im not sure offensiveness is a particularly useful metric hereTo me, it's far more offensive to say intelligence isn't real, because then you're stuck with "well they're just lazy" or something when called upon to explain why these people can't hang with post-industrial society.
I understood it more as a metaphysical claim, that there is a supply of psychic wealth that some people manage to suck up, resulting in an uneven fabric of intelligence.I think it's sorta true (see Eno on scenius) but only in the sense that piracy is theft.
When you take an idea, you are only ever taking a copy—it's a positive-sum economy instead of zero-sum
I tend to think that a reliable signature of intelligence is the ability to compound abstractions mentally, as in complex maths. This seems like something one can exercise, but it also seems some are talented without much exercise.I tend to believe most people have such little variance in innate intelligence that its a null distinction
this is partly what im getting at with the notion that stupidity is something forced onto people.I think a lot of it depends on stimuli during early years of development, which may sound obvious but would challenge the notion that intelligence is genetically predetermined.
This I totally agree with, and it gets at some points @version made about the psychological impact/toll of poverty, perhaps a lack of cognitive or imaginative engagement as a child, parents too busy working, or perhaps not there at all.this is partly what im getting at with the notion that stupidity is something forced onto people.
This I think is a major crux in the discussion of "cognitive biodiversity" or whatever the trigger term is. That is, intelligence is largely determined by levels of cognitive/imaginative engagement as a child.