Clever CUKkers

[Mich the Tester]

To become rich while not doing very much. This does reflect a higher intelligence, since implicitly you're accepting that you don't really matter in cosmic terms, but are merely enjoying your time on earth.

Well, that perhaps depends on your own experience of the word 'rich'. Personally I harbour the illusion (or delusion) that we are fabulously rich; in material terms we have a comfortable home that is very nearly paid off, we have two cars that fit our taste and needs well, a couple of very good racing bicycles and all the comforts of a modern house. We take holidays at least once a year in some fascinating and exotic places, and we can go out for dinner pretty much wherever or whenever we choose. OK, so there are some people who could (and do) buy several new Bentleys as opposed to second hand jags and fiats. Some people live in palaces and some fly around the world in private jets and stay in presidential suites instead of the standard rooms in smart hotels, but I have no reason to be envious of them as the real comfort and pleasure offered by these things is subject to the law of diminishing returns. In the less material sense, we live close to some beautiful scenery, some excellent art galleries and theatres and towns where life is very pleasant. Plus, our neighbourhood is comfortable and relatively free of crime. However, we both work a lot to pay for all this, but neither of us does work that's particularly taxing or that will make us cripples in old age. We could both work more hours or take the risk of investing in a business that might make us very 'rich', but why would we do that if it's unlikely to add much to our general level of enjoyment?

[Mich the Tester]

But if academics condemn their families to live on the pittances they earn purely because they have fun using their brains, maybe they're being selfish rather than smart or intelligent?

I think that reaching the top of any field of endeavour requires a certain amount of selfishness, if if that field is one where you primarily help other people.

[sasguru]

Well, that perhaps depends on your own experience of the word 'rich'. Personally I harbour the illusion (or delusion) that we are fabulously rich; in material terms we have a comfortable home that is very nearly paid off, we have two cars that fit our taste and needs well, a couple of very good racing bicycles and all the comforts of a modern house. We take holidays at least once a year in some fascinating and exotic places, and we can go out for dinner pretty much wherever or whenever we choose. OK, so there are some people who could (and do) buy several new Bentleys as opposed to second hand jags and fiats. Some people live in palaces and some fly around the world in private jets and stay in presidential suites instead of the standard rooms in smart hotels, but I have no reason to be envious of them as the real comfort and pleasure offered by these things is subject to the law of diminishing returns. In the less material sense, we live close to some beautiful scenery, some excellent art galleries and theatres and towns where life is very pleasant. Plus, our neighbourhood is comfortable and relatively free of crime. However, we both work a lot to pay for all this, but neither of us does work that's particularly taxing or that will make us cripples in old age. We could both work more hours or take the risk of investing in a business that might make us very 'rich', but why would we do that if it's unlikely to add much to our general level of enjoyment?

So to summarise you're rich (in your terms) and don't do very much. What's your point?

[sasguru]

I think that reaching the top of any field of endeavour requires a certain amount of selfishness, if if that field is one where you primarily help other people.

I don't think most academics "help people" as much as pursue their own interests.

[RedSauce]

How does saying I feel sorry for your kid have anything to do with stupidity. The fact I don't think private schools are a good idea (or actually that good most of the time) is not an intelligence issue its one of personal preference.

My parents had 5 children, they sent us all to the same private primary school. We all passed the 11+ and went to grammar schools in the top 5 in the country and we all went to decent universities. This is what is would do if I ever planned on having children as I think grammar schools really do deliver the best education as you are around other intelligent kids (plus a few who have been trained to pass the entrance exams). Private schools on the other hand don't guarantee the intelligence of the pupils as if there are entrance exams they are generally easier (in my experience) than the grammars and having wealthy parents does not guarantee intelligence.

[DimPrawn]

OK, so there are some people who could (and do) buy several new Bentleys as opposed to second hand jags and fiats. Some people live in palaces and some fly around the world in private jets and stay in presidential suites instead of the standard rooms in smart hotels...

The Office of Tony Blair

[Mich the Tester]

The Office of Tony Blair

He always gives me the impression that he really wants people to like him. It's rather like a Greek tragedy.

[sasguru]

Private schools on the other hand don't guarantee the intelligence of the pupils as if there are entrance exams they are generally easier (in my experience) than the grammars and having wealthy parents does not guarantee intelligence.

That's an interesting argument since we are discussing intelligence.
The fact is alumni of private schools (not grammar schools) dominate the top of virtually all professions/sports/firms/public bodies in this country.
So obviously academic intelligence is not the most important thing to get to the top?

[RedSauce]

Well, that perhaps depends on your own experience of the word 'rich'. Personally I harbour the illusion (or delusion) that we are fabulously rich; in material terms we have a comfortable home that is very nearly paid off, we have two cars that fit our taste and needs well, a couple of very good racing bicycles and all the comforts of a modern house. We take holidays at least once a year in some fascinating and exotic places, and we can go out for dinner pretty much wherever or whenever we choose. OK, so there are some people who could (and do) buy several new Bentleys as opposed to second hand jags and fiats. Some people live in palaces and some fly around the world in private jets and stay in presidential suites instead of the standard rooms in smart hotels, but I have no reason to be envious of them as the real comfort and pleasure offered by these things is subject to the law of diminishing returns. In the less material sense, we live close to some beautiful scenery, some excellent art galleries and theatres and towns where life is very pleasant. Plus, our neighbourhood is comfortable and relatively free of crime. However, we both work a lot to pay for all this, but neither of us does work that's particularly taxing or that will make us cripples in old age. We could both work more hours or take the risk of investing in a business that might make us very 'rich', but why would we do that if it's unlikely to add much to our general level of enjoyment?

People who chase wealth will never be happy as there is always someone wealthier than you and while you are chasing the illusion of happiness being found in wealth, your life will pass you buy. I have a few friends who like to display the illusion of wealth by buying the most expensive care they can afford, drinking in the most expensive bars, while having to make sacrifices in other areas of their lives and being unable to save for the future. I suspect it is these people who end up depressed as they are unable to reach the unrealistic aspirations they have set themselves.

[RedSauce]

That's an interesting argument since we are discussing intelligence.
The fact is alumni of private schools (not grammar schools) dominate the top of virtually all professions/sports/firms/public bodies in this country.
So obviously academic intelligence is not the most important thing to get to the top?

I think it depends on the private school, I suspect there are an elite few schools who farm the industry leaders, but there are probably hundreds of other private schools whose alumni are only marginally more successful than their counterparts at state-schools.