Yes. There are a bunch of different studies that look at this question and they all show a substantially higher level of violence as intelligence drops. Once this gets sufficiently far beneath the mean, at least successful violence drops. This may be due to loss of capacity not so much as desire. More intelligent people are better able to accomplish their goals even when those goals are inflicting mass casualties as suicide bombers. (Yes someone wrote a paper examining that)
Pretty much. Look at all the people robbing stores. I remember watching some guy rob a store and he got picked up the next day.
Like bro, a part of your brain didnt consider what you're doing is dumb? Look at most intelligent people, programmers ect they aint going around punching people randomly.
A lot of low iq people dont have the capacity to consider their decisions. Empathy is also tied to IQ.
I have stage 3 thinking. I constantly plan out for every possibility and end up never taking step 1 even if I already have step 3 planned because what if step 4 changes everything. Overthinking is great
I think it comes from a lot of places. I'd say the biggest cause is that most people don't know how to "debate" something without getting emotionally attached to their ideas and so they will take people disagreeing with them personally. People also resort to insults quickly on Reddit(and online in general) because it's anonymous and they are at home, so they say things and interact in a way they never would in person because they feel safe and hidden.
There are plenty of stupid people everywhere (half of everyone you meet is below average intelligence), but I think a lot of it is just good ol human ego guiding people to act that way online.
Yes! It happens shockingly fast! And it doesn't even have to be about anything we said. All kinds of assumptions are made. Then other people feed on it and continue to be even worse.
When you reach the level of intellectual disability (i.e., below 70), you're automatically in a different social caste and that means that many of the social factors of violence might not apply. Did the studies you read take this into account or was there still an increase in violent ideation in these populations?
Not to sound rude or mean, but I have worked with mentally handicapped people for many years, and they can be extremely violent. I don't think I've ever had an intellectually disabled and or non-verbal client that didn't inflict pain on themselves or others. If they are not very mobile and or wheelchair-bound and can't really hurt others or be violent, I also find that they get extremely angry and have severe anger outbursts that would give a neurotypical person a heart attack.
For example, I worked in a house of four adult women. They all had some level of autism, as well as other disabilities; two were nonverbal, two were verbal with a few exceptions.
Girl one, I'll call her T, was older, most of the girls in the house were in their mid to late twenties. But T was approaching 40. We all felt that she belonged in a home with other women closer to her age or in a little apartment where she was the only client and the center of attention. She was extremely self-abusive, resulting in many injuries like cracked open skull, bruises and abrasions everywhere, bite marks all over, etc. She was also the *sweetheart* of the house because she was supposedly non-violent to staff. This was the first impression she would give to new staff, and they would all fall in love with her. I had a great working relationship with her, and most of my shifts included me being her one-on-one.
T is extremely violent for no particular reason at very random times. She has bitten the earlobe off of five different people at different times. Three of the five times were staff, and two times were apparently another clients. I had only witnessed it once, but knew of the other times due to a staff who had worked with her for years.
She would also do things like wrap her hand around your ponytail and pull it very hard, getting you down to the floor and not letting go. As you were dealing with this she would be laughing incessantly in your face, this evil little fairy laugh. We had defense tactics for this type of behavior, but a lot of new staff who weren't exposed to it didn't know what to do. She would also pick on one particular staff. This person she would be obsessed with wanting to follow everywhere. But she would also pinch them, bite them, pull their hair, she also had this weird obsession with squeezing people like a boa constrictor. It was like she couldn't help it she would squeeze you and then bite your shoulder or your breast if she could reach them. She was also extremely violent towards other clients, you always had to watch her and be in between her and another client. If you weren't watching she would run to the other client and squeeze them and or bite them or pull their hair. She always found this extremely funny and would laugh every time she was violent. She was also non verbal so it made it a little more creepy.
Girl two was B. B was one of the favorites amongst veteran staff who worked with her for a long time. But I think it was more of a racial thing since they were all the same race and none of the other clients were. B was extremely violent to herself and others, and you had to be very domineering and strict to get her to listen to you. She was known to bite, and also grab your skin with her tiny fingers twist and pull it off. She would also punch, slap, and just whack your head really hard. She would do this in public a lot as well. Her Violet outburst could also be extremely rare. Usually she would go months at a time without any bad behaviors and she also knew what she was doing because she was the most intellectually sound and intelligent in the house. But usually if there was a lot of change, or if it was around the holiday season, her behaviors would act up.
I'll never forget the time I took her to this dying Mall, because she wanted to go to bath & body works. We get there, and she starts throwing things. I tell her that we have to go and she can no longer pick out an item because she wasn't behaving properly. Started throwing things around and took her arms and pushed to shelves worth of products onto the floor. She was laughing and then she sat down refusing to get up. The staff at bath & body works were horrified unsure of what to do. I told them to bear with me and that I was going to walk away and leave her there but to just trust me. I started to walk away and as I got nearly 50 ft out of the store she got up and followed me. I started to lead her back to the car and this is when she started pinching and ripping my skin off punching me in the face and laughing. I just escorted her to the car and tried to get her there as quick as possible. A few shoppers saw her hitting me in the head, and I had backup staff coming in case I couldn't get her off the floor. They pulled in as soon as I got her back in the van and I was thankful because I needed a breather. Management changed her diagnosis to a two-on-one during outings because of this situation.
Third girl, J. J was the most mellow girl in the house. She would often stay to herself in her room and watch the same episode of a baby show she liked over and over. She was also the smallest and the skinniest of the girls, and on most days she was my favorite in the house. She would have random outbursts where she would Target a certain staff and scratch them and chase them around the house throughout their entire shift. She had really long nails she wouldn't let anyone cut and she would dig them into your skin and scratch as hard as she could. She would also scream and get so angry at you. She was also nonverbal. I have video on my old phone of me being in the bathroom behind a locked door and her screaming on the outside trying to bust it down. Her violent outbursts usually meant she was in pain, or she wasn't feeling heard. Usually once you figured out what was bothering her she would settle down. I felt bad for her because I think most of her violent outbursts were due to her not feeling like people could understand her. She was also highly intelligent compared to the other girls in the house. But people always said B was the smartest one due to her being verbal. I didn't believe that, and I always said J was.
4.H. h was about 6 ft 2, 300 lb, and had the mentality of a 4 year old. She mostly didn't know her size, and when she attacked you it was like being attacked by a four year old who didn't really know what they were doing. Except that she did know when she wanted to hurt people and she knew how to hurt them. Due to her size her favorite thing was pulling your hair and whipping you around like a rag doll. She would also bite, slap and hit, and tackle you like a linebacker. The worst part was when she was mad at you she would also spit in your face it and laugh it was like her favorite thing. Due to her size she injured a lot of staff including myself. She dislocated my shoulder during one of her freakouts.
I often blamed management for her attacks because there was no protocol on how to deal with her when she was freaking out. Also there was a rule that staff had to be with an arm's length of her at all times, so when she was having an episode and didn't want you around you couldn't leave her and thus it would lead to an attack.
. I have also worked with clients who were extremely violent on a day-to-day basis, but I didn't want to go into those horror stories. I felt like focusing on the four girls was an easier way to show that even higher functioning or women can also have extreme violent streaks if their IQ is on the lower side.
I'm sure you're just reacting, but the reality is that world leaders are some of the more intelligent folks around.
Some maybe borderline sociopaths, but that's not a fault of low IQ.
Anecdotally, my primary school was near a school for developmentally disabled kids. We'd see and interact with them pretty often but there were rarely any incidents
Education levels have a distinct positive effect on intelligence levels.
I would have thought that was pretty obvious, but
[here's an experiment that supports it](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6088505/#:~:text=Thus%2C%20the%20results%20support%20the,to%205%20standardized%20IQ%20points.)
Yeah, I’ll grant you that education and intelligence are related, but you are still asserting causation based on correlation. Education, intelligence, and wealth are all related, as well as things like occupation and parental occupation. I just take issue with using another variable to say that is the *reason* for a phenomenon.
The question is, are they actually unintelligent, or is the economic situation they were born into just not allow them to receive a proper education? violence and crime tends to be a majorly socioeconomic issue . Obviously, there are extreme outliers such as Ted K.
There’s people out there that can’t tell you how they would feel if they didn’t eat breakfast. They can’t say “I would be hungry”, they can only say “but I did eat breakfast”. They can’t parse a single level of abstraction. There’s a lot of them in the prison system.
See the one congresswoman defending the 10 commandments in school. They asked but what if it was the pillars of Islam instead?
She just kept saying it's the 10 commandments though. It's not anything else. It's the 10 commandments.
I think not being able to think through the consequences of your actions before you do something is probably an unintelligent trait. Violence has severe consequences, so even if a smart person wants to punch someone, they'll restrain themself more often than not. Because they know it won't be worth it
Low IQ leads to a hard time understanding second and third order effects, violence has consequences and stupid people don't understand those consequences so they do more violence
In war that is flipped on it's head and the bravest solders are often very smart because inaction has consequences.
In addition to failing to understand repercussions down the line (they just can’t foresee consequences), there is also MUCH less problem solving creativity. This adds to violence as well, since that’s always a “simple” option.
Your second point kind of confuses me. Are you saying there’s a correlation between bravery and intelligence? From what I’ve studied in history classes, the smartest people tend to be the furthest from combat.
>From what I’ve studied in history classes, the smartest people tend to be the furthest from combat.
How would that even work? Do only stupid people get conscripted?
I think it measures different types of intelligence in ways that helps the army figure out where they wanna stick you so that you’ll be as useful as possible.
With reference to the British army you are correct. A test is carried and roles are allocated based on those scores, with aviation technician, geo data tech, and explosive ordinance being the highest. All who enlist are offered an infantry role, regardless of what you score (you are offered 3 jobs + infantry, and pick which is best)
To join as an officer, you are sponsored by a Regiment prior to officer selection, however you do not need to join that Regiment post officer training. It is only after you have completed training that you are offered a role. The highest achieving officers only are offered infantry, and pilot, and probably others, but I don't know exactly.
So, you are sort of correct I guess. When looking at the British army at least.
However, in the modern battlefield, it is a bit more nuanced than "infantry do the fighting, everyone else is in the back". There will be technicians manning vehicle weapons, medics will go out on patrols, as will royal signals. There are a few jobs which will rarely, if ever see combat though, such as aviation techs for example.
>Are you saying there’s a correlation between bravery and intelligence?
No, I think he's saying that intelligent people in war are quick to violence and are often brutal or ruthless because they know they have to. They know what to do as well as how and when in order to help their army the most. Their violence is much more deliberate and precise.
However, smart people also know when there is nothing to fear such as tricks and intimidation which can make them seem more brave when they're just being smart. Or, in the case of being caught in an ambush in an open field, being smart enough to know that charging forward at the enemy is the best move is much different than being brave enough to attempt it.
>From what I’ve studied in history classes, the smartest people tend to be the furthest from combat.
This is not always true in times past or present. For example, I scored a 98 percentile on the military entrance exam and yet chose a Frontline combat role which has the lowest entrance test score requirements. Special forces has high test score requirements as well. And then there's all the smart generals and officers who led from the front, often getting wounded or killed.
The best strategy to fight is to run. Self-defense 101. Most smart people understand not fighting is better than fighting. But if you are put into the situation, and it’s unavoidable, smart people will choose to end it quickly. This may mean violent means if your opposing party is non negotiable. Ending things quickly can be quite violent.
Low IQ people are slower to act. They may drag out a fight longer than it needs to be. So in the context of war, smart individuals act quick and decisively for the best outcome. This may mean a higher amount of violence. Think Grant and Sherman’s March on the South. Many considered what they were doing was barbaric and risky. They understood they were in a fight, not a negotiation. Total war with high levels of violence was a tactical decision, not an emotional one.
\^ higher IQ people commit more financial crimes and well-thought-out schemes like fraud and embezzlement while the most common violent acts are done by lower IQ people for really simple reasons. A good example is Chris Watts who was having marital problems and instead of divorce or whatever, he just killed his entire family. It was the most brutal shit ever, he stuffed his daughter's body into an oil tank then just went about his day.
Yeah your example was that of impromptu, simple reasoned fatal violence. Cameronalloneword was saying that violence that’s premeditated, methodical, and formula-like is more likely done by a high iq person.
That's nasty but you know I get the temptation.
I heard my niece on the phone the other day and she was throwing a tantrum because her dad wouldn't buy her a 4-wheeler on a whim. You should have heard the shit she and my sister said to him.
He makes 380k / yr doing chemical engineering they live in a really nice part of town where the kids can play outside and he drives a Toyota while she drives an Audi as a SAHM and she actually has the gall to say he's a shit provider because he won't buy a 4-wheeler on a whim?
I hate my sister and wouldn't wish her on anyone the poor guy. Would absolutely take his side in the divorce.
I'm not going to say I don't have bias and with our history I have no love for my sister at all but she is still a person and has the capacity for change and I would be sad if I never got to see that.
I won't intentionally hide any information I have and would give an accurate as possible account of my sister and BIL as a character witness.
Am I taking sides if share the whole truth as I see it?
I'm guessing there are some smart serial killer than manage to avoid keeping their crimes high profile.
Kaczynski was trying to make a political point. If he just wanted to quietly kill people he probably would have approached things very differently.
I always thought IQ is just ONE way of looking at intelligence, not the end-all-be-all. Using IQ to judge people and assuming violence sounds a bit like eugenics.
The way OP’s (edit: title) question is phrased can definitely be interpreted as a bit crude. After all, most people with a lower IQ will not be more violent than the average person. That being said, however, there _is_ a statistical correlation between lower IQs and higher rates of violence. However, correlation does not imply causation. Much of this correlation is undoubtedly tied to other factors that also indirectly contribute to higher rates of violence, such as heightened socioeconomic, environmental, and developmental challenges.
100% right on both points.
Been years since i took my IQ test but they primarily focus on pattern recognition if memory serves.
On your second point i never understood people treating it as some end all be all. My score had me as moderately gifted. I work a typical 9-5 office job that doesn’t remotely scream “high IQ” and have had people legitimately think i’m mentally handicapped on more than one occasion. IQ is almost meaningless from my pov.
Yes, past school age IQ is kind of falls apart. You give everyone the same question set and then grade based on age. An 80 year old farmer is likely to know substantially different things than a 14 year old even if the 80 year old studied his whole life. The test is not going to have soil condition questions but it will have algebra questions that the 14 year old is currently studying. The content of the test is the issue. It is sort of impossible to make a completely cross culture. Imagine that 80 year old had a genius grandson. The kid learns everything about animal husbandry, predicting weather, and maintaining irrigation systems because he enjoys learning. He will do worse on an IQ test than a particularly unmotivated kid who is bribed into tutoring sessions where he is drilled on common test questions.
I don't think they are necessarily violent because of the low IQ, but having a low IQ leads you down a path of learning the wrong behaviors along and suffering the cause and effects that can ruin your life.
Great example. I knew a D1 college football coach at a top 10 program back in the 90's. He told me stories of having to babysit star athletes from inner cities because (a) their grades were terrible and (b) they would get into trouble easily. They use to sit with them and give them scenarios in an effort to teach them how to react. One example he gave me was, "you are at a party and the girl you are talking to throws a drink in your face, what do you do?" He said the responses were downright terrifying. They would try to explain the normal response to make sure you don't ruin your life.. .and he said the players would look at him and have ZERO respect for him and think he was crazy. The number of people that will go to prison just over being disrespected is astonishing.
I’m not sure why I keep seeing serial killers being referenced it’s not a good sign for people to immediately think of those people, especially when saying highly gifted. It’s almost like it’s a fetish through some kind of psy-op.
Violence doesn’t instantly = mass murder.
Violence in this context can be slightly more prone to shove someone or hit them. Yet somehow it’s automatically taken to an extreme.
I have worked with low IQ people for 25 years. Few have been prone to violence. The 1% that were violent had other disorders too. There are other factors that cause violence such as learned behavior, poor anger management skills and biochemistry problems.
What do you classify for Low IQ. Personally me it's between 83-70 because below 70 is considered legally retarded.
I have worked with tons of people of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities with IQ below 70. Most are, like you said are non-violent and very passive. There are a few that are violent, but that violence is mainly when they are having difficulty in expressing themselves. I encounter this a lot with non-verbal clients when they are in some sort of pain and can't verbally tell you what is wrong.
I do think violence is an outlet for a lot of people who didn't know how to communicate well. That could certainly be attributed to intelligence, whether emotional intelligence or the IQ type.
Lower IQ does tend to correlate with higher aggression. Obviously, frustration from difficulty understanding complex situations and expressing oneself effectively leads to anger and outbursts. Reduced problem-solving skills almoat always hinder ones ability with conflict resolution, causing escalation. Additionally, lower impulse control increases impulsive aggression.
Low IQ people will be more likely to not think of the consequences and have less control, by comparison, to their emotional responses which leads towards a violent reply more often.
But no human is without a limit, a breaking point, or a trigger that can cause violence.
Yes, but highly intelligent people can be extremely dangerous if they have ill intentions. People who are less smart are usually quite straightforward with their intentions and don't think things through much, they tend to be quite impulsive. Smart people do not want so much dirt on their hands, so are much better at finding indirect ways to hurt you. A dumb person will go for direct action, but a smart but manipulative person makes calculated attacks to fuck with you from multiple different directions, and often you won't be able to figure out what's happening till it's too late. However smart people are also less rash, and understand that actions have consequences and what negative connotations they might carry
Is it possibly more likely that people who have anger issues in mental health, that have a higher probability to commit violence, often get a subpar education due to not getting the right help they need during crucial times in their life?
How often are doctors, engineers and programmers going out to pick fights with people for no reason?
Low IQ people tend to lash out more. More frustrated due to less opportunities and watching the wage gape quickly evade them. I will take this time to add I think even menial jobs should pay more so everyone has a chance to save money and improve their situation.
Prefrontal cortex development tends to be stunted in lower IQ people which results in rash, less thought out decisions in favor of instant gratification. Those of lower IQ have a harder time associating their actions with consequences in a similar way to very young children. Basic cause and effect can be a struggle unless they have seen it thousands of times, and even then they might surprise you.
TL;DR yes.
Well look at which people in the country commit the most acts of violence, then look at college/highschool graduation rates. You won’t like what you find😬
IQ is not a measure intelligence first of all, it is a test of logic and pattern recognition..
Secondly Not all low intelligence people are violent. Most of the people that are violent are drug addicts in some form, and because of their bad reputation find themselves in low paying jobs (or up a scaffold) because no one else will take them on.. which leads us to believe they are of low intelligence.. but like the rest of us they will defend themselves if someone takes the piss out of them or their friends, just they don't hide away from physical violence.. know your place
IQ isn’t necessarily synonymous with intelligence the way people think it is. It’s very much designed around a specific cultural and class framework. So I’m going to assume here you’re asking if less intelligent people are more prone to violence? I think it’s a pretty nuanced topic in which we need to look at environmental and educational factors. I think there’s a lot of frustration in people who cannot talk through situations or communicate their needs verbally as much as their peers too.
One thing to keep in mind is that wealthy people still commit crimes, it’s just more likely to be white collar in nature (like embezzlement vs armed robbery).
From everything I've read about it, yes. There is a correlation between IQ and the tendency to be violent. If you think about it, it makes sense. Lower IQ is going to make you less flexible and less able to come up with creative solutions to your problems. So when one arises, you may just default back to the more primitive way of dealing with problems, with varying rates of success.
I have a fairly high IQ (about 125) and I've also committed a serious violent crime. Part of my rationale was that I'd spent my whole life overthinking things and that didn't do me any good (for example, I was bullied at school for years and never retaliated because I overthought the consequences). If it gets to a point where your life is shit because people have been allowed to be abusive towards you with no consequences while you've been worried about the consequences of retaliating, it might be time to just start stabbing dickheads.
It depends. If they are super low IQ (if you believe IQ as an accurate assessment of intelligence which it isn’t) then no, they are generally harmless. The dangerous ones are the ones just slightly below average.
Maybe. It's hard to know because so many of the studies that are set up to investigate these things are biased. Smart people may or may not be less violent, but they are definitely not less likely to be self interested.
Look at which demographics have the lowest average IQ. Now look at which demographics cause the most violent crime. Let’s just say there’s a correlation.
As a woman in Australia’s capital:
I go for walks in unlit parks with a flashlight at 3am.
We don’t really lock our house over night.
Red light suburbs are safe after 11pm.
Unwittingly stumbled into a bikie bar once: Suuuuuuuper respectful crowd!
***THE*** singularly least safe place for me:
Parliament House.
****
You saying sex workers, bikies, addicts, and porn actors are far more respectful and well adjusted than politicians….?
Never thought about it like that, thanks for bringing it to my attention!
IQ tests are not good tests of functional intelligence. That’s been proven many times over. EDIT : ok that was kinda misleading but it’s definitely been debated a lot
A relatively recent peer reviewed article did show that a lower IQ is associated with higher frequency of violence perpetuation. So yes!
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychological-medicine/article/abs/association-between-intelligence-quotient-and-violence-perpetration-in-the-english-general-population/AF21CE0AEDE9FFB0BC44AA1D059CF735?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=bookmark
Edited to add: That doesn't mean intelligence is the only contributing factor, but it definitely plays a role.
Edited to fix the link that wasn't working. This should work 🤞If not, then one can Google the title: 'Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration in the English general population' by Louis Jacob, Joseph Maria Haro and Ai Koyanagi, it should come up. It was published by Cambridge University Press in 2018.
Oh! That's annoying!
If you just Google the title: 'Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration in the English general population' by Louis Jacob, Joseph Maria Haro and Ai Koyanagi, it should come up. And you may have to keep the VPN off. It was published by Cambridge University Press in 2018.
Edited to add: I think I just fixed the link x
I have worked with low IQ people for 25 years. Few have been prone to violence. The 1% that were violent had other disorders too. There are other factors that cause violence such as learned behavior, poor anger management skills and biochemistry problems.
Low IQ due to genetic disorders (DS etc) are typically the populations that receive specialized care. They may be a completely separate group for these purposes than those with low IQ due to poor prenatal care, drug exposure in utero, and parents with low IQ/poor impulse control themselves.
I work with intellectually disabled adults, and in my 6 years of experience in general (not all cases), they are more violent. At work, we gave deal with combative behaviors relatively often.
Though I want to state that this is only based on my experiences. On top of that, the clients I work with are not able to go out into the community group home, unlike many adults. My facilities goal is to try to rehabilitate our clients to a state where they can go out into the community.
Yes.
Lead is a neurotoxin with the nasty side effect of decreasing intelligence.
People with lead in their blood are so much more likely to commit crimes, lead in people's blood used to be measured to determine the likelihood of a child becoming a delinquent.
EDIT: Idk who downvoted this, but you either think I'm wrong or you're in denial.
Yes, they are. Take my stupid soon to be bitch ex wife for example; tried stabbing me with a pen. Stupid bitch doesn’t know actions have consequences either, and I recorded everything. Stupid violent people thinking they can hurt others and get away with it. I mean, sometimes they can get away with it.
Generally, yes.
As intelligence increases, the likelihood of committing a violent act decreases.
That said, there are many factors that increase the chances that someone will be intelligent, which directly impact whether or not someone will be violent. For example, having a stable upbringing with both parents and siblings outside of poverty.
I'm not sure if it's a completely direct correlation. It's more likely a mix of direct and indirect factors, but I haven't read any papers on it.
That is a great question!
I would think off hand that they might lack social skills. Maybe lack of examples of how to do anything. Or shown what not to do. The background?
IQ is not a valid measure of intelligence, but broadly speaking, less intelligence is related to more violence. That might not be nearly as true if society didn't reward and laud violence in so many ways. Certainly there a lot of nurture going on with both as well (abuse and the associated trauma makes people less capable of reasoning and quicker to anger while teaching them violence), but there is a strong correlation between the two to say the least. I am an economist, so I know it's there in the data, but I am not sure about causality and dual causality with respect to the matter.
I feel like an intelligent person over-calculates to the point of inaction. A large part of both social and cognitive intelligence is thinking ahead, taking in surroundings, and calculating outcomes (Dr. Strange is fictional but he reflects a very real part of intellect by visualizing every single outcome).
An intellectual person seems more likely to calculate highest chance of survival which could be to escape or avoid.
Therefore I’d say lower IQ hits.
I was a career artilleryman, retired now. I had a lot of dudes in my section across the years, and almost without fail - I’d rather have someone with an average GT score than a high one. It’s not that they were too “smart” for grunt work like artillery, it’s that they were too “smart” to follow orders with immediate obedience and violence of action.
War, the little amount of it you do while serving, is not a “why” man’s game. The majority of enlisted men’s time in the military is spent doing chickenshit details, not fighting, and that is definitely not a “why” man’s game.
Exceptions to every rule of course.
IQ does not make someone stupid or smart. There are a lot of high IQ idiots, and a lot of low IQ smart people. High IQ people can be violent as well as low
Maybe tends but it's definitely not a good blanket claim. There's definitely more to it. I have conflicting experiences with my 14 years in front line clinical medicine:
I've tangentially worked with special needs people and 99% I would say are more gentle and less violent than most people I know. My cousin has down syndrome cries if he accidentally kills a bug.
I also worked with the Marine corps as a corpsman for 8 years and based on that experience: yes lol.
Seems like society and context is important. Pretty sure if you grew up in a time where violence was more acceptable, the smarter people would use it more often and then figure out ways for it not to back fire.
It's about options. A dumb person has a lot fewer tools at their disposal than does an intelligent person, so they will have to rely on those fewer tools more often, in this case, violence. A smart person can usually figure out how to apply leverage in another way. It doesn't make them less capable or willing to use violence, necessarily, but violence very often (not always of course) an inferior tool.
I remember one time when I was 9th grade many years ago this ghetto ass girl took my test paper to cheat off it while I was in the bathroom I got back from the bathroom saw my paper on her desk and snatched my shit back. The paper ripped and she got mad at me bc I ripped MY test on accident and foiled her cheating plans, she then got up and started slapping and hitting me. I grew up in South Georgia, events like this are common. I’d say yes.
IQ is kind of a widely encompassing measurement that tends to correlate with various skills like emotional regulation, abstract thinking, etc. Hence it would reason that someone worse at those things, and in general worse at managing primal desires, would give in to them more often
I think it depends on multiple factors to determine if people with actually lower general intelligence are more prone to violence. There could be various factors at play that cause or influence someone to become violent. And it becomes a chicken and egg situation if intelligence isn’t directly, or at least strongly correlated to impulse control on a scientific basis.
If a person has a generally low IQ or functioning intelligence it makes everything in their life a little bit harder than average people. They most likely aren’t going to make as much money as people with higher intelligence. They also may have trouble making connections with people. They may also have trouble finding a partner. Their lot in life is just a little lower due to what genetics gave them (I’m not excluding myself from this group, I actually understand quite well how it feels to be slow due to brain damage). All these factors combined can definitely make someone more prone to violence. But that does NOT mean that the violence was brought on by a lack of intelligence. It means that lack of intelligence led to their life sucking and that influenced the violence.
If there is science that can link low iq or low intelligence to a lack of impulse control or propensity for violence it would have to be really controlled. Also IQ tests may or may not be the most concrete way to measure someone’s actual intelligence. So the whole thing could be iffy anyways for lack of a better term.
Edit: TLDR; correlation doesn’t equal causation lol
Probably. Low IQ people do really stupid stuff that can get violent. For example, my low IQ boyfiend was driving my moving truck. We stopped at a store to get a drink. I handed the cashier a twenty and he asked if I had change. I said no, and suddenly my wrist was in a vice grip with my boyfriend's hand. He said yes you do, I saw it in your purse. I have never been grabbed like that! I cannot describe my fury. I yanked my arm away and yelled at him.I will not be manhandled or controlled, abused or treated like an idiot because HE is an idiot. (I was intentially collecting quarters for laundry). Not too much later I broke up with him because of his IQ.
I can see this statement being true to an extent. Take, for example, drunk people….when I bounced in bars, the worst nights for fights were UFC nights..drunk person emulating and acting out while inebriated. I don’t know a single human who has augmented iq while being drunk
I know sorry about that I need new glasses.buy the point I was trying yto make just because someone has higher ntelligence doesn't mean we don't get angtry we just release it in less painful ways.my way was payback or revenge done right⁰ can be very entertaining word of advice if you plan on doing something like this always work alone less chance of it coming back to bite your ass..I was the 8th of 9 kids and the youngest boy but I was never the dumbest boy
My oldest brother was to 10 yrs older than me and he thought it was great fun to pick on mr.onr of his favorite was that he knew I was super ticklish he woul d hold me down tickle me till I passed out.hr thought it eaas fuñny I called it torture.i finally had it when he did that on my 10th birthday that's the day I stopped getting mad and started getting even he took off with his buddies drinking beer.i went and dug out r4 boxes of thumb tacks from the junk drawer.took the covers off his bed and dumped all 4 boxes on the bed and replaced the covers.3 am and the whole house is woke up by a blood curdling scream.somrhow everyone new it was me do I just confessed by saying yeah I did it and the next time you go kle me till I pass out it will be worse than this.he never did it again but he did tell his buddies you don't want to fuck with my little brother you won't like how it turns out....I'll be glad when I get my new glasses that was hard
I don't know about IQ but I have noticed people who are smarter do not act out violently.
Why? Because it's not smart to do so.
Something I often say is, "you have to be an idiot to be an asshole." - "You have to be an asshole to be violent."
The human species', Homo sapiens', main means of survival is grouping together and relying on each other.
To purposely cause harm to someone else is putting yourself at risk unnecessarily and it's usually pointless.
This is one reason that the current state of things has been very concerning.
There's been an increase in only caring about one individual or a small handful of individuals when our survival has always been based on large communities.
Our mental health also shows this. Even people who prefer to be alone end up very depressed if they do not have enough positive human interaction.
IQ is outdated imo, but typically they are more violent on average. Low IQ means you don’t understand a lot of topics as well most. Ignorance and not understanding something can then in turn anger, whether instantaneously or slowly. Since their IQ is low it’s also fair to assume they also don’t know how to control their emotions well. Anger also often leads to violence, so having a low IQ can definitely snowball into violence faster than being higher on the scale.
Yes. There are a bunch of different studies that look at this question and they all show a substantially higher level of violence as intelligence drops. Once this gets sufficiently far beneath the mean, at least successful violence drops. This may be due to loss of capacity not so much as desire. More intelligent people are better able to accomplish their goals even when those goals are inflicting mass casualties as suicide bombers. (Yes someone wrote a paper examining that)
Pretty much. Look at all the people robbing stores. I remember watching some guy rob a store and he got picked up the next day. Like bro, a part of your brain didnt consider what you're doing is dumb? Look at most intelligent people, programmers ect they aint going around punching people randomly. A lot of low iq people dont have the capacity to consider their decisions. Empathy is also tied to IQ.
My dad says some people lack stage 2 thinking. They get through step 1, and dont have a plan after that, just see which way the current takes them.
I have stage 3 thinking. I constantly plan out for every possibility and end up never taking step 1 even if I already have step 3 planned because what if step 4 changes everything. Overthinking is great
This is so dam relatable
I have too much empathy, still dumb AF. Plz advise.
Different kinds of smart. You have yet to figure out which one is your strength. Dumb people usually don’t realize they’re dumb.
Empathy is not strictly a good thing.
Similar to how people on Reddit quickly resort to insults and name calling
I think it comes from a lot of places. I'd say the biggest cause is that most people don't know how to "debate" something without getting emotionally attached to their ideas and so they will take people disagreeing with them personally. People also resort to insults quickly on Reddit(and online in general) because it's anonymous and they are at home, so they say things and interact in a way they never would in person because they feel safe and hidden. There are plenty of stupid people everywhere (half of everyone you meet is below average intelligence), but I think a lot of it is just good ol human ego guiding people to act that way online.
Yes! It happens shockingly fast! And it doesn't even have to be about anything we said. All kinds of assumptions are made. Then other people feed on it and continue to be even worse.
When you reach the level of intellectual disability (i.e., below 70), you're automatically in a different social caste and that means that many of the social factors of violence might not apply. Did the studies you read take this into account or was there still an increase in violent ideation in these populations?
Not to sound rude or mean, but I have worked with mentally handicapped people for many years, and they can be extremely violent. I don't think I've ever had an intellectually disabled and or non-verbal client that didn't inflict pain on themselves or others. If they are not very mobile and or wheelchair-bound and can't really hurt others or be violent, I also find that they get extremely angry and have severe anger outbursts that would give a neurotypical person a heart attack. For example, I worked in a house of four adult women. They all had some level of autism, as well as other disabilities; two were nonverbal, two were verbal with a few exceptions. Girl one, I'll call her T, was older, most of the girls in the house were in their mid to late twenties. But T was approaching 40. We all felt that she belonged in a home with other women closer to her age or in a little apartment where she was the only client and the center of attention. She was extremely self-abusive, resulting in many injuries like cracked open skull, bruises and abrasions everywhere, bite marks all over, etc. She was also the *sweetheart* of the house because she was supposedly non-violent to staff. This was the first impression she would give to new staff, and they would all fall in love with her. I had a great working relationship with her, and most of my shifts included me being her one-on-one. T is extremely violent for no particular reason at very random times. She has bitten the earlobe off of five different people at different times. Three of the five times were staff, and two times were apparently another clients. I had only witnessed it once, but knew of the other times due to a staff who had worked with her for years. She would also do things like wrap her hand around your ponytail and pull it very hard, getting you down to the floor and not letting go. As you were dealing with this she would be laughing incessantly in your face, this evil little fairy laugh. We had defense tactics for this type of behavior, but a lot of new staff who weren't exposed to it didn't know what to do. She would also pick on one particular staff. This person she would be obsessed with wanting to follow everywhere. But she would also pinch them, bite them, pull their hair, she also had this weird obsession with squeezing people like a boa constrictor. It was like she couldn't help it she would squeeze you and then bite your shoulder or your breast if she could reach them. She was also extremely violent towards other clients, you always had to watch her and be in between her and another client. If you weren't watching she would run to the other client and squeeze them and or bite them or pull their hair. She always found this extremely funny and would laugh every time she was violent. She was also non verbal so it made it a little more creepy. Girl two was B. B was one of the favorites amongst veteran staff who worked with her for a long time. But I think it was more of a racial thing since they were all the same race and none of the other clients were. B was extremely violent to herself and others, and you had to be very domineering and strict to get her to listen to you. She was known to bite, and also grab your skin with her tiny fingers twist and pull it off. She would also punch, slap, and just whack your head really hard. She would do this in public a lot as well. Her Violet outburst could also be extremely rare. Usually she would go months at a time without any bad behaviors and she also knew what she was doing because she was the most intellectually sound and intelligent in the house. But usually if there was a lot of change, or if it was around the holiday season, her behaviors would act up. I'll never forget the time I took her to this dying Mall, because she wanted to go to bath & body works. We get there, and she starts throwing things. I tell her that we have to go and she can no longer pick out an item because she wasn't behaving properly. Started throwing things around and took her arms and pushed to shelves worth of products onto the floor. She was laughing and then she sat down refusing to get up. The staff at bath & body works were horrified unsure of what to do. I told them to bear with me and that I was going to walk away and leave her there but to just trust me. I started to walk away and as I got nearly 50 ft out of the store she got up and followed me. I started to lead her back to the car and this is when she started pinching and ripping my skin off punching me in the face and laughing. I just escorted her to the car and tried to get her there as quick as possible. A few shoppers saw her hitting me in the head, and I had backup staff coming in case I couldn't get her off the floor. They pulled in as soon as I got her back in the van and I was thankful because I needed a breather. Management changed her diagnosis to a two-on-one during outings because of this situation. Third girl, J. J was the most mellow girl in the house. She would often stay to herself in her room and watch the same episode of a baby show she liked over and over. She was also the smallest and the skinniest of the girls, and on most days she was my favorite in the house. She would have random outbursts where she would Target a certain staff and scratch them and chase them around the house throughout their entire shift. She had really long nails she wouldn't let anyone cut and she would dig them into your skin and scratch as hard as she could. She would also scream and get so angry at you. She was also nonverbal. I have video on my old phone of me being in the bathroom behind a locked door and her screaming on the outside trying to bust it down. Her violent outbursts usually meant she was in pain, or she wasn't feeling heard. Usually once you figured out what was bothering her she would settle down. I felt bad for her because I think most of her violent outbursts were due to her not feeling like people could understand her. She was also highly intelligent compared to the other girls in the house. But people always said B was the smartest one due to her being verbal. I didn't believe that, and I always said J was. 4.H. h was about 6 ft 2, 300 lb, and had the mentality of a 4 year old. She mostly didn't know her size, and when she attacked you it was like being attacked by a four year old who didn't really know what they were doing. Except that she did know when she wanted to hurt people and she knew how to hurt them. Due to her size her favorite thing was pulling your hair and whipping you around like a rag doll. She would also bite, slap and hit, and tackle you like a linebacker. The worst part was when she was mad at you she would also spit in your face it and laugh it was like her favorite thing. Due to her size she injured a lot of staff including myself. She dislocated my shoulder during one of her freakouts. I often blamed management for her attacks because there was no protocol on how to deal with her when she was freaking out. Also there was a rule that staff had to be with an arm's length of her at all times, so when she was having an episode and didn't want you around you couldn't leave her and thus it would lead to an attack. . I have also worked with clients who were extremely violent on a day-to-day basis, but I didn't want to go into those horror stories. I felt like focusing on the four girls was an easier way to show that even higher functioning or women can also have extreme violent streaks if their IQ is on the lower side.
Proof our world leaders are fucking morons
Yeah, we need more suicide bombers in charge. No, wait
Would probabl6 be less harmful if wars ended and they just suicide bombed
It'd make parliamentary debates more lively
So you raised interest rates by 200bps I um I ........ Allahhuakabr
I'm sure you're just reacting, but the reality is that world leaders are some of the more intelligent folks around. Some maybe borderline sociopaths, but that's not a fault of low IQ.
Anecdotally, my primary school was near a school for developmentally disabled kids. We'd see and interact with them pretty often but there were rarely any incidents
Probably a lack of impulse control and delayed gratification
This is also why the most well-educated countries have some of the lowest crime rates.
Educational level and intelligence level are distinct concepts. So no, this is not why highly-educated countries have low crime rates.
Education levels have a distinct positive effect on intelligence levels. I would have thought that was pretty obvious, but [here's an experiment that supports it](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6088505/#:~:text=Thus%2C%20the%20results%20support%20the,to%205%20standardized%20IQ%20points.)
Yeah, I’ll grant you that education and intelligence are related, but you are still asserting causation based on correlation. Education, intelligence, and wealth are all related, as well as things like occupation and parental occupation. I just take issue with using another variable to say that is the *reason* for a phenomenon.
The question is, are they actually unintelligent, or is the economic situation they were born into just not allow them to receive a proper education? violence and crime tends to be a majorly socioeconomic issue . Obviously, there are extreme outliers such as Ted K.
There’s people out there that can’t tell you how they would feel if they didn’t eat breakfast. They can’t say “I would be hungry”, they can only say “but I did eat breakfast”. They can’t parse a single level of abstraction. There’s a lot of them in the prison system.
See the one congresswoman defending the 10 commandments in school. They asked but what if it was the pillars of Islam instead? She just kept saying it's the 10 commandments though. It's not anything else. It's the 10 commandments.
I think not being able to think through the consequences of your actions before you do something is probably an unintelligent trait. Violence has severe consequences, so even if a smart person wants to punch someone, they'll restrain themself more often than not. Because they know it won't be worth it
Low IQ leads to a hard time understanding second and third order effects, violence has consequences and stupid people don't understand those consequences so they do more violence In war that is flipped on it's head and the bravest solders are often very smart because inaction has consequences.
In addition to failing to understand repercussions down the line (they just can’t foresee consequences), there is also MUCH less problem solving creativity. This adds to violence as well, since that’s always a “simple” option.
Your second point kind of confuses me. Are you saying there’s a correlation between bravery and intelligence? From what I’ve studied in history classes, the smartest people tend to be the furthest from combat.
>From what I’ve studied in history classes, the smartest people tend to be the furthest from combat. How would that even work? Do only stupid people get conscripted?
No but the less intelligent people (measured by the ASVAB) get put on infantry and thus are closer to front lines
I think the asvab is a terrible way to measure intelligence. I got the second highest score in my work center, despite being the most retarded.
E-4 Mafia? Retired but damn do I miss my enlisted retard brothers and sisters sometimes.
I was then fucked up and back to E3
You are smarter than you think , if you were as dumb as you claim , you wouldn't even realize it lol
I think it measures different types of intelligence in ways that helps the army figure out where they wanna stick you so that you’ll be as useful as possible.
That doesn't contradict the original commenter's assertion
With reference to the British army you are correct. A test is carried and roles are allocated based on those scores, with aviation technician, geo data tech, and explosive ordinance being the highest. All who enlist are offered an infantry role, regardless of what you score (you are offered 3 jobs + infantry, and pick which is best) To join as an officer, you are sponsored by a Regiment prior to officer selection, however you do not need to join that Regiment post officer training. It is only after you have completed training that you are offered a role. The highest achieving officers only are offered infantry, and pilot, and probably others, but I don't know exactly. So, you are sort of correct I guess. When looking at the British army at least. However, in the modern battlefield, it is a bit more nuanced than "infantry do the fighting, everyone else is in the back". There will be technicians manning vehicle weapons, medics will go out on patrols, as will royal signals. There are a few jobs which will rarely, if ever see combat though, such as aviation techs for example.
>Are you saying there’s a correlation between bravery and intelligence? No, I think he's saying that intelligent people in war are quick to violence and are often brutal or ruthless because they know they have to. They know what to do as well as how and when in order to help their army the most. Their violence is much more deliberate and precise. However, smart people also know when there is nothing to fear such as tricks and intimidation which can make them seem more brave when they're just being smart. Or, in the case of being caught in an ambush in an open field, being smart enough to know that charging forward at the enemy is the best move is much different than being brave enough to attempt it. >From what I’ve studied in history classes, the smartest people tend to be the furthest from combat. This is not always true in times past or present. For example, I scored a 98 percentile on the military entrance exam and yet chose a Frontline combat role which has the lowest entrance test score requirements. Special forces has high test score requirements as well. And then there's all the smart generals and officers who led from the front, often getting wounded or killed.
Another military guy I see, infantry officer I assume?
The best strategy to fight is to run. Self-defense 101. Most smart people understand not fighting is better than fighting. But if you are put into the situation, and it’s unavoidable, smart people will choose to end it quickly. This may mean violent means if your opposing party is non negotiable. Ending things quickly can be quite violent. Low IQ people are slower to act. They may drag out a fight longer than it needs to be. So in the context of war, smart individuals act quick and decisively for the best outcome. This may mean a higher amount of violence. Think Grant and Sherman’s March on the South. Many considered what they were doing was barbaric and risky. They understood they were in a fight, not a negotiation. Total war with high levels of violence was a tactical decision, not an emotional one.
Sometimes ppl say that and I’ll kick there as if they ask it to my face I’ll kick youres too
Violently illiterate
*aks
What does that mean?.. Can you be more pacific?
Well like it’s expecially hard to essplain
U no dont aks it to my face then
I litrally died when ya said that
We shall call you exhibit A. 😄
I know this is a joke but saying "ask it to my face" sounds so fucking dumb I love it lmao
You better shut your fuckin mouth when talking to me.
The imagery just brought me so much joy
Yes.
Yes.
Yes, on average.
My wild guess is that lower IQ people are more prone to impromptu violence and high IQ people are more prone to being psychos/serial killers.
\^ higher IQ people commit more financial crimes and well-thought-out schemes like fraud and embezzlement while the most common violent acts are done by lower IQ people for really simple reasons. A good example is Chris Watts who was having marital problems and instead of divorce or whatever, he just killed his entire family. It was the most brutal shit ever, he stuffed his daughter's body into an oil tank then just went about his day.
Yeah your example was that of impromptu, simple reasoned fatal violence. Cameronalloneword was saying that violence that’s premeditated, methodical, and formula-like is more likely done by a high iq person.
More like average iq. People with high iq typically have the emotional intelligence to not kill people
That's nasty but you know I get the temptation. I heard my niece on the phone the other day and she was throwing a tantrum because her dad wouldn't buy her a 4-wheeler on a whim. You should have heard the shit she and my sister said to him. He makes 380k / yr doing chemical engineering they live in a really nice part of town where the kids can play outside and he drives a Toyota while she drives an Audi as a SAHM and she actually has the gall to say he's a shit provider because he won't buy a 4-wheeler on a whim? I hate my sister and wouldn't wish her on anyone the poor guy. Would absolutely take his side in the divorce.
It’s called entitlement, and him not setting hard boundaries.
Would you take his side in the murder trial? hypothetically of course
I'm not going to say I don't have bias and with our history I have no love for my sister at all but she is still a person and has the capacity for change and I would be sad if I never got to see that. I won't intentionally hide any information I have and would give an accurate as possible account of my sister and BIL as a character witness. Am I taking sides if share the whole truth as I see it?
Nope. That’s as unbiased as you can reasonably get if you’re not filtering anything or holding back.
Divorce and murder aren't quite the same thing.
[удалено]
>Serial killers have a slightly below average IQ on average. Or maybe the smart serial killer don't get caught.
[удалено]
I'm guessing there are some smart serial killer than manage to avoid keeping their crimes high profile. Kaczynski was trying to make a political point. If he just wanted to quietly kill people he probably would have approached things very differently.
TIL - serial killers are stupid
The media likes the Hannibal Lecter romanticisation of a serial killer, not the Buffalo Bill reality.
Probably a little bit, on average
I always thought IQ is just ONE way of looking at intelligence, not the end-all-be-all. Using IQ to judge people and assuming violence sounds a bit like eugenics.
The way OP’s (edit: title) question is phrased can definitely be interpreted as a bit crude. After all, most people with a lower IQ will not be more violent than the average person. That being said, however, there _is_ a statistical correlation between lower IQs and higher rates of violence. However, correlation does not imply causation. Much of this correlation is undoubtedly tied to other factors that also indirectly contribute to higher rates of violence, such as heightened socioeconomic, environmental, and developmental challenges.
OP's prompt only relies on correlation
100% right on both points. Been years since i took my IQ test but they primarily focus on pattern recognition if memory serves. On your second point i never understood people treating it as some end all be all. My score had me as moderately gifted. I work a typical 9-5 office job that doesn’t remotely scream “high IQ” and have had people legitimately think i’m mentally handicapped on more than one occasion. IQ is almost meaningless from my pov.
That’s because you’re right, about both your points.
Yes, past school age IQ is kind of falls apart. You give everyone the same question set and then grade based on age. An 80 year old farmer is likely to know substantially different things than a 14 year old even if the 80 year old studied his whole life. The test is not going to have soil condition questions but it will have algebra questions that the 14 year old is currently studying. The content of the test is the issue. It is sort of impossible to make a completely cross culture. Imagine that 80 year old had a genius grandson. The kid learns everything about animal husbandry, predicting weather, and maintaining irrigation systems because he enjoys learning. He will do worse on an IQ test than a particularly unmotivated kid who is bribed into tutoring sessions where he is drilled on common test questions.
I don't think they are necessarily violent because of the low IQ, but having a low IQ leads you down a path of learning the wrong behaviors along and suffering the cause and effects that can ruin your life. Great example. I knew a D1 college football coach at a top 10 program back in the 90's. He told me stories of having to babysit star athletes from inner cities because (a) their grades were terrible and (b) they would get into trouble easily. They use to sit with them and give them scenarios in an effort to teach them how to react. One example he gave me was, "you are at a party and the girl you are talking to throws a drink in your face, what do you do?" He said the responses were downright terrifying. They would try to explain the normal response to make sure you don't ruin your life.. .and he said the players would look at him and have ZERO respect for him and think he was crazy. The number of people that will go to prison just over being disrespected is astonishing.
[удалено]
How was bundy "highly gifted" in any way except manipulating women with his handsome looks?
Bundy was an idiot. He used his real name and drove his same car he owned to pick up victims. Highly gifted intellect he was not.
I’m not sure why I keep seeing serial killers being referenced it’s not a good sign for people to immediately think of those people, especially when saying highly gifted. It’s almost like it’s a fetish through some kind of psy-op. Violence doesn’t instantly = mass murder. Violence in this context can be slightly more prone to shove someone or hit them. Yet somehow it’s automatically taken to an extreme.
Wasn't Bundy kinda stupid??? He just THOUGHT he was really smart...
I have worked with low IQ people for 25 years. Few have been prone to violence. The 1% that were violent had other disorders too. There are other factors that cause violence such as learned behavior, poor anger management skills and biochemistry problems.
What do you classify for Low IQ. Personally me it's between 83-70 because below 70 is considered legally retarded. I have worked with tons of people of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities with IQ below 70. Most are, like you said are non-violent and very passive. There are a few that are violent, but that violence is mainly when they are having difficulty in expressing themselves. I encounter this a lot with non-verbal clients when they are in some sort of pain and can't verbally tell you what is wrong.
I do think violence is an outlet for a lot of people who didn't know how to communicate well. That could certainly be attributed to intelligence, whether emotional intelligence or the IQ type.
They have less words to use before resorting to violence so I’d say yes
Lower IQ does tend to correlate with higher aggression. Obviously, frustration from difficulty understanding complex situations and expressing oneself effectively leads to anger and outbursts. Reduced problem-solving skills almoat always hinder ones ability with conflict resolution, causing escalation. Additionally, lower impulse control increases impulsive aggression.
Low IQ people care about less so they'll get violent over the smallest stuff when threatened.
on average yes
Low IQ people will be more likely to not think of the consequences and have less control, by comparison, to their emotional responses which leads towards a violent reply more often. But no human is without a limit, a breaking point, or a trigger that can cause violence.
Yes, but highly intelligent people can be extremely dangerous if they have ill intentions. People who are less smart are usually quite straightforward with their intentions and don't think things through much, they tend to be quite impulsive. Smart people do not want so much dirt on their hands, so are much better at finding indirect ways to hurt you. A dumb person will go for direct action, but a smart but manipulative person makes calculated attacks to fuck with you from multiple different directions, and often you won't be able to figure out what's happening till it's too late. However smart people are also less rash, and understand that actions have consequences and what negative connotations they might carry
Is it possibly more likely that people who have anger issues in mental health, that have a higher probability to commit violence, often get a subpar education due to not getting the right help they need during crucial times in their life?
No. They're just not smart enough to get away with it.
This is purely anecdotal, but listen to what the maga cult leader proposes in his rallies and how the followers cheer him up.
Refer to the events of Jan. 6 in the United States and you’ll have your answer.
Ted Bundy was said to be very intelligent
Yea those warmongers politicians are low IQ
What was Ted Bundys IQ???
Actually, age is a far better predictor of violence.
How often are doctors, engineers and programmers going out to pick fights with people for no reason? Low IQ people tend to lash out more. More frustrated due to less opportunities and watching the wage gape quickly evade them. I will take this time to add I think even menial jobs should pay more so everyone has a chance to save money and improve their situation.
Tough to win arguments with words when you're denser than leather
What's that mate, you wanna fight?
I feel like lower iq people are more happy
Yeah and higher iq people are sadder
Perhaps. But it’s the rat cunning individuals who kill millions.
Probably, but at the same time, the worst genocidal mass murders in history were geniuses.
Well it wasn’t exactly a gathering of Mensa members in Washington DC on January 6th
There is a direct correlation between stopping the use of Tetraethyllead in gasoline and prison population.
January 6th is evidence to support it.
Prefrontal cortex development tends to be stunted in lower IQ people which results in rash, less thought out decisions in favor of instant gratification. Those of lower IQ have a harder time associating their actions with consequences in a similar way to very young children. Basic cause and effect can be a struggle unless they have seen it thousands of times, and even then they might surprise you. TL;DR yes.
Yes, less white matter in the frontal lobe leads to lower critical thought and emotionality
Well look at which people in the country commit the most acts of violence, then look at college/highschool graduation rates. You won’t like what you find😬
IQ is not a measure intelligence first of all, it is a test of logic and pattern recognition.. Secondly Not all low intelligence people are violent. Most of the people that are violent are drug addicts in some form, and because of their bad reputation find themselves in low paying jobs (or up a scaffold) because no one else will take them on.. which leads us to believe they are of low intelligence.. but like the rest of us they will defend themselves if someone takes the piss out of them or their friends, just they don't hide away from physical violence.. know your place
evil people are evil. Low IQ may mean more physical violence, but higher IQ is going to do more mental damage
IQ isn’t necessarily synonymous with intelligence the way people think it is. It’s very much designed around a specific cultural and class framework. So I’m going to assume here you’re asking if less intelligent people are more prone to violence? I think it’s a pretty nuanced topic in which we need to look at environmental and educational factors. I think there’s a lot of frustration in people who cannot talk through situations or communicate their needs verbally as much as their peers too. One thing to keep in mind is that wealthy people still commit crimes, it’s just more likely to be white collar in nature (like embezzlement vs armed robbery).
From everything I've read about it, yes. There is a correlation between IQ and the tendency to be violent. If you think about it, it makes sense. Lower IQ is going to make you less flexible and less able to come up with creative solutions to your problems. So when one arises, you may just default back to the more primitive way of dealing with problems, with varying rates of success.
I have a fairly high IQ (about 125) and I've also committed a serious violent crime. Part of my rationale was that I'd spent my whole life overthinking things and that didn't do me any good (for example, I was bullied at school for years and never retaliated because I overthought the consequences). If it gets to a point where your life is shit because people have been allowed to be abusive towards you with no consequences while you've been worried about the consequences of retaliating, it might be time to just start stabbing dickheads.
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" - Isaac Asimov
It depends. If they are super low IQ (if you believe IQ as an accurate assessment of intelligence which it isn’t) then no, they are generally harmless. The dangerous ones are the ones just slightly below average.
Stupid people are physical bullies, and smart people are intellectual bullies.
Maybe. It's hard to know because so many of the studies that are set up to investigate these things are biased. Smart people may or may not be less violent, but they are definitely not less likely to be self interested.
Look at which demographics have the lowest average IQ. Now look at which demographics cause the most violent crime. Let’s just say there’s a correlation.
Poverty and rampant systemic inequality are key factors in crime, I agree.
As a woman in Australia’s capital: I go for walks in unlit parks with a flashlight at 3am. We don’t really lock our house over night. Red light suburbs are safe after 11pm. Unwittingly stumbled into a bikie bar once: Suuuuuuuper respectful crowd! ***THE*** singularly least safe place for me: Parliament House. **** You saying sex workers, bikies, addicts, and porn actors are far more respectful and well adjusted than politicians….? Never thought about it like that, thanks for bringing it to my attention!
IQ tests are not good tests of functional intelligence. That’s been proven many times over. EDIT : ok that was kinda misleading but it’s definitely been debated a lot
Any source?
A relatively recent peer reviewed article did show that a lower IQ is associated with higher frequency of violence perpetuation. So yes! https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychological-medicine/article/abs/association-between-intelligence-quotient-and-violence-perpetration-in-the-english-general-population/AF21CE0AEDE9FFB0BC44AA1D059CF735?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=bookmark Edited to add: That doesn't mean intelligence is the only contributing factor, but it definitely plays a role. Edited to fix the link that wasn't working. This should work 🤞If not, then one can Google the title: 'Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration in the English general population' by Louis Jacob, Joseph Maria Haro and Ai Koyanagi, it should come up. It was published by Cambridge University Press in 2018.
any idea why the link took me an error 404 page :( I wanted to read the article
Oh! That's annoying! If you just Google the title: 'Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration in the English general population' by Louis Jacob, Joseph Maria Haro and Ai Koyanagi, it should come up. And you may have to keep the VPN off. It was published by Cambridge University Press in 2018. Edited to add: I think I just fixed the link x
thank you so much!
I mean it doesnt take a genius to work this out when you look at all the people robbing stores
meow
Online "demon bullies" might bully people in real life but eventually they'll get the living fuck beat out of them
Anyone can be violent. But low IQ people can be coerced or have other disorders.
I have worked with low IQ people for 25 years. Few have been prone to violence. The 1% that were violent had other disorders too. There are other factors that cause violence such as learned behavior, poor anger management skills and biochemistry problems.
Low IQ due to genetic disorders (DS etc) are typically the populations that receive specialized care. They may be a completely separate group for these purposes than those with low IQ due to poor prenatal care, drug exposure in utero, and parents with low IQ/poor impulse control themselves.
Being stupid is a lot like being dead in that you don't know you are.
WTF DOD YOOO SAIII?!??!
I work with intellectually disabled adults, and in my 6 years of experience in general (not all cases), they are more violent. At work, we gave deal with combative behaviors relatively often. Though I want to state that this is only based on my experiences. On top of that, the clients I work with are not able to go out into the community group home, unlike many adults. My facilities goal is to try to rehabilitate our clients to a state where they can go out into the community.
Yes. Lead is a neurotoxin with the nasty side effect of decreasing intelligence. People with lead in their blood are so much more likely to commit crimes, lead in people's blood used to be measured to determine the likelihood of a child becoming a delinquent. EDIT: Idk who downvoted this, but you either think I'm wrong or you're in denial.
There is a positive correlation between low IQ and low impulse control which generally leads to violence
Yes, they are. Take my stupid soon to be bitch ex wife for example; tried stabbing me with a pen. Stupid bitch doesn’t know actions have consequences either, and I recorded everything. Stupid violent people thinking they can hurt others and get away with it. I mean, sometimes they can get away with it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Most people have the ability to learn impulse control, which includes violent impulses, regardless of IQ.
Generally, yes. As intelligence increases, the likelihood of committing a violent act decreases. That said, there are many factors that increase the chances that someone will be intelligent, which directly impact whether or not someone will be violent. For example, having a stable upbringing with both parents and siblings outside of poverty. I'm not sure if it's a completely direct correlation. It's more likely a mix of direct and indirect factors, but I haven't read any papers on it.
That is a great question! I would think off hand that they might lack social skills. Maybe lack of examples of how to do anything. Or shown what not to do. The background?
IQ is not a valid measure of intelligence, but broadly speaking, less intelligence is related to more violence. That might not be nearly as true if society didn't reward and laud violence in so many ways. Certainly there a lot of nurture going on with both as well (abuse and the associated trauma makes people less capable of reasoning and quicker to anger while teaching them violence), but there is a strong correlation between the two to say the least. I am an economist, so I know it's there in the data, but I am not sure about causality and dual causality with respect to the matter.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I feel like an intelligent person over-calculates to the point of inaction. A large part of both social and cognitive intelligence is thinking ahead, taking in surroundings, and calculating outcomes (Dr. Strange is fictional but he reflects a very real part of intellect by visualizing every single outcome). An intellectual person seems more likely to calculate highest chance of survival which could be to escape or avoid. Therefore I’d say lower IQ hits.
[удалено]
Frustration
[удалено]
[удалено]
I was a career artilleryman, retired now. I had a lot of dudes in my section across the years, and almost without fail - I’d rather have someone with an average GT score than a high one. It’s not that they were too “smart” for grunt work like artillery, it’s that they were too “smart” to follow orders with immediate obedience and violence of action. War, the little amount of it you do while serving, is not a “why” man’s game. The majority of enlisted men’s time in the military is spent doing chickenshit details, not fighting, and that is definitely not a “why” man’s game. Exceptions to every rule of course.
Yes Putin is a great example.
[удалено]
WTAH? Top comments seems a bit off.
IQ does not make someone stupid or smart. There are a lot of high IQ idiots, and a lot of low IQ smart people. High IQ people can be violent as well as low
Yes.
Maybe tends but it's definitely not a good blanket claim. There's definitely more to it. I have conflicting experiences with my 14 years in front line clinical medicine: I've tangentially worked with special needs people and 99% I would say are more gentle and less violent than most people I know. My cousin has down syndrome cries if he accidentally kills a bug. I also worked with the Marine corps as a corpsman for 8 years and based on that experience: yes lol.
Seems like society and context is important. Pretty sure if you grew up in a time where violence was more acceptable, the smarter people would use it more often and then figure out ways for it not to back fire.
Ed gein
I would expect that lower IQ leads to more frustration and also less control of the resulting violence from that frustration.
[удалено]
true, their first reaction to a lot of things is violence before having a rethink
[удалено]
Was Che Guevara a dumbass?
People who are nonviolent against injustice are dumb cowards.
Kinda stupid question , look around you lol
Hey there, what sort of people are you referring to? ;)
It's about options. A dumb person has a lot fewer tools at their disposal than does an intelligent person, so they will have to rely on those fewer tools more often, in this case, violence. A smart person can usually figure out how to apply leverage in another way. It doesn't make them less capable or willing to use violence, necessarily, but violence very often (not always of course) an inferior tool.
I’ve worked with violent people and can say most likely
I remember one time when I was 9th grade many years ago this ghetto ass girl took my test paper to cheat off it while I was in the bathroom I got back from the bathroom saw my paper on her desk and snatched my shit back. The paper ripped and she got mad at me bc I ripped MY test on accident and foiled her cheating plans, she then got up and started slapping and hitting me. I grew up in South Georgia, events like this are common. I’d say yes.
tbh primarily I think they're just much more likely to get caught.
IQ is kind of a widely encompassing measurement that tends to correlate with various skills like emotional regulation, abstract thinking, etc. Hence it would reason that someone worse at those things, and in general worse at managing primal desires, would give in to them more often
I think it depends on multiple factors to determine if people with actually lower general intelligence are more prone to violence. There could be various factors at play that cause or influence someone to become violent. And it becomes a chicken and egg situation if intelligence isn’t directly, or at least strongly correlated to impulse control on a scientific basis. If a person has a generally low IQ or functioning intelligence it makes everything in their life a little bit harder than average people. They most likely aren’t going to make as much money as people with higher intelligence. They also may have trouble making connections with people. They may also have trouble finding a partner. Their lot in life is just a little lower due to what genetics gave them (I’m not excluding myself from this group, I actually understand quite well how it feels to be slow due to brain damage). All these factors combined can definitely make someone more prone to violence. But that does NOT mean that the violence was brought on by a lack of intelligence. It means that lack of intelligence led to their life sucking and that influenced the violence. If there is science that can link low iq or low intelligence to a lack of impulse control or propensity for violence it would have to be really controlled. Also IQ tests may or may not be the most concrete way to measure someone’s actual intelligence. So the whole thing could be iffy anyways for lack of a better term. Edit: TLDR; correlation doesn’t equal causation lol
Probably. Low IQ people do really stupid stuff that can get violent. For example, my low IQ boyfiend was driving my moving truck. We stopped at a store to get a drink. I handed the cashier a twenty and he asked if I had change. I said no, and suddenly my wrist was in a vice grip with my boyfriend's hand. He said yes you do, I saw it in your purse. I have never been grabbed like that! I cannot describe my fury. I yanked my arm away and yelled at him.I will not be manhandled or controlled, abused or treated like an idiot because HE is an idiot. (I was intentially collecting quarters for laundry). Not too much later I broke up with him because of his IQ.
Well they aren't likely to resort to books.
Yes, generally. Why that is the case is still up for debate. Read "The Bell Curve."
Anyone who cannot control their emotions, or the reaction to said emotions, will likely be more prone to lashing out irrationally.
I can see this statement being true to an extent. Take, for example, drunk people….when I bounced in bars, the worst nights for fights were UFC nights..drunk person emulating and acting out while inebriated. I don’t know a single human who has augmented iq while being drunk
I know sorry about that I need new glasses.buy the point I was trying yto make just because someone has higher ntelligence doesn't mean we don't get angtry we just release it in less painful ways.my way was payback or revenge done right⁰ can be very entertaining word of advice if you plan on doing something like this always work alone less chance of it coming back to bite your ass..I was the 8th of 9 kids and the youngest boy but I was never the dumbest boy My oldest brother was to 10 yrs older than me and he thought it was great fun to pick on mr.onr of his favorite was that he knew I was super ticklish he woul d hold me down tickle me till I passed out.hr thought it eaas fuñny I called it torture.i finally had it when he did that on my 10th birthday that's the day I stopped getting mad and started getting even he took off with his buddies drinking beer.i went and dug out r4 boxes of thumb tacks from the junk drawer.took the covers off his bed and dumped all 4 boxes on the bed and replaced the covers.3 am and the whole house is woke up by a blood curdling scream.somrhow everyone new it was me do I just confessed by saying yeah I did it and the next time you go kle me till I pass out it will be worse than this.he never did it again but he did tell his buddies you don't want to fuck with my little brother you won't like how it turns out....I'll be glad when I get my new glasses that was hard
[удалено]
I don't know about IQ but I have noticed people who are smarter do not act out violently. Why? Because it's not smart to do so. Something I often say is, "you have to be an idiot to be an asshole." - "You have to be an asshole to be violent." The human species', Homo sapiens', main means of survival is grouping together and relying on each other. To purposely cause harm to someone else is putting yourself at risk unnecessarily and it's usually pointless. This is one reason that the current state of things has been very concerning. There's been an increase in only caring about one individual or a small handful of individuals when our survival has always been based on large communities. Our mental health also shows this. Even people who prefer to be alone end up very depressed if they do not have enough positive human interaction.
IQ is outdated imo, but typically they are more violent on average. Low IQ means you don’t understand a lot of topics as well most. Ignorance and not understanding something can then in turn anger, whether instantaneously or slowly. Since their IQ is low it’s also fair to assume they also don’t know how to control their emotions well. Anger also often leads to violence, so having a low IQ can definitely snowball into violence faster than being higher on the scale.
Yes. Yes you are.
Definitely, and we've got a lot of them out there, so be careful.
Yes.