Can hard work beat intelligence, Sup Forums?

Just work hard and u will succedd Sup Forums? even if ur dumb as fuck?

quora.com/Can-hard-work-beat-intelligence

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>succedd
kill yourself

I can fuck your mom but I'm stupid as fuck, your image is cucked

this is something rich people tell to stupid people so they keep working

Depends on the industry you're working in.

Friend was a contractor that worked in construction and now has a multi million dollar company that employs over 500 contractors and has contracts with huge developers. Owns a bunch of houses, a nice big fishing boat, couple nice cars and pulls in a few hundred thousand a year.

Here I am still falling for the le programmer meme.

does it meaen ur dumb as fuck?

???

"Hard work" is solving Fibonacci in O(2^n)
Intelligence is solving Fibonacci in O(n)

Smart people get more out of less work.

Hard work beats laziness. Many people are lazy. Many intelligent people are lazy.

Hard work is not the same as smart work.

>keep working goy! Someday, you'll make it and be rich like me! hehe

It matters to a point. It needs to be above average, any more is pointless in terms of success. Hard work ethic + good networking or being born in the upperclass is the way to success.

You're a fucking idiot.

>Just work hard and u will succedd Sup Forums? even if ur dumb as fuck?

No shit dumbass.

if you have average iq and you work hard as fuck you can do anything.

Everyone who you've ever admired has worked hard to get where they were, nothing comes easy. Pretty much every great inventor was told he was a retard but he told them to fuck off and worked on his passions and ended up changing the world while the people who criticized them died achieving nothing.

Intelligence means nothing if you don't take action regularly. There's people on Mensa forums, with literal genius-tier IQs who waste their day essentially shitposting about how smart they are and how dumb other people are, they're going to die doing nothing with all their IQ.

You have to go back

if you're smart, you'll figure out a way to work as little as possible

i'd call that lazy
lazy and smart is figuring out how to completely automate your menial job without letting your superiors know that you're being paid to watch anime all day

If you're so smart and you're working for someone else you're just wasting your potential.

No, intelligence will trump effort as long as it's used.

>IQ

Why do we keep repeating memetic quantities that don't prove much?

>doing as little work as possible
is not the same as
>doing the maximum work with the minimum effort

It's his life he choose. Why question it, when instead you should question yours. Are you where you want to be?

>Are you where you want to be?

Of course not but I'm just saying if you're such a smartypants then you should be working on your own business instead of earning money for someone else.

impulse control is probably more important, which also correlates with IQ

Even the most powerful force, directed incorrectly, is useless. I'd consider willpower and intelligence to be complementary. One is not useful without the other and neither will allow you to succeed independently.

I'd say don't be stupid, but just trying hard won't help.

You can learn impulse control? Pure intelligence is nothing if you don't work hard

With average intelligence and average physical capabilities you can do anything really

>500 contractors
>huge developers
>few hundred thousand a year

this is how i know you're dumb because this math makes no sense. keep hammering those nails, chachi.

I completely agree.
Pure intelligence is nothing if you don't work your ass off.
You can do anything with a little bit of hard work and good genetics.

Oh boy, here we go with the "IQ and SAT are scams" drivel. No dummy, Mensa level intellect is very rare and most of those people apply themselves to their passions and talents. Mensa isn't even that smart, it's just smart to idiots.

Yes. I know this because I scored 139 on an IQ test, but I'm lazy, and as a result I'm a complete failure while my harder-working classmates have successful careers.

Do people actually believe in IQ tests?
If you can make a conscious effort to "train" for an IQ test, it's not an accurate test, you dumb shits.

>500 contractors
That's retarded. You hire 50 contractors and they hire 2-20 Mexicans each, as needed.

No.
Hard work is solving Fibonacci in O(2^n) or O(n).
Intelligence is having Pajeets solve Fibonacci for you.

I didn't say it was a scam but it means very little.

Yeah you might be less intelligent but you can work harder and want things more than other people and achieve success. If it takes some 1/1000000 smartfag to understand a complex by reading it one and for you it takes 5 times or more then you sit there and read it for hours until you get it.

Are you fucking retarded? If you train for anything you'll get better at it. If you train to solve math problems, you'll get better at maths problems and then you know what? You'll be smarter at maths than the next guy. Derp.

You can train and practice for IQ test-specific questions and get better at them. Practice them for 3 months before a test and you'll do far better than if you didn't. So what - in those 3 months did you all of a sudden grow in intelligence or did you just practice the criteria of the test and what it asks for?

It's a meme psuedo-test

IQ is a relative measure. If you score 150, and the global average is 100, then you know you are smarter than the overwhelming majority. It is not meant to be an accurate measure, like measuring mass or temperature.

Why are these type of threads popular? The instant it pops up, it gets never ending attention.

Is it because of the insecurity of its posters? Is it because it touches that nerve which makes us believe ''we wont make it because we arent as great as those'' like the ones OP talks about?

But you can practice for it, so how can it be accurate at all if you can skew the results like that?

It's like asking people a geography quiz when they can just brush up on their geography knowledge

Furthermore, what's even the point of it? Is it just ego-stroking? Who cares about your iq just to get to work and work hard, everything else will fall into place

Larger reward for physical work incites more work.

Even a small reward for even slightly mental work causes productivity to take a nose dive.

look it up. This is why SJW's are so retarded. They get so many pats on the back from their friends for being idiots that they just remain idiots.

work hard
work smart
do what you can and then some

>You're a fucking idiot.
Jewish man rubbing hands together and smiling.jpg

>But you can practice for it, so how can it be accurate at all if you can skew the results like that?
People can practice chess. And get better. We still have chess rankings.

People can practice running. And get better. We can still measure speed.

etc etc

yeah dude le jews did everything and made up the holocuast XD

>People can practice chess. And get better. We still have chess rankings.
>People can practice running. And get better. We can still measure speed.

Yes but no one is claiming that chess is a skill you're born with and can't noticably improve past your developmental years.

I thought the whole point of iq was to show your intelligence?

Working hard is good. Being smart obviously helps.
The true key though is to go with the flow (the wealthiest flow)

Example: the get rich quick CEOs all did what the investors were looking for, not what it's really needed. Being super smart and hardworking idealist will get you nowhere.

but when you practice and train for those things, you really do become good at them

When you practice for an "intelligence test", you're not going to become more intelligent for learning how to get better at the very domain specific problems on the test, you just learned how to score well on an IQ test, and that shouldn't be allowed if you're trying to measure intelligence.

I mean I like to think so, if you really want to can get down to how it's hard to really quantify intelligence, and whether or not a person can be intelligent in general or in specific situations. I've definitely seen people - myself included - who were less naturally gifted at something than their peers exceed them by just working harder. It's not unheard of, best combo is being gifted and hard working tho lmao

>the get rich quick CEOs all did what the investors were looking for, not what it's really needed

How is that not doing what's needed?

Who are you to decide what is needed or not?

Doesn't matter how smart you are, in 50 years there will be AI's smarter than any human that has ever existed.

Learn to value the incredible gift of life that you have. Wanting to be something you're not only leads to unhappiness. The subjective experience is all that matters.

We're all basically hairless great apes.

>a few hundred thousand a year.
That's only a little more than a senior dev who goes to work at 10am and types on a computer while snacking on free food.

Sure, you might learn to imitate artists who came before you, or plug numbers into an equation, but you'll never actually a work of art or come up with some revolutionary formula unless you're born with talent.

Intelligence is not static. You CAN improve it. Intelligence is not just "teh smartz", it is the ability to solve problems and reason things. If you practice lots of problem-solving, you get better at problem-solving. Your knowledge, your level of tiredness, even your diet, can all affect your intelligence.

>So I will just practice and practice and get smarter than Einstein
There are limits.

This.

You'll never become successful so why even try?

if you're not born a genius then you might as well just give up and not do anything

Remove your trip you dumbfuck. No one is talking about your shitty site.

>How is that not doing what's needed?
Of course, the investors "need" it. What about the rest?

>Who are you to decide what is needed or not?
>Needed
It's obvious that what's needed is to save human lives and health. I don't need a survey for that. What you actually mean is "what people like" and not all people, you're just thinking about certain people.

Of course I can't decide that since I'm not the legal owner of thousands of people's workforce (in the form of money) so why are we even talking about it.

hard work will get you to work experience. That's important and you can learn the theory later.

If you lack practical experience, you won't get too far from a job unless you are in academia.

No matter how hard you work there's two billion Chinks and Pajeets out there who are more desperate then you will ever be

Hate to shit on your parade and all, but you guys should probably look into how Maxwell came up with his equations in order to find out that he didnt even intended to came up with them in the first place.

He used tools available for everyone, implemented them into experimentation and translated his results into equations (which can be made if you understand calculus)

All of these things are available for everyone and can be understood by anybody who puts time into them.

By this logic, eventually, somebody else would have come up with Maxwell equations. I dont think its a matter of talent desu.

all skills are trainable.

true, there are gifted people that get it quick and if they are disciplined they can be the ones we see in the history books. But EVERY SKILL IS TRAINABLE.

Just do it, practice and go on. Don't be a lazy fag.

To add to this. Advances in physics aren't made because somebody decided he wanted to specifically find x and revolutionize the world.

Its a matter of trial and error. It would have been impossible to invent the radio before 1800 because there was missing knowledge in there, there was no explanation on electricity and magnetism and no such knowledge of a radio wave.

In other words, things happen or not, things advance or not. Eventually they do, does that mean those who contributed with experimentation and work into it were talentless?

I feel that it is often under-appreciated that differences in IQ cause a communication gap (which is actually a relatively well studied phenomenon). Humans don't rigorously define everything and highlight each tiny step of their reasoning when they communicate. We omit obvious steps, but what may be obvious omissions to someone with an IQ of 150 might seem a leap of logic to someone of 130 IQ. Across differences over 15 IQ communication is problematic, at 30 and more it can be very difficult indeed. The ways your minds work are just too different.

That's part of the reason why people in the 120-130 IQ range are the backbone of most any major human endeavour. They are smart enough to (with effort) understand and apply the rare breakthroughs and paradigm shifts initiated by geniuses, but close enough to the average to be able to easily work with the general population and each other. And as they vastly outnumber the actual geniuses they can more easily pool their efforts. Man is a social animal.

How that reflects on individual success is another issue, but it's pointless to try to be what you are not. It's much better to be as good as you can at something you are.

yeah but most of them don't give a shit about gitting gud. they just want to get gud enuf to get a visa in a white country

I don't remember ever having to work hard in my life. Everything just always came easy to me. I feel bad for those who do.

I don't know. Every truly masterful composer I can think of was trained from birth to be so, from Bach to Shostakovich, there is not a single exception (ie, somebody who started seriously learing music after puberty and who became a household name). They all started extremely young and were in some cases forced to practice daily. The only exception to this seems to be Beethoven whose compositions at the age of 20 were truly mediocre relative to what he later produced. But he was a piano virtuoso since before puberty, so he had musical fluency.

My theory is that to be great (ie, world class pioneer and thinker) you have to learn whatever it is you're learning like a language, starting before puberty. People who start afterwards will always have an "accent" of amateurishness, whereas people who start before will be "fluent".

Of course it depends on the individual as well. Joseph Conrad did not learn English until well after puberty and became one of the greatest writers in the English language in history. But he could already speak a language since before puberty, so whose to say that you could learn a new language such as music, programming, etc after puberty and become fluent?

Basically, if you had shitty parents who didn't give a fuck about training you, you're doomed to mediocrity. A human is an organism and certain years of development are lost forever, much like in dogs.

this is what brainlets tell themselves to prevent themselves from committing sudoku every morning

jk, sounds reasonable

Also most progress is incremental and the 120-130s are perfectly capable of that. The geniuses are crucial for the comparatively rare big breakthroughs.

>He used tools available for everyone, implemented them into experimentation and translated his results into equations

You can backhand pretty much anything like that. "oh Mozart just pressed some buttons on a piano and wrote them down, eventually we would have reached the composition he wrote".

they started young because they could only expect to live until like 30

>Basically, if you had shitty parents who didn't give a fuck about training you, you're doomed to mediocrity.

my parents didn't give a shit about training me. i had to give shits about myself.

most people just want to pass the days. those of us with motivation, and vision are the ones who succeed. hopefully our motivation encourages others to believe in themselves.

That's probably also why most university professors are in the 120-130 range Very interesting.

No. Intelligent people can work just as hard and have the best of both worlds.
I can study all I want and understand areas in mathematics and physics, but that doesn't mean I'm going to make up a revolutionary theory that will change the world in a day's time.

Sure is technology in here. Just kill Sup Forums for a few weeks.

I'm sure there's a certain floor at which you're just too dumb to do great things. But a high iq is useless if you can't be assed to do anything with it.

I wager Sup Forums is filled with child geniuses who were in all the smart-kid classes, but burned out early because they're lazy as fuck.

the child genius is a myth. the lazy genius is a myth.

if you're a genius, you have intrinsic motivation because you don't let anything hold you back, it's just not intelligent to do so.

Those average lifespans are bullshit. They included infant deaths which brought the averages down. Ages of 50 to 70 were not uncommon for non-farming people (musicians, bourgeoisie, etc.) even in the 18th century.

>le smart but lazy meme
When will it end?

Most if not all relevant scientists went to university when they were adults, they gave themselves time and had regular non precocious lives.

This is what's great about a professional career, you don't need to be a prodigy kid, just a competent adult and work your way to the top.

This applies to art as well but there are people that take exceptions as rule.

>Of course, the investors "need" it. What about the rest?

Well if the investors find value in it, isn't that what is needed?

>It's obvious that what's needed is to save human lives and health

And how are we suppose to do that exactly?

Not necessarily. You see those two things do not connect.

One describes a basic principle of nature which, according to our experimentation, happens everywhere else in the universe. In other words, this principle is the same here and in the other side of the galaxy.

On the other hand, you have a composition of notes, originated from an idea, originated from experience and practice, originated from initiative. You are taking all the merit out of Mozard by basically saying that those things just ''magically popped up'' in this mind and then he wrote them. Give some credit dude.

So yes, considering that Maxwell continued the work of others before him, he dared and proceeded to experiment onto what he believed was happening. Had he not done it, somebody else would have discovered it.

This.

So you're smart but not smart enough to figure out you need to work hard? Yeah real smart

That's what every highschool drop out living with his parents says.
>I'm smart i'm just lazy!
No, you're lazy AND dumb

Never since it's true.

mindblown

But it isn't

How can you be smart but not be smart enough to find out that being lazy won't get you anywhere?

It's retarded. It's like saying "Yeah I could totally pick up 10/10's at the bar if i WANTED to but instead I'm lazy so i sit at home and masturbate to CP all day", ridiculous.

Yeah Mozart talked about perceptions of his genius, “It is a mistake to think that the practice of my art has become easy to me. I assure you, dear friend, no one has given so much care to the study of composition as I. There is scarcely a famous master in music whose works I have not frequently and diligently studied.”

*interracial porn

I am a cuk user.

Perceptions of reality do not always change behavior. Motivation is a feeling, not just a thought. All feelings I guess could be categorized as thoughts, but not all thoughts can be categorized as feelings.

>How can you be smart but not be smart enough to find out that being lazy won't get you anywhere?

Bipolar disorder, depression, ADD, abusive childhood, psychopathy, narcissism, anxiety, thyroid disorders; any number of things can interfere with motivation and commitment.

>It's like saying "Yeah I could totally pick up 10/10's at the bar if i WANTED to but instead I'm lazy so i sit at home and masturbate to CP all day", ridiculous..

Pedophilia is a sexual preference. If kids were allowed at bars, well that'd be another story.

Why have I never heard anyone describe themselves as both lazy and stupid?

Feels like every 3rd person is lazy but smart and just so happens to choose to be unsuccessful and work a shitty job. Yeah funny how that works out, protip: You aren't as smart as you think you are

>Feels like

Thats the keyword. It feels true. That does not mean it is.

Yes I don't literally mean that one third of the population describes themselves as lazy but smart, that was just hyperbole for the purpose of illustrating my point.

Are you one of these "smart but lazy" types?

>Why have I never heard anyone describe themselves as both lazy and stupid?

Regardless of how stupid they are, most people believe themselves to be smart.

Yeah I could totally start a successful business and become a billionaire if i wanted to, I just choose not to.

I also choose to be a virgin and a NEET when i could have sex with any woman i want and any job I want

>Motivation is a feeling, not just a thought. All feelings I guess could be categorized as thoughts, but not all thoughts can be categorized as feelings.

What an empty statement. What are you even trying to say?
Seems to me you're starting to realize you're you're not that smart after all.

You have knocked down a strawman. Congrats. Now read: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

tl;dr Dumb people do not think they are.

I wouldn't consider myself smart or lazy, and that does not change the substance of the argument. Hyperbole is not a useful tool for illustration, but its great for emotional venting.

>Bipolar disorder, depression, ADD, abusive childhood, psychopathy, narcissism, anxiety, thyroid disorders
LOL

>implying no one has succeeded in spite of any ailment

git gud

>a few hundred thousand
Literally my starting salary.

T. Maths Ph.D

What I meant was quite clear, and you understood perfectly well but you're just arguing for arguments sake

Are you saying that you don't understand the difference between thinking and feeling?

You're deriving a false implication, possibly because your caricatures of other people have become your reality. Or perhaps a projection of your own self-loathing.

Friend, your sample size is likely limited to people who spend a lot of time on the internet for starts. Secondly, its obvious to everybody that its better for th ego to admit laziness than stupidity, so you already know the answer to your question. My concern is not so much about the truth of what you say but about the lack of nuance in your thinking. Other people are not two-dimensional characters, and there are obvious reasons why somebody would be smart but not successful or motivated.

I am going to the store, please let me know if you'd like any tampons.

>i'm smart I swear!!

user...

>even if ur dumb as fuck
Not if you are dumb as fuck, at best you can hope for mediocrity.
Real success (6 digits salary if that's what you mean) is like 40% luck 40% work hard as fuck and 20% intelligence.
All of them are necessary tho, you really can't get anywhere without at least a little bit of everything

KEK HAHAHAHAHA

>Other people are not two-dimensional characters, and there are obvious reasons why somebody would be smart but not successful or motivated

Yeah the obvious reason is lying to themselves and trying to comfort themselves for their failure/position in life(or whatever endeavor)

On-par with blaming other people for their failure ("the government", their parents, their upbringing, getting "unlucky", complete strangers being the most common)