to give people and companies an idea of how many people are willing and able to work but just don’t have jobs. They don’t count the people in prison, because although they may want jobs and be able to do them, they are stuck in prison and cannot work. They also, after a period of time, a number of months, stop counting people who just cannot find a job. That sounds crazy, but they think of it as if the guy looking for work but cannot get it just might be unemployable where he wants to work. Can’t hire a guy with no arms and legs as a butcher, can’t hire a guy as a salesman who tells everyone to shove off. It’s the same with a lot of folks on the lower IQ end. They just can’t keep a job, they go through a few of them, and they run out of places to try. They maybe want to work, but they just can’t keep up with the job, so they can’t work. They are simply unemployable. Ireland has 2.7million people employed. It’s population is over 5 million. That’s about 2.3 million people who do not work. 2.4 million non-workers divided by 5 million people is 46% true unemployment.
@TheEarthStoodStill Yes of course, to both of your comments. You seem to have taken offense to a statement that contained no offense. Physical and mental challenges currently limit the job opportunities available, they do not do away with them entirely. Those who have some form of employment funded by programs such as Easter Seals of America ARE counted in the labor force, while others are counted as a volunteer force and are compensated in other ways or by other funding and are therefore not counted in the labor force. There are few available jobs for them, however, as the employment programs are rarely profitable enough to run a business by solely doing them and must be funded by outside sources. As to babies, absolutely. That is why there is a difference between the “unemployment rate” that is publicized and the actual total population of a country that is not currently working that I was describing. I was explaining the difference between the two, not stating that babies were expected to belly up to the factory line.
in all fairness, lobster boy is wrong about a lot. it happens when you can buy your way through society. stay strong man, don't let the bastards grind you down!
If your IQ is indeed 70 then I think the concept of IQ needs to be revisited entirely. It's bizarre and fascinating to watch someone who says that working in a kitchen at McDonald's is too mentally taxing for him to then go on and make a sound counterargument using statistics and phrases like "Assume for the sake of argument".
You are really articulate - I don’t know how you arrived at an IQ of 70, but I doubt the validity of the test. I had a friend Moira, who wanted to be a teacher when she was in high school, but her mother was told that she had a low IQ and would never be able to make it academically. She was advised to take her out of school and get her some working retail, or in a factory. Her mother had a different opinion, took her out of school and coached her for 6 months, got her tutored in maths, then got her to sit for a scholarship exam for a private school. Moira did not win the scholarship, but came close and got great feedback from the school. She continued her home studies, then at age seventeen she re enrolled at a different state school, where she did better than most of the other students and got a scholarship to teachers college. She taught for 15 years in state schools, eventually did a bachelors degree, then a masters degree and ended up teaching in the university’s faculty of education. Not bad for a kid who was deemed too low in intelligence to go on to senior high school!
The unemployment statistics is insufficient. For instance, the unemployment of US is at 3.8 % currently. You would expect the employment rate to be 96.2 %, right? However, 60% of people are actually employed. Now you would also expect the remaining 36% to be self-employed, right? In reality, only 10% of people are employed. Now, it isn't exactly true that 15% people ( i.e below 83 IQ) are all unemployed. Jordan Peterson said that they are HARD TO EMPLOY. He also made a distinction by stating the rule of US army that a person with an IQ of below 83 cannot be employed in the army. This isn't the rule in other sectors. He also tells the story of one of his clients who's IQ was nearly 70. He was fired from a volunteer work of stuffing envelopes because he couldn't deal with the complexity of folding different sizes of envelops.
To be fair, that 3.8% unemployment rate is of the work force, not the general population. In America, for example the work force only around 60% of the population. Those outside the work force are those who are not employed or looking for employment and often include the disabled or dependents. So technically it is very possible that almost all of those with IQs below 70 are not employed and are just not part of the work force. However it does not change the fact that this man has legendary willpower and motivation.
Mark, I have been tested above 145 as a child, i would estimate im still between 120 to 130 in my mid 20s. Some of the kids i know in the advanced and gifted classes are bums. You say it in many videos, its mentality. I struggle with ADHD and some addiction issues. Everyone has a strength and a struggle.
I was in special Ed. I now am a business development manager at a tech company and make 250k a year. I make more than 99.999% of the people that were in my high schools gifted classes lol. Half of them went on to get arts degrees and now cry on instagram on how they are broke. Its not how you start its how you finish
Similar story to mine. I remember told that my ADHD testing had an IQ test baked into it and I was so confused on how anyone could take this data seriously. Like part of the testing involves math and definitions of words which are both extremely dependent on your level of education rather than your potential. Throughout high school i got good grades but was a terrible procrastinator due to my ADHD. I ended up getting into a good college, but my gpa is barely over a 2.0 as I barely can muster the discipline to write essays despite doing all the readings and loving to discuss the material inside and outside of class. All of this is to say that IQ is BS and there are way more important parts of your life when it comes to success or what it means to be a valuable member of society.
IQ, learning is only part of the game.. You can learn every fact in the world but it means nothing if a person never has time to reflect on their lives and apply what they have learned to themselves.. A lot of people never do that
I will say that some people just don't wish to do a low skill, low paying job that they don't enjoy for 8 hours a day just because they are capable of doing so, and I don't blame them for it. I personally have adhd which adds to this, but I have worked a myriad of jobs in my life and I realized early on that I cannot hanndle being in an environment that is so unenjoyable for such a large percentage of my life. I simply happen to be someone who has the skills to do something else, but I don't wish for others to be stuck in that situation either.
Why should the rest of us pay for you to sit around because you can't be bothered to work? You should have your benefits stopped immediately, you lazy bastard! Loads of us have had to do boring jobs at some point in life. That's just how it is! Imagine if people only did the job they wanted to. There would be next to no waiters, cleaners, shop assistants, dustmen, taxi drivers etc.
I grew up in a farm community. There were some people that were more than likely far below a 70 IQ doing farm work. IQ, if used as an excuse is the cause of unemployability. The lack of desire to work is the problem. The training method is most important. Putting the tools in your hands and having you move them from station to station yourself in a dry run is the key to teaching the process. If they only explain it you and then ask you to do it, that's too much pressure and the work flow isn't established in your mind. You have to do it hands on, not explain and then display your ability to perform the task. You can't just listen to the job explained and then watch someone else do it. You have to do it yourself.
Omg I love this guy… Peterson is a petty little psycho who loves to justify people’s suffering or lack of opportunity as ‘just the way things are’ and you saw right through that. There’s a large group of people on the internet that follow Peterson and think of themselves as superior to everyone else and they can’t see how wrong he is. So in my eyes, you’re now categorically smarter than any Peterson fan 😊. You’re gonna do great things someday my man, keep it up!
oh I actually basically hate Peterson, when I said “I love this guy” I meant Mark… I mean admittedly, I followed JBP for the first few months he was internet popular. But, I quickly realized he’s a hateful, hypocritical conservative christian sophist (with some worrying Nazi sympathies) who’s only popular because he invented a fake scandal around himself regarding gender pronouns and then pivoted into the right-wing grifter economy. If I had to pick a piece of content including him that I enjoy, it would be his (IIRC second) appearance on Sam Harris’ podcast when Sam made him look like an absolute fool with simple questions and challenges about what he believes. I’m done with Harris too, for that matter, but that episode is gold.
To be clear, "the percentage of the labor force that is jobless" is not the actual unemployment rate measure, at least not by a cursory reading of that metric. You don't simply exclude people who "can't" work, but you also exclude people who aren't actively looking for work from the figure. The bar isn't simply people who would like to work, it has to be people truly actively looking for work. So, the actual measure is "the percentage of the labor force that is unemployed while actively seeking employment". This is no small distinction. Your example of the "low IQ" person who isn't working isn't actively looking for work, and so isn't part of the unemployment rate. You are effectively conflating the (un)employment rate with with the (un)participation rate, the rate of the workforce that is actively working. It's just wrong to consider one of the metrics without the other. So what's Ireland's participation rate? 65.7%. That is low relative to the potential, demonstrates that there is a large portion of the population that COULD be working, but aren't (whether because they are lazy or not skilled or motivated enough to try, a common trait of "low IQ" people, as you detail in your example), especially when you consider that with such a low unemployment rate, that there are jobs available and lots of people to potentially fill them, but they aren't. All this gives much more room for Peterson's premise. Also, Peterson isn't hating or mocking such people at all, he's championing them, recognizing their number, urging them to carry on, detailing that they are indeed needed, he's just calling it for what it is statistically. That's the thing about Peterson: he's often not saying what you think he is saying without considering it in depth. I'm not trying to be a dick, you've thought about this and understand it more than most people, but it's not quite right and it matters.
It would be clever if he made a case if the 3.8% unemployment rate was relatively equal to that of the participation rate of the economy. In this case, I think those with very low IQ could be within the non-participants. I haven’t checked the data yet though, but I’m guessing Jordan Peterson might be closer to correct than Mark.
Just want to point out that the unemployment rate of 3.8% doesn’t means 3.8% of the total Irish population Children, people who are disabled, intellectual impaired and pensioners/ retired people are not included in this count This does not in anyway shape or form dispute the claim 15% of people who Jordan Peterson claims cannot work as the CSO already doesn’t count them The employment rate in Ireland only counts people who are willing and able to work So if your not able to work then you won’t be counted as unemployed. Therefore if you are unable to work because your IQ is too low you won’t be counted I know you have made videos about your IQ being low and I don’t mean to insult you but I think you may need to read a bit more on statistics….
Good point. I'm not sure he understands that those with a 70 IQ are not included in general unemployment figures. Those figures are not for people with mental deficiencies.
I really hate to be the um actually guy but um actually IQ is not a measure of intelligence even tho it gaslights us to believe it is the name intelligence quota has nothing to do with its creator or its actual purpose IQ is a measure of your agility to solve various problems recognize patterns and follow orders, and it's closely tied with your maturity and having an average IQ means you're a ok to get whatever job you like below 80 you likely have a learning disability or a minor gap in your knowledge base having IQ above 120 means your very mature for your age and actively excel in your work place or some such tats why you can have ppl with 160 IQ and 10 in intelligence stat that are lazy and pretty much worthless to society and vice versa you can have IQ below 80 and be a very successful individual it all depends on the amount of work you are willing to put towards yourself hope that helps.
The mensa IQ test isnt a complete beeakdown of intelligence in my opinion. It leans towards logic and mathematics, leaving out language music, Arts and social skills. Any thoughts on my comment?
Outlines of Pyrrhonism by Sextus Empiricus. This book is needed more than ever in these times. It's a philosophy based on doubting to achieve peace of mind. You gather arguments on every side that you can think of about an issue take employment for an example, and then you don't make a choice. You keep doing this and I am told you will become more peaceful. Most of the book is on this channel on here American Pyrrhonism.
low score in IQ says a lot less about you than a high score. What that means is, there's loads of reasons you could score 70, but you can't get a score of 130 out of luck. so the meaning behind IQ is quite skewed, and a low score doesn't mean you're the same level of intelligence as another person with the same score.
Mark i stumbled upon your videos today. Really respect that you are looking for work and think that Snoredone Peterson is selling people rubbish. I worked for a year with children who had Autism 13 years ago. What I would say is dont fixate so much on IQ (which is difficult I realise). People arent necessarily successful because of intelligence or intellect but more because of specialisation. If you focus on getting good at something and that skill is important you can do well in it. People with high IQs (excluding the very idea of IQ is slightly dodgy) couldn't necessarily work in McDonalds but you did because you focused your time in getting good at it. I hope my rambling comment helps in summary a) your channel is lovely b) dont worry about IQ so much c) try and find something you can specialise in that other people need.
A higher IQ certainly makes it easier, but with enough effort, if you work hard, you can often overcome what is "normal" and get farther than many people would think you could.
The worst thing you can do is listen to that guy. He doesn’t know much. Just talks a lot. I wouldn’t focus on iq so much. It was never intended to measure general intelligence. I would just work on yourself however you can and move forward
Yes it was, the whole point of an IQ test is to get a measurement of the g-factor (general intelligence factor). The way an IQ test is validated is by measuring how much each of its factors loads onto the g-factor. High loadings mean it correlates highly with g. Modern tests correlate up to 0.8 (maybe a little higher), which means 80% of the variance of testing results are explained by general intelligence.
@@tear728 Yeah I know that’s what they say. But it wasn’t made for that. It was created by Simon Binet to test French kids on language arts skills and assign them to a class that would suit their capability. Then he left the project and someone tried to adapt it to what they wanted. I know about how it is suppose to work. But it doesn’t.
@RaniaIsAwesomeyou have no clue what you're on about 😂😂😂 Go do some actual research and no don't expect constructive criticism when you've demonstrated such stupidity.
Mark, You are smarter than you think. You are clever enough to understand and question J Peterson's teories, you did your own research, verified the data and came to your own conclusions. You have your own RUclips channel and you post an interesting content, that could inspire many people. I see you as common sense young man, with great attitude to life. Human nature is so rich and complex, do not underestimate yourself, do not accept being categorised and labelled as 'unitelligent' just because you once scored low taking fancy IQ test, there are people who despite of high IQ test score don't achieve much, because they overestimate their competences, or lack positive attitude. I personally know people with high IQ who are emotionally dumb, or lazy, and it ruins their private and profesional life, they are neither succesful nor happy. Your positive ethos, hard work and Life Wisdom will take you where you want. Wishing you all the best!
The unemployment rate is not the number of people not working, it's just the people who collect unemployment benefits, for which there are conditions like having worked for a certain amount of time sufficiently recently. What you need to look at instead is the EMPLOYMENT rate. Which for Ireland is 74%, meaning 26% of working age Irish people are not employed.
Hi Mark, I want you to know you are an inspiration to me. I have a degree in computer science have worked for NASA and Microsoft. The lessons you have teach us are invaluable thank you so much.
To be fair the employment rate is not calculated including everyone. It's probably just people who collect unemployment. Some people might not apply for unemployment or might not quality for such.
The problem with JBP is that he lives in a very complex world. He doesn't realise how many jobs require you to do anything more than turn up on time and repeat a simple action all day. I've worked with a lot of people who can't operate machines with complicated interfaces but could capably stack boxes, move stuff where they were told, check id badges countless other things that wouldn't occur to anyone outside of a specific industry. Those simple jobs exist but they are being removed by automation, which i think was his actual point, that in the long term, these people will lose their place in society.
Being unemployed doesn't mean that you will be included in the unemployed data. Typically, if you are in some sort of government program (wellfare, studying, work training, etc, etc) you are not included. So the actual number of unemployed people are many times that figure that is called "unemployment rate".
@youknowkbbaby also interesting is that some of the most intelligent people I know are construction workers. And some of the most foolish are academics. Interesting too that some of the construction guys earn more than the academics. I agree that you can die or suffer injury in the construction industry. Proper fall protection is an important aspect of safety. Vehicle safety is important too. Since falls, vehicle accidents, and heavy machinery accidents are the most dangerous aspects of construction. Agriculture is probably more dangerous yet. As far as allowing people of different intelligences in the industry is concerned, the industry has a wide array of employment opportunities. All requiring different job qualifications. Not much specific IQ testing though. Much like we don’t IQ test our rap singers, basketball hero’s, actors and actresses, teachers, or news reporters and correspondents.
Mark, IQ means quite a bit in specific industries. Most people can't become Physicists or Mathematicians because we just can't grasp what they see as "simple" formulas and theories as quickly as they can, and thus would have a slower rate we can complete the same tasks they would have. But that doesn't mean you're unintelligent or can't train / be taught specific skills or knowledge that will greatly help you be better at the job you want to do. It might just take you a bit longer to "get it" than people with average IQs. Find yourself a good manager, that'll work with you until you grasp what you need to. Work hard, be positive and show up on time when you're supposed to. Stick to those few simple things, and you'll get further than A LOT of people much "smarter" than you. You're a great example of achieving what others might think should be "impossible" for you to achieve. P.s I just want to state this again, you're not unintelligent just because you have a lower IQ....a lot of high IQ people do a lot of stupid things.... :)
It's not what Peterson said and it's not his personnal opinion. According to the research that the us military conducted for their own benefit (that Jordan Peterson is refering to), the us military doesn't have for people with IQ under 85, or is it 83, any position that the expected return on resource investment is worth the trouble(ressources in money, training, time, supervision, all that man power to have a worker complete his own tasks, the place in the ranks compared to have chosen a better candidate). The military are not playing. A candidate needs to be able to learn and develop the expected abilities and be able to enter his posting and succesfully deliver the expected task in the expected time with the predetermined limited ressources. The minest demanding job in the military is infinitly more demanding than the minest demanding job on civilian work market. Now, other factors will stop low iq people to find adequate job. There is the fact that the work market is more and more demanding of technical abilities and learning capacities to be able to follow and adapt to frequent and rapid changes of tasks. Because of developments that make a lot of lesser demanding jobs obsolete and rare and not worth doing for the worker, the perfect job could be out there but far away from home, friends and family, and the lesser demanding jobs will again go to the better candidate who just might be someone who has great potential and abilities but wants an easy less demanding job. I know cleaning contractor enterprises who hire people with diagnosed mental/intellectual disabilities and they get fiscal benefits from the government to offset the financial loss that brings a low ability employee compared to a fully capable employee(takes more training, more administrative work, more supervision, more employees and more time to complete the same task properly). That kind of employer, with efforts and organisationnal development, has been able to make room for that kind of workers, we need to make sure that the appropriate amount of the right jobs are available to the people who need those rarer jobs; that is made by developping the employer's ability to put disabled worker at use in the best conditions and have them thrive. It was worst before, it's better now, it will be even better in the futur, hopefuly.
Mark, I see what point you’re trying to make, but the 3.8% accounts for those who are searching for work, not for discouraged workers or those who are out of the work force. These can include people such as retirees, students, children, housewives, etc. The participation rate of Ireland is under 45%. This comprises of people who are able to and willing to work. This means that 55% of the people are out of the labour force.
I am very interested on the question of if I.Q. can be improved by studying/training. So glad I found your channel. Do you think that regardless of the "number", any person can study and work on it, to improve comprehension and reason and just "being more conscious or aware"? Best wishes from Portugal!
I interpreted what Jordan Peterson said as speaking generally with an eye on the future, the rise of AI will see further automation of manual processes and working at McDonald's you too would be aware of this drive towards AI automation by the company. All anyone can do is strive to be the best version of themselves...
Unemployment only considers people seeking employment. This argument doesn't work. It might be that 15% of the population is unemployed, but they aren't seeking employment so they aren't part of the official unemployment rate.
The unemployment stats count only those who are looking for work - not those on disability (@ 10% of the population) or who have stopped looking. Still, it is misleading for him to assert that those below 85 are unemployable. I have always balked at this assertion of his. I agree that an IQ above 70 is enough to do unskilled labor.
He isn't saying they are unemployable, he was saying it's counterproductive. meaning it would be a net negative for a company to hire them pretty much. They could still work, but companies aren't economically incentivized to do so. I'm sure if you trained someone for a while and they stayed at a company long enough it would eventually be a net positive, but that's not reliable.
I think was he was saying is that "below 85 is the point where it was decied you can't have a job", and especially that was during a talk about Vietnam war, I don't think this is what he himself believes
This is a completely fallacious argument that ignores the fact that most people with an IQ that low are not considered part of the work force and not included in the unemployment statistic; and while you might not be the brightest bulb, I highly doubt your IQ is below 85, so you wouldn't count either. Peterson is not wrong, you just don't understand the situation. I'm also fairly certain you're misrepresenting the term "Unemployable."
Got to disagree as, I am not aware of their being a disability benefit for people with low IQ’s outside of course from say those born with a condition such as Down’s Syndrome, having to take a “medical IQ” test to qualify for disability benefit. If there were such a test, I’d imagine a lot of people would deliberately fail the test to garner benefits.
Unemployment rate is a percentage of the 'labor force.' The labor force in Ireland as of 2022 is 2 702 125, the population is about 5 million, with about one million under 14. So the labor force only constitutes about 67% of the total working age population. Or about 84% if you discount people over 65. Unemployment is a statistic using by labor bureaus to put a statistic on out of 'how many people are willing or searching for work' or 'labor force' are not able to find work at that time, or 'unemployment.' So out of those 67% or 84% only 3.8% are unable to find work. There are other things like physical disability, financial independence, stay-at-home parents, etc. that also add to this percentage, which you caught. A quick google search shows that 13.5% of people are on some form of disability, but that doesn't mean they're not employed. I think your mindset of improving and working where you can, and doing what you can do where you are is excellent and noone should deny that.
Mark, people with an IQ of 70 are not able to understand percentages and statistics the way you do and they absolutely cannot mount an argument against Jordan Peterson. They would be incapable of understanding Jordan Peterson. Whoever gave you that IQ score was wrong and any difficulties you have are being caused by something else. Please, I'm begging you, go to your doctor, find out what issues you really have, and make sure they help you with them. It's obvious that just reading is helping you so I'm certain there are other therapeutic approaches that would help too. Don't you ever give up sweetheart, you're doing wonderfully xx
The fact that you correlated Jordan Petersons' statement with the unemployment rate and understood that those numbers are in dispute. You are definitely over 70 IQ.
you've never dealt with adults with developmental disabilities before.
He still got it wrong, problem-solving doesn't do shit if you can't or won't read about the numbers you present
Look up what unemployment rate doesn't include. Individuals who are not included in the unemployment rate include those who are not actively seeking work, such as retirees, stay-at-home spouses, full-time students, and individuals who are unable to work due to disability or personal obligations. Additionally, people who have given up looking for work are also not counted as unemployed. If you counted all those groups (minus perhaps students and retirees) as unemployed for purposes of measuring unemployment rate then the metric is well over 25% in Ireland; more than enough room to fit everyone with an IQ of less than 70.
@RealLifeIronMan your statement relies on an assumption that a large portion of people not actively seeking work are also people with an IQ under 70. You correctly pointed out in your comment that this group is composed of people who are studying, caring for children or family members on a voluntary basis and retired people. I think you would having to provide some evidence that those groups are significantly representing lower IQ than the general population which I seriously doubt.
Did you take an official Mensa IQ test? If you were to take one now, i would be surprised if you end up with a score below 85. You are clearly able to think abstractly, and you have good problem solving skills. You are also pretty articulate.
Big +1 on this. I appreciate Mark's channel for the positivity and hard work, and I don't doubt that he's had learning difficulties and such growing up. But I have strong strong doubts of his IQ of 70 unless it was either a faulty test, or a score from when he was a child. The thought to even compare unemplyment rate to IQ distribution to refute JPs argument is not something I'd expect most people below 100 to come up with. Beyond that, as everyone points out, Mark is quite articulate, and able to stick to grander narratives over the course of his videos, just tons of signs of at least reasonable intelligence.
Maybe one other explanation - he might just be a poor test taker
@@RyanCacophony apparently the tests have a big margin of error
@@ferreus At the extremes, definitely. There's also a bunch of different tests with different scales and shortcomings, and most of the stuff online isn't properly administered in a way to ensure consistency. There's just a lot of reasons to not believe he's actually at 70
@@RyanCacophonyI have never taken an IQ test, but if I had to guess, 100-95, in other words, I'm probably average. Probably not below 90, but also probably not above 105. Anyway, the idea to compare unemployment rates and IQ is an extremely obvious idea, Jordan Peterson's point is about unemployment and the IQ, to compare the two yourself is common knowledge. So I disagree with your comment that most wouldn't think to do so.
The "Mensa test" does two versions - the std Cattell III B test and a 'culture-fair' version. At least it did when I joined about 40 years ago. The std test involves a lot of verbal questions (eg. Duck is to water, as candle is to (a) fire, (b) flame, (c) Earth, (d) Wax) and since Mark is 'improving his IQ' by reading 20 mins a day I think he would probably score higher on the 'culture fair' IQ test (which is more based on sequence of pictures, number series etc). I'd guess he had literacy/education issues (that are being rectified by regular reading practice), and that his 'true' IQ is around 90ish.
ps. I'm a non-financial Mensan - I found the meetings incredibly boring and pointless. The original conception of Mensa as a gathering place for 'high IQ' people to use their natural mental gifts to help improve the world seems to have never been implemented (I think government 'think tanks' actually fill in this role in the real world), and the Mensa 'club' is simply a place for high IQ individuals who are often under-achievers to go feel good about themselves. High IQ people who are actually effective in the work are usually too busy with their 'day job' to bother going to Mensa functions. But the lapel pin is cool ;)
I honestly think you should consider if you might have dyslexia, adhd or some other related neurodiverse condition and get an assessment. A significant component of the IQ tests relate to executive functioning which neurodiverse people struggle with and thus could explain depressed IQ scores in otherwise intelligent individuals. Wishing you all the best.
Well maybe the IQ test is just fucking dumb
Hard agree, i got diagnosed with ADHD recently, and part of that process was taking an IQ test and a general abilities index test that removed the weighting of stuff ADHD affected. The results were like night and day
Yeah, I've been wondering if I have ADHD. Oftentimes I make little mistakes that cause me to feel like I'm stupid, but a lot of the small mistakes I make seem to be related to ADHD
This is what I was thinking as well.
Agree. I've done badly on every exam I've ever taken. Teachers told me I was useless. But I went to uni and worked my ass off and got a first class degree. Eventually got diagnosed with Autism and ADHD as an adult.
When I was young, I had a teacher who said less intelligent people can acheive more than more intelligent people by doing small things consistently. Consistency is key. Just keep doing it.
This RUclips channel would be a perfect example. If he just keeps posting and working on content creation he increases his chance of success month by month. Great advice btw.
Very true
I don't know what my IQ is but I find learning anything new and remembering to be a struggle.
I did small steps to improve my communication skills and mindset and this led me to learn programming and find a job.
Working was also a struggle but I put hard work and received good feedback.
I have lost my job recently and jobmarket is at crazy stage now but I will not give up and will continue learning new skills/technology to be more competitive candidate
You're not kidding, a lot of intelligent people suffer from perfectionism paralysis.
What if more intelligent people also do small things consistently? Lol. Like if both people did the exact same amount of work, wouldn’t the more intelligent one come out “on top” ?
The unemployment rate is only the percentage of people looking for work but don't have any work. It's not the actual percentage of people that don't have any work.
A lot of people with a low IQ (and I think you're underestimating yours) are not counted in this as they're on benefits and excempt from any obligation to look for work.
I think Mark’s argument is if 15% of the working population are unemployable why do we have 3.8% unemployment rate, and despite disabled people not working this still doesn’t explain the discrepancy. I think Mark has a fair point
@@jimbodimbo981Didn't op say this, the unemployment of 3.8% doesn't refer to the amount of people who don't work, it refers to people who look for work but don't have any. It doesn't mean the actual percentage of people that don't work.
@@jimbodimbo981 Like the other's say, Mark Molly isn't interpreting the statistic properly. You can absolutely have a low unemployment rate (the "workforce" not employed and not looking) while having a large portion of the "workforce" that is capable of working but not doing so. And Ireland has exactly this. If anything, this demonstrates that what Peterson is asserting is more true, not less. And if you drill down into the particulars, these rates are respective of the "workforce", whereby people with an IQ of less than 70-75 aren't even actually part of said workforce nor the statistic; These statistics only include those on the cusp of so-called "employability" and up, no one below. Finally, these statistics aren't truly standardized, rather difficult to discern that much without really digging into how they are tabulated on a per country basis.
@@alexwestconsulting That indeed is correct, it’s not an Apple with an Apple comparison. As you say there is the possibility that those with a lower IQ are hidden in the not participating in the workforce category, but there is no direct evidence for this presented and so Peterson’s assertion isn’t more true. Using Mark as an example, anecdotally challenges Peterson’s view, as Mark at an IQ of 70 has successfully maintained a job, paid at a market rate. Therefore Mark’s success is admittedly one example (data set) to disprove Peterson
@@jimbodimbo981 I don't think a guy with 70 IQ can critically think like this.
Mark, you act as a lighthouse to all.
I rarely comment on RUclips but I was so impressed with your videos, your attitude, your work ethic and your positivity.
Keep up the reading. With practice, regularity and time it will become more fluent and easier. After that it can become a joy (and if you’re not careful an addiction!).
You have buoyed my day. Thank you.
He still got it wrong, problem-solving doesn't do shit if you can't or won't read about the numbers you present
1. Your argument is somewhat clever. Your mathematical reasoning was good.
But it is wrong. The disabled (physically or mentally) who are not looking for work are outside these statistics.
Furthermore, many disabled people are employed to help them, not because they are very useful at work.
2. You should not take those statements of JP as absolute.
They refer to a general rule. There are exceptions. There are some jobs where low IQ individuals can perform well. But they are not enough and are frequently occupied by others with slightly higher IQs.
Statistically, it is observed that those with lower IQ end up in prison and live less.
(they are not unemployed)
3. JP's concern is that societies have moved forward (and faster every day) in eliminating roles for the less intelligent.
A big reason is excessive labor rights. These high labor rights mean that unprofitable workers are not elected.
To put it easy:
A (hypothetical) incompetent individual produces 5usd per hour.
(hypothetical) Labor laws require paying a minimum of 8usd per hour.
Result: Nobody hires him.
This applies to a lesser extent where there are no minimum wages. He can get a job but it is still true that the incompetent does not produce enough to cover an acceptable lifestyle. While in their surroundings things become more expensive.
You are an awesome dude, Mark. Don't let a number on a piece of paper define who you are.
He still got it wrong, problem-solving doesn't do shit if you can't or won't read about the numbers you present
I don't think JBP was trying to hate on low IQ people. He was worried for the future as automation takes jobs from low skill workers and creates more high skilled jobs. He''s worried that we will be letting an entire segment of the population slip between the cracks. This would also lead to some weird things for society. We'd get some Gattaca type stuff where you are automatically selected for careers based on IQ and stuff like that.
buddy makes an excellent point though and this demographic needs leaders. im excited..(my is around 130)
@@douglasjamesmartin Its a horrible point, just because they're employed doesn't mean they're doing a good job and wont be fired in the near future. Mark totally misunderstands Jordan's point, mark is committing a strawman fallacy.
@@ggaz683 You just assume they are doing a bad job to make your point? It would be great if Mark actually used a JP quote so we could do a post mortem but going back and forth about what JP meant is not going to be fruitful. The fact that the unemployment rate is commonly lower than the % of people below IQ 80 is a decent indication that these people are getting employed and your suspicion, as is, adds very little to the conversation
@@douglasjamesmartin no... it's an indication they don't understand what unemployment measures. Unemployment only measures the people who actually want a job and are actively searching for one. Otherwise the number of unemployed is way higher than 3.8% with old retirees, rich people, kids...
Are you sure you have 130 IQ? you don't sound very smart.
He wants to give money to the people with the highest iq and leave the below 85s to starve. Listen to what he’s saying.
You're the best, dude. Your humility is infectious, and whatever you lack in intellect you make up for in wisdom.
Unemployment is a measure of those seeking work who don’t have jobs. Those not seeking jobs are excluded. A better measure is labor force participation, though even that excludes the institutionalized population. The labor force participation rate in Ireland is 65%, meaning fully 35% of non-institutionalized adults are not employed.
The issue with that number is that it includes people over 65 and under 25, which means pensioners and students impact this number. LFPR for men 30-45 is over 90% so while a secondary statistic was a good idea, your interpretation of the data was lacking and a proper interpretation actually seems to back up OPs hypothesis.
@@IzzyIkigaithey don’t actually care, they’re a bunch of conservative losers who only use statistics to justify the claims they want to make before they even look at the statistics. Same as Jordan Peterson, who somehow hates Marxism but has never once read Marx
@@IzzyIkigai What he said didn't back up what the OP said at all, even if you don't count in people over 65 (don't know why you included under 25, lots of people work under 25) the number is well over 3.8% meaning a lot more people don't work than he initially claimed by looking up the unemployment rate alone. It was a good use of a second statistic, also Jordan peterson didn't say that there's nothing people under 85IQ can do, he said it's counterproductive to teach them how to do those jobs, the time and effort spent teaching them would not be worth it economically. But they can still find jobs if they really want too which is where I think the OP got it wrong.
The unemployment rate refers to the percentage of the labourforce who is unemployed but is currently seeking work and is of working age. This means that people living on welfare are not included in this percentage.
Not just that, but people who simply can't work or don't wish to are not counted in unemployment figures either.
Yes, it's a very misleading definition, one that is also stretchable by redefining 'people looking for work'.
A person who loses his job, and his house, and ends up addicted in the street is not included in the employment figure. If someone put him in rehab and helped him look for work, then the number of 'unemployed' people would increase.
@@Trazynn the figure is designed to capture the state of the labor and employment market. That is, if someone seeks, employment, is the market in a state to make use of them? this is the question it seeks to answer.
@TheEarthStoodStill "living on welfare" implies someone who is not actively seeking employment, thus would not be counted to the figure. If they are on an "unemployment" welfare program, this is another matter.
@TheEarthStoodStill that depends on the welfare program. Many people on “welfare” are on a disability program.
Have you considered that you could have a learning disability that could be eased up by better accommodations?
Not only that, but Sometimes struggles in the workplace can be linked to with things like implicit rules (rules that are not clear, or instructions that are not clear) that can make it difficult for people with ADHD or other neurodivergencies to perform compared to neurotypical peers.
I know for me personally I need extremely specific instructions to complete a task confidently, and not every employer is willing to do that
I also haven’t heard about your background. Sometimes a lack of a good academic school base can make the rest of learning throughout life much harder!
Great channel and great message. Love the motivation you’re sending others
Cheers
Unemployment rates dont include people who arent actively looking for work. So people who cannot work aren't counted. So, it is possible that the employment rate of those with iq's below 85 is very low. That being said, work ethic is probably more important than iq when it comes to employment. So keep it up!
You’re very articulate, man. I don’t know you, so I haven’t seen how much you have improved your intelligence over the years, but I think you are probably underestimating yourself. Either way, good on you for striving to be better - we all should do that.
The unemployment rate only considers people who are looking for work. Those who are on permanent disability are not included in the statistic.
I bet Dr. Peterson would be interested in interviewing you. Your perspective is very interesting and valuable. You should tweet him and link to your RUclips video about your work ethic at McDonalds. I think you could change his mind.
Nah, Peterson is a lost cause. His brain is toxic and fried. Mark's words in this video speak volumes more than Peterson's twilight ramblings.
The only thing we should do with folk like Peterson is ignore them and stop airing their bullshit.
If memory serves, what Jordan said that IQ measurement was developed for military purposes and under those circumstances if your IQ was less then 83 then you weren't intelligent enough to do anything of worth for the military.
That being said there are jobs way simpler then being in an infantry and can be learnt trough trial and error.
IQ is not simply just about that you can't do something, it is also about how long you learn and get a grasp of things. Fortunately this means that given enough time, even if you have lower IQ then 83 you can still do work.
Of course there was some information regarding the necessary IQ to be able to take care of yourself, but I don't remember that value.
IQ less then 70 is a point where life gets difficult, but behavior can be learnt and if you learn enough you can still live a decent life. However that requires you to not differ from the norms and things you learn because otherwise it can create obstacles that you can't pass wihtout help.
this exactly! he isn't saying people whose iq is lower than 83 cannot function. if my memory is right he only really talks about how life is much more difficult and keeping a job is a challenge
Im not the biggest jp fan but I’m pretty sure he was saying the military was trying to take as many human bodies as possible and the military declared that threshold to be the lowest before anything they would do would be more detrimental than supplemental to the war effort. So yes he was saying whatever threshold he quoted was the lowest to be productive in society, not that i really agree with it.
@@pipichi8441 you are correct on the first half but I do not understand how you come to the conclusion you do. the military is highly efficient in its operations. that is true but it also means that it is not willing to waste money and training on people. it doesn't mean that people with a lower iq are useless to society if they aren't adaptable enough for the military.
@@Kolaotse im going to cover my ass and say that i disagree with him on not just this but a ton of other stuff, though he says "if you imagine that the military is approximately as complex as the broader society, which I think is a reasonable proposition, then there is no place in our cognitively complex society for one in ten people."
@@pipichi8441 oh! i then i stand corrected! there has been quite some time from when i saw that interview so i guess my memory failed me. guess I'll have to re-watch it since I am quite interested in what he precisely meant by that. not to search excuses for him but because i often find that the things that he says need some thought before i can grasp the full meaning of his words. i myself are going to cover my ass (or probably do the opposite) by saying that many of the things he speaks about are not topics in which i am knowledgeable enough to have my own opinion but i do find myself agreeing with him on many things. obviously there are many things that i also disagree on with him but to be honest they are much more rare than those that i do agree with.
Mate you are an inspiration, as someone who feels they have a relatively high IQ im blown away by your emotional intelligence, good attitude and your ability to articulate your thoughts into well constructed sentences. I would of never guessed you were low IQ as you say.
This boy is a gem. I absolutely love him.
Dunning-Kruger effect; you probably have a lower IQ than your feeling
Very interesting to hear you say that high IQ people think everyone else on the planet is as intelligent as they are, because in my experience most people with a high IQ believe theyre smarter than everyone else, and yet I understand what you mean perfectly. People expect everyone to be of the same competency level as they are, and can't understand how someone could struggle to learn or do something they find easy
I'd agree with him regarding high IQ individuals expecting others to be on their level of understanding (obviously this wouldn't always be the case, as there's always exceptions to all rules). I've personally found it difficult to navigate this sometimes, as I do have a high IQ and have had many conversations where you believe the person you are conversing with is understanding and following your discussion along fully, only to realize that they lost you halfway there or that what you thought information "everybody knows/understands" are beyond their comprehension. A lot of people "judge" others based on what their own competency in a specific subject/matter is, and thus think that's the "normal" level of understanding in that subject matter, which is very seldom the case (others often know more/less than yourself in most matters - experience / exposure / upbringing / interests all have a heavy influence on what people know, and how well they know what they know).
I work in IT and have worked with people that can't follow basic instructions like "do you see this thing on the left of your screen", and because I'm more proficient in specific IT maters than most non-technical individuals, it's quite easy for me to over-estimate what others know/understand in the field etc. But the other side is also true, where individuals that are more intelligent / experienced in the same subject have left me stumped midway through a discussion, and have given me the "how could you not know that look" when I expressed my lack of understanding.
I think the "how you perceive" someone else tends more to levels of narcissism or ego than "intelligence" levels. My reasoning for it is due to many "less intelligent" individuals believe they know more than they do, and thus would state half truths / misunderstood facts as 100% truth, as they believe they are experts in a subject when they might actually have very little or no knowledge on the matter being discussed. Dunning-Kruger effect for example Flat Earthers that believe they know more about science than all the scientists in the world, many of which has spent years or decades researching / testing the subject at hand.
You can have the highest iq in the world and still know nothing the people you converse with probably just didnt take the time to learn their trade properly whereas you did doesnt mean theyre low iq @TheSpike911
This is exactly how the term common sense has become a fallacy! The term common sense is entirely subjective, because good sense that seems common knowledge to some has no reason to be common sense to someone in a different town, family, country, etc. the term common sense assumes that everyone has the same starting gate, or is even running in the same race. There can't be common sense without equality in education and exposure to experience.
Nah I know exactly what he is talking about. I did it for years without ever knowing. It basically comes down to speaking and making statements that your audience functionally can't relate to due to a lack of critical thinking skills. Even if you literally walk down a line of reasoning, some of these people just don't put 2-2 together. It hurts because for a long time I thought I could speak well and communicate with everyone, I even started Special Ed programs in my community, but I found that many people just failed to see how my program was beneficial for a variety of reasons I tried to explain. These are parents that directly use my program. I completely switched to a much more laid back approach and kinda gave up on trying to explain myself. Rather I just write out my overall line of reasoning for a variety of topics within my program, then I just direct people to those write ups. It lets the reader go at their own pace, it also lets them look up anything they don't understand. It genuinely killed any motivation I had to work on the program, even though the write ups solved almost every communication problem. I ended up quitting and moving on to a full on career in something adjacent, and now I avoid having to explain how my methodology supports comprehension. (Now I get to point and gesture at state standards and explain how my methodology is integrated with those)
Worst of all worlds is the thought that "everybody is stupid, but they had all the same ability/opportunity as me to be smart/rich/succesful". I mean, I am rich, but I am well aware that that is mostly luck (being born in the west, being born to parents who took a lot of time to teach me, being able to go to good schools, being born with a high IQ, none of those things are I got to pick)... and despite knowing that rationally, it's easy to emotionally forget in some situations.
Dude, Jordan Peterson referred to the military research and how they started only recruiting people with an IQ over 83. He also added that it would be difficult for such people to work as a cashier for example, and didn't say that there are no jobs for them.
"Watch Jordan Peterson get destroyed by facts by man with 70 iQ"
"unemployed" doesn't include nearly everyone without a job.
This subject is way more complicated.
You are wrong about the 3.8% that’s because that’s not how unemployment is measured. Unemployment is measured by individuals able and willing to work. There are always portions of the population that don’t want to work or aren’t looking for work, they don’t count.
Proof that low IQ doesn’t mean a low intelligence human. You are smarter than Peter in so many ways, and i can see you know that too!
Confidence is half the battle, and thank you for inspiring others to not be discouraged just because they have a low IQ
Hi Mark,
yes you have some of the traits of a below average IQ, such as (by your admission) your slowness in learning new tasks. I can't comment on your pen and paper abilities but your verbal and organisational abilities demonstrated in your videos indicate something rather higher than IQ70. Thanks for posting your insights. Very interesting channel.
Low IQ if defined by ability to learn new tasks has NEVER hindered our highest paid govt reps!
You clearly been working hard with the IQ, good job man 🏋🔥
I like it that a man with an IQ of 70 has presented a good reasonable argument against one of JP's ideas, without resorting to hysterics and character assassination, he puts the spoilt children at our elite universities to shame. I actually think JP would welcome an intelligent debate with this guy.
He's an interesting guy, interesting to listen to but also interesting psychologically. It's hard to believe that someone so articulate, fluent, could struggle with a menial job, indeed the IQ of 70 could be way off, I wonder if the low score is down to inability to concentrate, too many ideas flying around his head.
But I watch a lot of RUclips, and I get fed up with people who just can't TALK properly, by this I don't mean regional accents, Estuary English, UPTALK! I mean they can't present their ideas clearly, they can't utter a sentence without mangling the English language, every sentence contains a cliché. This dude is definitely better than the majority of RUclipsrs.
what he say is 85 and below is not a specific job like the others IQ. but if you train one skill you can do it even better than the average of that skill. (and is easier if it is some repetitive task like training specific movements(that get ingrained with time)) practice a lot and make it a habit.
I found the trending viral video today about working at McDonald’s. I will now binge lots of this channels content. I find your wisdom very refreshing.
I love your can-do mentality. Thanks for sharing.
It AMAZES me how people still underestimate humans. Even the "dumbest" people you know, theyre still the most intelligent and capable life on earth. Even the lowest IQ humans are still humans, and humans are fucking crafty. (yes i know there's people who are fully disabled but i think my point is clear)
Also IQ as a concept of measuring intelligence is nonsense. Intelligence is far more complicated than a score you get on any one or even multiple tests so don't put much weight into your score.
The unemployment rate you are talking about is not the TRUE unemployment rate, mate.
Think about it this way:
As far as the job market goes, nobody cares if little kids and old retired grannies don’t have a job, so they don’t count them. That’s a bigger percentage of those people than 3.8 of everyone, right?
Well they also do not count other people who just aren’t looking to go work somewhere. Can’t count a guy in a coma as actively looking for work, right?
It’s the same thing with others, Mum at home with the kids is not looking to work at the Tesco, nor are the folk on benefits.
They do a lot of “correcting” the numbers to be as accurate as possible to give people and companies an idea of how many people are willing and able to work but just don’t have jobs.
They don’t count the people in prison, because although they may want jobs and be able to do them, they are stuck in prison and cannot work.
They also, after a period of time, a number of months, stop counting people who just cannot find a job.
That sounds crazy, but they think of it as if the guy looking for work but cannot get it just might be unemployable where he wants to work. Can’t hire a guy with no arms and legs as a butcher, can’t hire a guy as a salesman who tells everyone to shove off.
It’s the same with a lot of folks on the lower IQ end. They just can’t keep a job, they go through a few of them, and they run out of places to try. They maybe want to work, but they just can’t keep up with the job, so they can’t work. They are simply unemployable.
Ireland has 2.7million people employed. It’s population is over 5 million. That’s about 2.3 million people who do not work. 2.4 million non-workers divided by 5 million people is 46% true unemployment.
@TheEarthStoodStillYeah cuz they're technically unemployed
@TheEarthStoodStill"supervision". They need someone to tell them each step all the time
@TheEarthStoodStill
Yes of course, to both of your comments. You seem to have taken offense to a statement that contained no offense.
Physical and mental challenges currently limit the job opportunities available, they do not do away with them entirely. Those who have some form of employment funded by programs such as Easter Seals of America ARE counted in the labor force, while others are counted as a volunteer force and are compensated in other ways or by other funding and are therefore not counted in the labor force. There are few available jobs for them, however, as the employment programs are rarely profitable enough to run a business by solely doing them and must be funded by outside sources.
As to babies, absolutely. That is why there is a difference between the “unemployment rate” that is publicized and the actual total population of a country that is not currently working that I was describing. I was explaining the difference between the two, not stating that babies were expected to belly up to the factory line.
@TheEarthStoodStill that’s… not at all what strawman means.
in all fairness, lobster boy is wrong about a lot. it happens when you can buy your way through society. stay strong man, don't let the bastards grind you down!
bro understands percentages and analytical thinking. no way youre below 85 iq
If your IQ is indeed 70 then I think the concept of IQ needs to be revisited entirely. It's bizarre and fascinating to watch someone who says that working in a kitchen at McDonald's is too mentally taxing for him to then go on and make a sound counterargument using statistics and phrases like "Assume for the sake of argument".
You are really articulate - I don’t know how you arrived at an IQ of 70, but I doubt the validity of the test. I had a friend Moira, who wanted to be a teacher when she was in high school, but her mother was told that she had a low IQ and would never be able to make it academically. She was advised to take her out of school and get her some working retail, or in a factory. Her mother had a different opinion, took her out of school and coached her for 6 months, got her tutored in maths, then got her to sit for a scholarship exam for a private school. Moira did not win the scholarship, but came close and got great feedback from the school. She continued her home studies, then at age seventeen she re enrolled at a different state school, where she did better than most of the other students and got a scholarship to teachers college. She taught for 15 years in state schools, eventually did a bachelors degree, then a masters degree and ended up teaching in the university’s faculty of education. Not bad for a kid who was deemed too low in intelligence to go on to senior high school!
Peterson claims to have an IQ over 160. That's a bunches of baloney.
I feel so sorry for you. You have been dealing with the thought of having low IQ when it is probably not that low.
Take care of yourself man.
telling an adult that you feel sorry for them is a pretty shitty thing to do.
The unemployment statistics is insufficient. For instance, the unemployment of US is at 3.8 % currently. You would expect the employment rate to be 96.2 %, right? However, 60% of people are actually employed. Now you would also expect the remaining 36% to be self-employed, right? In reality, only 10% of people are employed.
Now, it isn't exactly true that 15% people ( i.e below 83 IQ) are all unemployed. Jordan Peterson said that they are HARD TO EMPLOY. He also made a distinction by stating the rule of US army that a person with an IQ of below 83 cannot be employed in the army. This isn't the rule in other sectors.
He also tells the story of one of his clients who's IQ was nearly 70. He was fired from a volunteer work of stuffing envelopes because he couldn't deal with the complexity of folding different sizes of envelops.
You inspire me bro. And you deserve good things in this life.
IQ is bullshit anyway. Keep slaying, king. Cool channel
To be fair, that 3.8% unemployment rate is of the work force, not the general population. In America, for example the work force only around 60% of the population. Those outside the work force are those who are not employed or looking for employment and often include the disabled or dependents.
So technically it is very possible that almost all of those with IQs below 70 are not employed and are just not part of the work force.
However it does not change the fact that this man has legendary willpower and motivation.
Mark, I have been tested above 145 as a child, i would estimate im still between 120 to 130 in my mid 20s. Some of the kids i know in the advanced and gifted classes are bums. You say it in many videos, its mentality. I struggle with ADHD and some addiction issues. Everyone has a strength and a struggle.
I don't believe that. Did you take some random sh*t iq test from the internet? Most people on this planet have around 100 in iq.
I was in special Ed. I now am a business development manager at a tech company and make 250k a year. I make more than 99.999% of the people that were in my high schools gifted classes lol. Half of them went on to get arts degrees and now cry on instagram on how they are broke. Its not how you start its how you finish
@gRapeApe22 are you really trying to say successful people dont have instagram or something? what an odd thing to say
Similar story to mine. I remember told that my ADHD testing had an IQ test baked into it and I was so confused on how anyone could take this data seriously. Like part of the testing involves math and definitions of words which are both extremely dependent on your level of education rather than your potential.
Throughout high school i got good grades but was a terrible procrastinator due to my ADHD. I ended up getting into a good college, but my gpa is barely over a 2.0 as I barely can muster the discipline to write essays despite doing all the readings and loving to discuss the material inside and outside of class.
All of this is to say that IQ is BS and there are way more important parts of your life when it comes to success or what it means to be a valuable member of society.
IQ, learning is only part of the game.. You can learn every fact in the world but it means nothing if a person never has time to reflect on their lives and apply what they have learned to themselves.. A lot of people never do that
I will say that some people just don't wish to do a low skill, low paying job that they don't enjoy for 8 hours a day just because they are capable of doing so, and I don't blame them for it. I personally have adhd which adds to this, but I have worked a myriad of jobs in my life and I realized early on that I cannot hanndle being in an environment that is so unenjoyable for such a large percentage of my life. I simply happen to be someone who has the skills to do something else, but I don't wish for others to be stuck in that situation either.
Why should the rest of us pay for you to sit around because you can't be bothered to work? You should have your benefits stopped immediately, you lazy bastard! Loads of us have had to do boring jobs at some point in life. That's just how it is! Imagine if people only did the job they wanted to. There would be next to no waiters, cleaners, shop assistants, dustmen, taxi drivers etc.
I grew up in a farm community. There were some people that were more than likely far below a 70 IQ doing farm work. IQ, if used as an excuse is the cause of unemployability. The lack of desire to work is the problem. The training method is most important. Putting the tools in your hands and having you move them from station to station yourself in a dry run is the key to teaching the process. If they only explain it you and then ask you to do it, that's too much pressure and the work flow isn't established in your mind. You have to do it hands on, not explain and then display your ability to perform the task. You can't just listen to the job explained and then watch someone else do it. You have to do it yourself.
Please keep making videos, if you can, you are inspiring
happy you are making it brother
Ireland’s total true unemployment is 46%
That is the labor force participation.
That is taken from labor force math, yes, but this is the inverse term. The Labor Force Participation is 54%.
Omg I love this guy… Peterson is a petty little psycho who loves to justify people’s suffering or lack of opportunity as ‘just the way things are’ and you saw right through that. There’s a large group of people on the internet that follow Peterson and think of themselves as superior to everyone else and they can’t see how wrong he is. So in my eyes, you’re now categorically smarter than any Peterson fan 😊. You’re gonna do great things someday my man, keep it up!
@@gyrate98 haha that’s awesome man
oh I actually basically hate Peterson, when I said “I love this guy” I meant Mark… I mean admittedly, I followed JBP for the first few months he was internet popular. But, I quickly realized he’s a hateful, hypocritical conservative christian sophist (with some worrying Nazi sympathies) who’s only popular because he invented a fake scandal around himself regarding gender pronouns and then pivoted into the right-wing grifter economy. If I had to pick a piece of content including him that I enjoy, it would be his (IIRC second) appearance on Sam Harris’ podcast when Sam made him look like an absolute fool with simple questions and challenges about what he believes. I’m done with Harris too, for that matter, but that episode is gold.
Damn that’s actually a really good point.
I could be wrong but I think he was talking about military jobs specifically. That the military turns away people below 85.
I love you bro, keep your head up and keep going strong. Life isn’t all about iq and smarts, just enjoy it for what it is not what it is not. ❤️
To be clear, "the percentage of the labor force that is jobless" is not the actual unemployment rate measure, at least not by a cursory reading of that metric. You don't simply exclude people who "can't" work, but you also exclude people who aren't actively looking for work from the figure. The bar isn't simply people who would like to work, it has to be people truly actively looking for work. So, the actual measure is "the percentage of the labor force that is unemployed while actively seeking employment". This is no small distinction. Your example of the "low IQ" person who isn't working isn't actively looking for work, and so isn't part of the unemployment rate. You are effectively conflating the (un)employment rate with with the (un)participation rate, the rate of the workforce that is actively working. It's just wrong to consider one of the metrics without the other. So what's Ireland's participation rate? 65.7%. That is low relative to the potential, demonstrates that there is a large portion of the population that COULD be working, but aren't (whether because they are lazy or not skilled or motivated enough to try, a common trait of "low IQ" people, as you detail in your example), especially when you consider that with such a low unemployment rate, that there are jobs available and lots of people to potentially fill them, but they aren't. All this gives much more room for Peterson's premise. Also, Peterson isn't hating or mocking such people at all, he's championing them, recognizing their number, urging them to carry on, detailing that they are indeed needed, he's just calling it for what it is statistically. That's the thing about Peterson: he's often not saying what you think he is saying without considering it in depth. I'm not trying to be a dick, you've thought about this and understand it more than most people, but it's not quite right and it matters.
Mark, you are definitely NOT low IQ, sir. You are extremely intelligent and articulate.❤
This is a very clever argument.
It would be clever if he made a case if the 3.8% unemployment rate was relatively equal to that of the participation rate of the economy. In this case, I think those with very low IQ could be within the non-participants. I haven’t checked the data yet though, but I’m guessing Jordan Peterson might be closer to correct than Mark.
Honestly that is brilliant.
Mr High IQ weren’t expecting man to BRING OUT THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGURES WAS HE.
UNO reverse, flip the script IQ7000 move
When I was young I liked intelligent people, as I got older kind, humane people moved to the top of my list, and stayed there!
JP is wrong about a whole lot of stuff.
The 3.8% likely doesnt count people who are slow.
If you count everyone, the percent of people in Ireland that are not employed is 46%
It inherently includes some of them, those on the cusp, those being part of the workforce, anyone below that not included.
Just want to point out that the unemployment rate of 3.8% doesn’t means 3.8% of the total Irish population
Children, people who are disabled, intellectual impaired and pensioners/ retired people are not included in this count
This does not in anyway shape or form dispute the claim 15% of people who Jordan Peterson claims cannot work as the CSO already doesn’t count them
The employment rate in Ireland only counts people who are willing and able to work
So if your not able to work then you won’t be counted as unemployed. Therefore if you are unable to work because your IQ is too low you won’t be counted
I know you have made videos about your IQ being low and I don’t mean to insult you but I think you may need to read a bit more on statistics….
Good point.
I'm not sure he understands that those with a 70 IQ are not included in general unemployment figures. Those figures are not for people with mental deficiencies.
I really hate to be the um actually guy but um actually IQ is not a measure of intelligence even tho it gaslights us to believe it is the name intelligence quota has nothing to do with its creator or its actual purpose IQ is a measure of your agility to solve various problems recognize patterns and follow orders, and it's closely tied with your maturity and having an average IQ means you're a ok to get whatever job you like below 80 you likely have a learning disability or a minor gap in your knowledge base having IQ above 120 means your very mature for your age and actively excel in your work place or some such tats why you can have ppl with 160 IQ and 10 in intelligence stat that are lazy and pretty much worthless to society and vice versa you can have IQ below 80 and be a very successful individual it all depends on the amount of work you are willing to put towards yourself hope that helps.
You are a very wise man, yoir videos are very interesting
An IQ test is one thing determination is quite another.
The unemployment rate is not simply the percentage of people not working - the true rate of people not working is much much higher than 3-4%
I love this guy he has the same mentally as me
Idont think you have that
low of an iq i think u have 90 or 100+ you seem really nice
The mensa IQ test isnt a complete beeakdown of intelligence in my opinion. It leans towards logic and mathematics, leaving out language music, Arts and social skills.
Any thoughts on my comment?
Outlines of Pyrrhonism by Sextus Empiricus.
This book is needed more than ever in these times.
It's a philosophy based on doubting to achieve peace of mind.
You gather arguments on every side that you can think of about an issue take employment for an example, and then you don't make a choice.
You keep doing this and I am told you will become more peaceful.
Most of the book is on this channel on here
American Pyrrhonism.
low score in IQ says a lot less about you than a high score. What that means is, there's loads of reasons you could score 70, but you can't get a score of 130 out of luck. so the meaning behind IQ is quite skewed, and a low score doesn't mean you're the same level of intelligence as another person with the same score.
Jordan Peterson? When I hear that name, I begin to get vomit-feelings. Really.
Mark i stumbled upon your videos today. Really respect that you are looking for work and think that Snoredone Peterson is selling people rubbish. I worked for a year with children who had Autism 13 years ago. What I would say is dont fixate so much on IQ (which is difficult I realise). People arent necessarily successful because of intelligence or intellect but more because of specialisation. If you focus on getting good at something and that skill is important you can do well in it. People with high IQs (excluding the very idea of IQ is slightly dodgy) couldn't necessarily work in McDonalds but you did because you focused your time in getting good at it. I hope my rambling comment helps in summary a) your channel is lovely b) dont worry about IQ so much c) try and find something you can specialise in that other people need.
A higher IQ certainly makes it easier, but with enough effort, if you work hard, you can often overcome what is "normal" and get farther than many people would think you could.
The worst thing you can do is listen to that guy. He doesn’t know much. Just talks a lot. I wouldn’t focus on iq so much. It was never intended to measure general intelligence. I would just work on yourself however you can and move forward
Yes it was, the whole point of an IQ test is to get a measurement of the g-factor (general intelligence factor). The way an IQ test is validated is by measuring how much each of its factors loads onto the g-factor. High loadings mean it correlates highly with g. Modern tests correlate up to 0.8 (maybe a little higher), which means 80% of the variance of testing results are explained by general intelligence.
@@tear728 Yeah I know that’s what they say. But it wasn’t made for that. It was created by Simon Binet to test French kids on language arts skills and assign them to a class that would suit their capability. Then he left the project and someone tried to adapt it to what they wanted. I know about how it is suppose to work. But it doesn’t.
@RaniaIsAwesome thanks
@RaniaIsAwesomeyou have no clue what you're on about 😂😂😂
Go do some actual research and no don't expect constructive criticism when you've demonstrated such stupidity.
Mark, You are smarter than you think. You are clever enough to understand and question J Peterson's teories, you did your own research, verified the data and came to your own conclusions. You have your own RUclips channel and you post an interesting content, that could inspire many people.
I see you as common sense young man, with great attitude to life. Human nature is so rich and complex, do not underestimate yourself, do not accept being categorised and labelled as 'unitelligent' just because you once scored low taking fancy IQ test, there are people who despite of high IQ test score don't achieve much, because they overestimate their competences, or lack positive attitude. I personally know people with high IQ who are emotionally dumb, or lazy, and it ruins their private and profesional life, they are neither succesful nor happy.
Your positive ethos, hard work and Life Wisdom will take you where you want. Wishing you all the best!
The unemployment rate is not the number of people not working, it's just the people who collect unemployment benefits, for which there are conditions like having worked for a certain amount of time sufficiently recently. What you need to look at instead is the EMPLOYMENT rate. Which for Ireland is 74%, meaning 26% of working age Irish people are not employed.
Hi Mark, I want you to know you are an inspiration to me. I have a degree in computer science have worked for NASA and Microsoft. The lessons you have teach us are invaluable thank you so much.
Couldn’t agree more. Well said.
That number is already excluding all the people unfit for work, if you factor them back in its 34.3% of irish unemployed and unfit for work.
Mark you win. You are smarter than doctor Peterson.
To be fair the employment rate is not calculated including everyone. It's probably just people who collect unemployment. Some people might not apply for unemployment or might not quality for such.
He meant 15 percent of the worlds entire population. Not just exclusivelt Ireland.
Well king, let me tell ya: if you’re able to tell that Peterson is full of crap you’re doing much better than most!
They call Jordan Peteron the stupid man's smart person for a reason 😅
The problem with JBP is that he lives in a very complex world.
He doesn't realise how many jobs require you to do anything more than turn up on time and repeat a simple action all day.
I've worked with a lot of people who can't operate machines with complicated interfaces but could capably stack boxes, move stuff where they were told, check id badges countless other things that wouldn't occur to anyone outside of a specific industry.
Those simple jobs exist but they are being removed by automation, which i think was his actual point, that in the long term, these people will lose their place in society.
Being unemployed doesn't mean that you will be included in the unemployed data. Typically, if you are in some sort of government program (wellfare, studying, work training, etc, etc) you are not included. So the actual number of unemployed people are many times that figure that is called "unemployment rate".
is there anything jordan peterson is right about?
Some folks here in the States are incarcerated. Some are homeless. Some like me are even construction workers.
@youknowkbbaby also interesting is that some of the most intelligent people I know are construction workers. And some of the most foolish are academics. Interesting too that some of the construction guys earn more than the academics. I agree that you can die or suffer injury in the construction industry. Proper fall protection is an important aspect of safety. Vehicle safety is important too. Since falls, vehicle accidents, and heavy machinery accidents are the most dangerous aspects of construction. Agriculture is probably more dangerous yet. As far as allowing people of different intelligences in the industry is concerned, the industry has a wide array of employment opportunities. All requiring different job qualifications. Not much specific IQ testing though. Much like we don’t IQ test our rap singers, basketball hero’s, actors and actresses, teachers, or news reporters and correspondents.
hope u still doing great mate
Mark, IQ means quite a bit in specific industries. Most people can't become Physicists or Mathematicians because we just can't grasp what they see as "simple" formulas and theories as quickly as they can, and thus would have a slower rate we can complete the same tasks they would have. But that doesn't mean you're unintelligent or can't train / be taught specific skills or knowledge that will greatly help you be better at the job you want to do. It might just take you a bit longer to "get it" than people with average IQs.
Find yourself a good manager, that'll work with you until you grasp what you need to. Work hard, be positive and show up on time when you're supposed to. Stick to those few simple things, and you'll get further than A LOT of people much "smarter" than you. You're a great example of achieving what others might think should be "impossible" for you to achieve.
P.s I just want to state this again, you're not unintelligent just because you have a lower IQ....a lot of high IQ people do a lot of stupid things.... :)
It's not what Peterson said and it's not his personnal opinion. According to the research that the us military conducted for their own benefit (that Jordan Peterson is refering to), the us military doesn't have for people with IQ under 85, or is it 83, any position that the expected return on resource investment is worth the trouble(ressources in money, training, time, supervision, all that man power to have a worker complete his own tasks, the place in the ranks compared to have chosen a better candidate). The military are not playing. A candidate needs to be able to learn and develop the expected abilities and be able to enter his posting and succesfully deliver the expected task in the expected time with the predetermined limited ressources. The minest demanding job in the military is infinitly more demanding than the minest demanding job on civilian work market. Now, other factors will stop low iq people to find adequate job. There is the fact that the work market is more and more demanding of technical abilities and learning capacities to be able to follow and adapt to frequent and rapid changes of tasks. Because of developments that make a lot of lesser demanding jobs obsolete and rare and not worth doing for the worker, the perfect job could be out there but far away from home, friends and family, and the lesser demanding jobs will again go to the better candidate who just might be someone who has great potential and abilities but wants an easy less demanding job. I know cleaning contractor enterprises who hire people with diagnosed mental/intellectual disabilities and they get fiscal benefits from the government to offset the financial loss that brings a low ability employee compared to a fully capable employee(takes more training, more administrative work, more supervision, more employees and more time to complete the same task properly). That kind of employer, with efforts and organisationnal development, has been able to make room for that kind of workers, we need to make sure that the appropriate amount of the right jobs are available to the people who need those rarer jobs; that is made by developping the employer's ability to put disabled worker at use in the best conditions and have them thrive. It was worst before, it's better now, it will be even better in the futur, hopefuly.
Yes, this. Peterson was citing established statistics more so than forwarding his own opinion.
Mark, I see what point you’re trying to make, but the 3.8% accounts for those who are searching for work, not for discouraged workers or those who are out of the work force. These can include people such as retirees, students, children, housewives, etc.
The participation rate of Ireland is under 45%. This comprises of people who are able to and willing to work. This means that 55% of the people are out of the labour force.
I am very interested on the question of if I.Q. can be improved by studying/training. So glad I found your channel. Do you think that regardless of the "number", any person can study and work on it, to improve comprehension and reason and just "being more conscious or aware"? Best wishes from Portugal!
I interpreted what Jordan Peterson said as speaking generally with an eye on the future, the rise of AI will see further automation of manual processes and working at McDonald's you too would be aware of this drive towards AI automation by the company.
All anyone can do is strive to be the best version of themselves...
I think Jordan Peterson is wrong about most things
Unemployment only considers people seeking employment. This argument doesn't work. It might be that 15% of the population is unemployed, but they aren't seeking employment so they aren't part of the official unemployment rate.
The unemployment stats count only those who are looking for work - not those on disability (@ 10% of the population) or who have stopped looking. Still, it is misleading for him to assert that those below 85 are unemployable. I have always balked at this assertion of his. I agree that an IQ above 70 is enough to do unskilled labor.
@TheEarthStoodStillyeah supervision. You could get a monkey to do stuff with supervision.
He isn't saying they are unemployable, he was saying it's counterproductive. meaning it would be a net negative for a company to hire them pretty much. They could still work, but companies aren't economically incentivized to do so. I'm sure if you trained someone for a while and they stayed at a company long enough it would eventually be a net positive, but that's not reliable.
I think was he was saying is that "below 85 is the point where it was decied you can't have a job", and especially that was during a talk about Vietnam war, I don't think this is what he himself believes
This is a completely fallacious argument that ignores the fact that most people with an IQ that low are not considered part of the work force and not included in the unemployment statistic; and while you might not be the brightest bulb, I highly doubt your IQ is below 85, so you wouldn't count either.
Peterson is not wrong, you just don't understand the situation. I'm also fairly certain you're misrepresenting the term "Unemployable."
Got to disagree as, I am not aware of their being a disability benefit for people with low IQ’s outside of course from say those born with a condition such as Down’s Syndrome, having to take a “medical IQ” test to qualify for disability benefit. If there were such a test, I’d imagine a lot of people would deliberately fail the test to garner benefits.
@TheEarthStoodStillYou're spamming so much, people like that have trouble talking. They would be a net loss to society.
@TheEarthStoodStillyeah, "under supervision" which indicates they cannot be trained to work independently.
Peterson fan boy.
Unemployment rate is a percentage of the 'labor force.' The labor force in Ireland as of 2022 is 2 702 125, the population is about 5 million, with about one million under 14. So the labor force only constitutes about 67% of the total working age population. Or about 84% if you discount people over 65. Unemployment is a statistic using by labor bureaus to put a statistic on out of 'how many people are willing or searching for work' or 'labor force' are not able to find work at that time, or 'unemployment.' So out of those 67% or 84% only 3.8% are unable to find work.
There are other things like physical disability, financial independence, stay-at-home parents, etc. that also add to this percentage, which you caught. A quick google search shows that 13.5% of people are on some form of disability, but that doesn't mean they're not employed.
I think your mindset of improving and working where you can, and doing what you can do where you are is excellent and noone should deny that.
Mark, people with an IQ of 70 are not able to understand percentages and statistics the way you do and they absolutely cannot mount an argument against Jordan Peterson. They would be incapable of understanding Jordan Peterson. Whoever gave you that IQ score was wrong and any difficulties you have are being caused by something else. Please, I'm begging you, go to your doctor, find out what issues you really have, and make sure they help you with them. It's obvious that just reading is helping you so I'm certain there are other therapeutic approaches that would help too. Don't you ever give up sweetheart, you're doing wonderfully xx