<p>I call these people tryhards…Even though im ranked in the top 5…I dont do all this crap LOL</p>
<p>What’s the opposite of a grinder? Someone who has like a 3.0gpa and a 2000+ SAT score?</p>
<p>Oh god I can’t stand those grinders. They think they’re so smart. They call other people idiots. What’s worse is when teachers think that the grinders are smart. I’m so sick of people thinking that they’re smart because they can study 2 hours and score the same on a test that I didn’t study for.</p>
<p>Well the high GPA/low SAT thing could just be because the person isn’t good at the SAT or standardized test taking in general. After all, not many tests in school are 4 hours long and thus as exhausting as the SAT is.
But, yeah, the whole “condescending towards people who go to lower-level schools” thing is ********. Most of the time, I’d say those people are actually smart, since that’s usually where the money is. We’ll see who’s so smart when said “grinder” has $100,000+ in education debt.
As for me, I only take APs that I am interested in. So I don’t take AP English, although I think I could do well. I instead take Academic so I can focus on the APs I DO take, which are Physics and Calc this year. I’d rather have lower level classes overall and kick ass in those two than all high level classes and not do as well, mainly because, as a future engineer, I’m gonna REALLY NEED Physics and Calc. Not so much AP English or AP Psych.</p>
<p>i just want to say… i think it’s very unfair that some people are significantly more intelligent than others. </p>
<p>the phenomenon of grinders seems inevitable and sad to me. but yeah, i have felt negative emotions towards those kind of people, but i wouldn’t say my negative emotions towards them were justified, or reflected something intrinsically bad about the person.</p>
<p>Almost everyone on this thread sounds incredibly arrogant…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haven’t you guys ever heard of being humble!? Who cares what others do? Concentrate on yourselves!</p>
<p>The majority of the posters on this thread are pretentious ******bags. This thread is pathetic! How can any of you judge someone’s IQ based off of their work ethic?</p>
<p>@Rusty I read the original thread post, and seriously why is it that you get to judge the easy/hard APs? -_-
Who said LATIN was easy, and at some schools to do well in APUSH it requires a lot of outside classroom thinking through research. You are under the horrible impression that because you feel one way about a class at your school it must be true for other people at other schools.</p>
<p>I’m not judging anybody. That’s being elitist. But it does tick me off when people think they’re smart and then blame everyone else when they do poorly on tests/exams.</p>
<p>My point is that you are unfairly judging someone because they don’t take the “hard” classes, when actually I have known people to take Calc BC and say it was easier than their AP Lang class. It’s all a matter of opinion. So for you to say that someone who is taking 5 APs (Which is a ton of work already) is less than you in terms of picking the harder classes that you sign up for is elitist.</p>
<p>Honestly, you included AP Latin as one of the classes you would see on a “grinder’s course load”, but have you even taken Latin to determine it’s difficulty?</p>
<p>I think grinders are cute.
I just wanna snuggle with them and give them baths.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I recommend reading Harrison Bergeron.</p>
<p>lol rusty…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>to claim something is bad (in this case people having more equal abilities) because it would ruin society makes no sense.</p>
<p>if everyone was 20 feet tall it might ruin society, but only because this society was not created by people who were 20 feet tall.</p>
<p>and it might not even ruin it - it might force it to change to accommodate the new way people were (though maybe it would be chaotic in the interim). </p>
<p>there’s no doubt that if the variance of human intelligence shrunk it would alter society alot. but to say that it would ruin it? </p>
<p>maybe from the perspective of someone who really likes how things are (like you) it would, but i think <em>overall</em> it would reduce suffering.</p>
<p>there is a good sized sub-set of suffering that goes on in humanity that’s due to people being so unequal in ability. if people were more equal it would go away.</p>
<p>one of the things best correlated with how much people trust their neighbors across many human societies is how equal people perceive themselves to be to their neighbors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>discrimination of intellectual ability is very valuable to society (and to everyone in the end), more valuable than the loss of value that comes with people feeling bad about being less capable than others. that’s what i think anyway. the fact that these discrimination procedures are so pervasive nearly proves the point. it’s used because it works better than it doesn’t work. so i think discrimination of intellectual ability should continue - but care should be taken to minimize the unhappiness it causes. </p>
<p>the thing is… </p>
<p>i don’t think people are great at noticing how intelligent others are. it’s easy to have an inflated sense of your own abilities. </p>
<p>but when you see something such as test scores … a number with which to compare yourself to others … then some peoples delusions come crashing down. if you don’t share your high test scores with people with lower test scores then there’s no harm in you having them. but if you did do that, then i would wonder if you should be allowed to take the SAT.</p>
<p>Like, anyone who uses their high test scores to make people feel bad probably shouldn’t be allowed to get them. it’s true though that people do a pretty good job of shunning those who do that, which mitigates the damage those people might cause…</p>
<p>^ The most intelligent (and lucky) people create stuff that betters society as a whole. If everyone had the same intelligence then there would be no Mark Zuckerbergs, Bill Gates, or Ben Franklins.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i think i will leave speculations about the implications of how a society would function if the variance of human abilities was lower to social theorists… or really anyone intelligent who wants to dedicate their time to thinking carefully about it … </p>
<p>not science fiction writers who want to tell a feel-good story about why we should be thankful for our differences because we are stuck with them …</p>
<p>==</p>
<p>don’t you think if everyone was more equal we would tell the same dystopian tales about societies where people were more unequal?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I AGREE intelligence is one of the most precious and valuable things as is empathy. </p>
<p>obviously a society where everyone had 100 IQ WOULD NEVER GET OFF THE GROUND. but would it have less suffering than one with a higher variance of intelligence? maybe. </p>
<p>but a society where the average was 145 and the variance of the distribution of intelligence was smaller could be pretty nice i think.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>mostly i think everyone who wants to be smart should be able to be smart. and people should be able to accomplish their most fantastic dreams and not be limited by their intellectual speed. :).</p>
<p>I believe you ask if i’m 5 because you think my idealism is foolish? Well I’m happy to be considered to be 5 if it’s due to my naive idealism :).</p>
<p>If our society had an average of 145 with a low variance that would probably be pretty epic (yea, I said epic, what of it?). As long as we have our fair share of geniuses it’s fine with me.</p>
<p>yeah dfree i’m not really sure that you couldn’t have a lot of variance in human abilities and yet not a lot of unhappiness over the differences. </p>
<p>but i don’t know…</p>
<p>what’s i think is not optimal about how things are is the fact that not everyone has the ability to succeed in school who might want to be able to. but i’m open to suggestions for how that could be fixed.</p>
<p>when i used to think about it though, inequality, people who have wildly different opinions and capacities, all of that just makes things so darn complicated for the people who want everyone to be able to unite in some way and share a common vision (usually their way and their vision i guess :p).</p>
<p>obviously i don’t believe in controlling people and forcing people to do things, but freedom is difficult when people use their freedoms in ways that are antagonistic… anyway.</p>
<p>the fact that people want different things which can impose on each other makes things difficult if your ideal involves inclusion and
everyone coexisting okay.</p>
<p>If our society has an average of 145, then it would not be 145 anymore, it would be a hundred (remember 100 is the middle. It’s just a number to represent average). There will be more smart criminals if humans become even smarter.
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some people are born stronger than others, while some are born smarter. My math teacher made me realize this. I was complaining about how my pe teacher grade us based on physical tests and how it’s not fair, but then she told me that it is not fair how some people are good at math ( I have a high A in that class, so I guess she used this example on me on purpose ).
I guess that we, humans, place so much value on intelligence because it is what sets us apart from other animals. It is what brought us here. We are pretty weak compare to many other primates. I heard that a female orangutan is stronger than a fit adult man.</p>