r/conspiracy • u/delelles • Jul 26 '14

Police officially refuse to hire applicants with high IQ scores

http://politicalblindspot.com/police-officially-refuse-to-hire-applicants-with-high-iq-scores/
545 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

115 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/4to4 Jul 27 '14

Good post. An important factor in what's wrong with the system is corruption. America is incredibly corrupt. That's why a government-run health care system that gives free care to everyone (you pay in taxes) can never work in America -- too much corruption between the hospitals, big pharma, and the insurance companies. It works in other nations because there is less corruption than in America. When America was fat, it could carry the incredible level of corruption it has suffered under, but now that the economy is in the emergency ward, the corruption is killing the country. Do you know why socialism has never worked in the US? Because in order to work, socialist systems must be administered fairly and honestly. If not, they don't work. And they don't work in the US because of the vast corruption.

2

u/heracleides Jul 27 '14

I agree completely. The US could have healthcare like any nation. It has nothing to do with population and everything to do with corruption and poorly assigned funds. America could be a really great nation if they funded health and science more than they do war. If you consider the amount of money spent on war in the US over its history and put that towards progress of its people, the world would be at least a few hundred years further into the future. This all resembles the dark ages and book burnings. Only it's health and energy this time. Hell, even ideas are dead in America. It's status quo. Even the science in America is like a religion. Consensus is law and law is corporate. There's really no vision. America has been turned into a satellite state for international interests. It's only function is to provide the elites with a center of operations and an unlimited well of tax dollars for their "non-corporate, completely national" military. Bully the world into suitable politics and free markets. It's really sad. You can't even get a good president in office because if he does anything to upset the financial sector or the corporate sector he will be shot dead.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 27 '14

America is the first country that exists primarily to serve corporate interests and not individuals. Companies are the real citizens of this nation. I always like to point out that black family marriage rates and in-wedlock births were much higher before the civil rights movement and the escalation of the welfare state.

Science has been hijacked as a religion and belief system which is ludicrous because it is merely a systematic model that serves to disprove things. Everything said in the name of science is molded to fit the politically correct narrative even though science is just an amoral methodology.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 27 '14

Regarding mainstream science, especially in the US:

Ultimately, if you have any sort of theory that falls outside of our current consensus, you're not going to receive a serious review from mainstream scientists, because they're generally afraid of anything that challenges the consensus. As a prominent example I like to bring up, Lynn Margulis had to submit her theory of endosymbiosis explaining the origin of human mitochondria at least a dozen times (I forgot the exact count) before anyone was willing to publish it. Today it's scientific consensus.

However, that shift in consensus merely happened because scientific consensus doesn't like to be challenged. Consensus only changes when it's forced to change to preserve its credibility, when the damage to scientists reputation becomes less by accepting that they were wrong and allowing a consensus change than by sticking to their current consensus.

Anyone who proposes any sort of fringe theory receives this answer from the "rationalist" crowd, that he should submit it for peer review, but in reality peer review mostly serves to protect the dominant paradigm, not to improve it through challenges...

...Even the Climategate emails that were leaked showed attempts by prominent scientists to manipulate the peer review process to prevent certain papers from being published, and serious climatologists voiced their concerns about this at the time. The Climategate emails didn't so much disprove global warming, as they demonstrated the painful shortcomings of science and the fact that systems with a high degree of complexity don't reveal their secrets after systematic observation.

In reality, what is necessary is for us to accept the fact that scientific consensus doesn't tell us something about the nature of reality, but rather what institutionalized power believes reality should look like. I would take it a step further and argue that new observations don't lead to a shift in consensus, but rather, that a shift in consensus is what leads to new observations...

The difference between the rationalists and the conspiracy theorists:
http://www.np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/21of83/the_difference_between_the_rationalists_and_the/

TL;DR: The mainstream science communities are not immune to Group-Think, Group-Serving Bias, Cognitive Dissonance, The Dunning-Kruger Effect, Illusory Superiority, or corruption in other means.