<p>awalysleah - what if the principle turned out to be “the lowest 10% of society in terms of intelligence commits significant amounts of crimes”.</p>
<p>then even if you made everyone more intelligent, people would commit crimes in the smarter society that hadn’t in the older society (maybe because there would be more competition for them in the smarter society?).</p>
<p>it’s hard to be sure about the answer i think. it’s kind of wrong to assume everything would be the same as now, except people would be smarter because people being smarter would change the broader dynamics of things…</p>
<p>But that’s not the principle. People with an IQ between 80 and 90 commit significantly less crimes than those at 90-100. </p>
<p>However, if that principle was instated, then I’m not sure what would happen to the crime rate, simply because I don’t know what % of people today commit crimes. It would either go up or down to 10% however, that theory is pretty implausible because, like cchanged pointed out, there will always be white collar crime as well, though perhaps a lesser amount if you maintain the current data that says IQs 90-100 commit the most crimes.</p>
<p>Yes, certainly fewer petty crimes. But in terms of number of people affected, I would say that one criminal of petty crime would affect fewer people than one criminal of white collar crime such as fraud at one time.
Regarding the increase in white collar crime. Well, I drew my conclusion based on the fact that there are fewer people with iq of 145 so therefore there will be fewer bad smarties that we see. But let’s say that the ratio of bad smarties to all smarties remains the same, and the ratio doesn’t change even when we increase the number of total smarties. So now there be a higher total number of bad smarties, therefore more white collar crime, but the ratio of bad smarties to all smarties remains constant. Of course this might not be true, but who knows. I mean there are not that many high iq people, so therefore we don’t see as many high iq criminals.</p>
<p>i’m just saying - if the reason 90-100 IQ people cause so many crimes is because they are disadvantaged compared to others (have a harder time finding a paying job, being viewed as successful, and so on - do not get positive feedback for their efforts to do good respectable things because they fail at them more often)</p>
<p>then,</p>
<p>in a society where the average IQ is equivalent to 120 in this society (i.e a smarter society), people with 100-110 IQ’s might feel the same way as 90-100 IQ people feel in our society, and commit crimes that they wouldn’t have committed in this society.</p>
<p>don’t you think there’s something to that? if that was true, then the principle i proposed could be sort of accurate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>lol that’s a good point to keep in mind :). i guess the meaningful statistic in in terms of IQ and crime is the proportion of people at X IQ or X-Y range of IQs that commit crimes.</p>
<p>Umm… Yeah, it makes sense, but since they are smarter, they might devise more complex crimes.
Do you think smarter people make decisions more cautiously?</p>
<p>Cchanged you have good points. However, I think you have to think about WHY people are committing these crimes (lol exactly what enfield brought it). Is it because they are bad? I tend not to think so. I think the ratio of bad people is pretty stable throughout levels of IQ. I would argue that the IQ range of 90-100 simply doesn’t think about consequences for actions, while higher IQ people do, thus less high IQ people commit crimes. Also, as enfield sort of said, higher IQ people are more likely to be employed in a successful career, thus less likelihood of being in a bad neighborhood or needing to resort to crime. But yeah, more smart people would probably mean more bad smart people. But also significantly more good smart people who could implement more effective crime stopping techniques. </p>
<p>Enfield, I think you make good points, but they don’t explain why people with IQd below 90 commit less crimes than people with an IQ 90-100.</p>
<p>People below 90 are rarer I think. I am not sure.
In a society which everyone’s so smart, I can’t imagine what defines a successful career anymore.</p>
<p>ha cchanged might have me covered there - there are less of them :p.</p>
<p>'cause i imagine the data your refereeing to was identifying the group responsible for the most crimes, not the IQ range that has the highest ratio of people who commit crimes to people who don’t commit crimes (which arguably could be lower). </p>
<p>yeah but obviously at some point lack of ability to commit crimes comes into play, so it’s not like the lower your IQ the more likely you are to commit a crime (that only true over certain ranges).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>this is a point i was tempted at some point to bring up :). nicely said. yeah, i think in lots of scenarios like the one we’re talking about the risk of greater evil powers is emphasized without considering the benefit of greater good powers that comes with * everyone’s * abilities being increased.</p>
<p>Lack of ability to commit crime, umm, chimpanzees can act violently and kill each other ( I guess this is a crime in the human world).</p>
<p>More smart people to deal with the increase of white collar crime.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yeah me neither. thinking that kind of think is why i said -</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^^ mm yeah but if someone has the functional level of a chimpanzee in our society we remove them pretty fast, so i’m not sure if someone like that would wind up in jail for committing a crime.</p>
<p>Let’s just be happy with the way society is today. It ain’t perfect but it never will be no matter what.</p>
<p>I feel like it’s almost required to end a conversation like this on a note like that :p.</p>
<p>Now I can finally finish the two essays due tomorrow.</p>
<p>Exactly. Nice talking to y’all time to finish homework ehhh</p>
<p>mm nice talking to you guys too :).</p>
<p>I bet all of us are from west coast.</p>
<p>Yes indeed I am. I only stay up past 1 for the first half of the year anyway then I stop caring… Aha.</p>
<p>I am still in war with my essays. Ugh</p>