There's a proven correlation between low iq and the enjoyment of certain music genres (e.g. hip-hop). Therefore...

There's a proven correlation between low iq and the enjoyment of certain music genres (e.g. hip-hop). Therefore, isn't it correct to claim that genres/artists that require higher iq from its listeners are objectively superior?

wow youre such a tool

Yeah, never got into classical until I was a intelligent agent

>implying SAT score has anything to do with IQ

>implying stupid people don't shill beethoven on here all the time

This chart was designed by admitted racists.

White intelligence tests are designed so that POC perform poorly.

who's to say that a higher iq is inherently and objectively superior to a lower iq? You know that having a lower iq tends to lead to a happier life, for example

This is how the data was gathered, take it with a grain of salt op.

Reminder that by this logic ACDC, Oasis, and Coldplay are objectively better than Kanye West, Queen, and most Jazz music

>implying socially retarded NEETs are superior and contribute anything to society

Tool fans smarter than Doors fans? Lol

You're both proving my point.

They do; that doesn't matter.

Do you have any evidence to support that?

>You know that having a lower iq tends to lead to a happier life
What's your point?

Yeah, I know it's not scientifically sound, but it can't be disregarded that easily. There are several studies showing a correlation between intelligence and capacity for artistic appreciation and creativity; the casual study in the OP probably points to the same phenomena.

I'm okay with that

Are you implying all neets are intelligent?

Listening to Classical, Jazz and Avant-Garde just makes you pretentious not smart.

Nobody is saying that. You probably listen to hip-hop, right?

A theory on why Guster is so high: I'm from Mass. and they're real popular among suburban white kids here who also just happen to be around the best school systems in the country. Basically any band that is unusually popular among kids in the suburban Northeast US are going to have by far higher average test scores.

Why do you say that? Very curious to hear your response.

Define artistic appreciation. I can guarantee you majority of the general population can appreciate art.

Also, there is without a doubt a correlation between intelligence and wealth. The same people who can appreciate the arts also have time and money to actively seek out newer art, if that makes sense.

Are you fucking autistic, reading that was a topkek

>Do you have any evidence to support that?
It's not my job to prove things to you. Look up SAT racial biases.

It's to score brownie points and to look down upon the proles.
Essentially it's the worst kind of elitism, because you're using music as an accessory to be "hip".

Those who actually listen to Classical Music, don't brag about it.

>Define artistic appreciation
Please refer to Lindell, Annukka K., and Julia Mueller. "Can science account for taste? Psychological insights into art appreciation." Journal of Cognitive Psychology 23.4 (2011): 453-475.

No, are you a butthort hip-hop fan?

There's extensive research on both the correlations between SAT and IQ and the cultural/racial neutrality of IQ tests. What you call SAT racial biases could easily be explained by socioeconomic differences. That doesn't point to a biased test, but rather inequality among the test takers

>butthort
This has got to be fucking b8

Man, I'm not going to take an argument on Sup Forums's music board so seriously that I'll refer to a chapter in a book to understand your viewpoint.

What constitutes bragging in your mind?

You sound very unsure of yourself.

calling people's tastes and authenticity into question is the most juvenile trick in the book. no need to project that hard

typo

this paper has the most comprehensive definition to date, in my opinion.

Paraphrase it then.

It should serve as a way to back up your argument, not be your argument itself.

I've found that a bit odd as well.

educate us shitlords please

Music does not require a certain IQ to enjoy or understand, nor does that chart imply that it does. That chart doesn't even have anything to do with IQ.

The doors, seriously? Tool is bad, but doors are significantly worse and 15x more overrated.

that's what he meant by SAT racial biases I'm pretty sure. The socioeconomic issues you bring up ARE the reason people in poorer areas do worse on the SATs. They don't have good teachers and their school's lack of class leveling (CP, Honors, and AP) really fucks over students. That's why so many drop out.

I don't agree what your definition of smart is. SAT scores essentially are based on how much effort you put into studying.

>near perfect sat
>sufjan stevens is one my favorite artists

checks out. how do you subhuman rap """""music""""" fans feel?

>niggers have low IQs

stop the fucking presses

Your entire point is being made for no other reason than to feel superior to others, so yes, you are a huge tool. I don't understand this study because I'm confident I've seen another study that your taste in music has to do only with what you listened to when you grew up.

sat is a very good indicator of iq since its design is based on iq tests.

act is more of a test of knowledge.

study is actually bullshit because it's just the scores of people who like certain bands. this indicates literally nothing in the realm of science.

>Counting Crows

>AYOOO HOL UP, DESE ESS AYY TEES ARE RACISS N SHIEEET CAUSE I AINT PASSED
Blaming intelligence, or lack thereof on, ones skin color is racist and promoted victimhood

EVERYBODY REPEAT AFTER ME

SAY I LOVE SOCA