Exploring demographics on alcohol usage
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/05/people-of-class-drink-alcohol/
The very last chart is the kicker, though:
(http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/6327/drinkwordsum.png)
WORDSUM is a measure of vocabulary size, afaik. And thereby a sort of broad indicator of intelligence.
The amazing thing is the incredibly strong correlation. If you look at the other charts in the demographics there are lots of predictable results, things you would expect, but the correlation is a littlebit rough.
But this one, it's a near straight line. That's pretty statistically significant.
What do you think about it?
Alcohol makes you talkative :) is the best thing I can come up with.
But what about the "tool of the machine" belief we have over here? Not saying it invalidates it (wouldnt want to either), but what does that belief mean in the light of this chart?
Vocabulary doesn't correlate with how much of a biped you are?
Makes me think, can we come up with a quantitative way to gauge bipedality?
[not in the way of "you must do/think this and that to be(come) a biped", rather a way to sample a person, a test, to score them, not to judge but to draw other correlations similar to this from]
drinking is bad. without question. i'm drunk right now so i'd now for sure without question.
I refer to alcohol as tongue oil.
We all may have different ideas about what the Machine™ is, but I remember saying once that the Machine™ is what happens when people forget about their BIP.
As such, intelligence or vocabulary doesn't really matter in this case.
Maybe it's as simple as people with better vocabularies being more likely to have money to spend on alcohol?
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 03, 2010, 04:24:29 PM
Maybe it's as simple as people with better vocabularies being more likely to have money to spend on alcohol?
. . . and the Machine certainly has a lot to gain from ensuring that the thinking classes are also the drinking classes . . .
Quote from: Hawk on May 03, 2010, 04:09:38 PM
I refer to alcohol as tongue oil.
Mrs LMNO calls gin martinis "loudmouth soup".
She has very good reasons for doing so.
Quote from: LMNO on May 03, 2010, 04:33:50 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 03, 2010, 04:09:38 PM
I refer to alcohol as tongue oil.
Mrs LMNO calls gin martinis "loudmouth soup".
She has very good reasons for doing so.
I had the right to remain silent... but I didn't have the ability.
Ron White
INTERESTING...
Because some of the first written documents are booze recipes, historically speaking.
COINCIDENCE?
I think not.
Mr. Language was talking about the birth of written language last night; he thinks there is a strong correlation between use of mind-altering substances and humans becoming literate.
He might just be a filthy hippie, but I'm not the linguistics professor.
It makes some sense, neurologically. Doesn't it follow that it takes a certain degree of synaesthesia to recognize the sound of the word with the look of it's written form with the actual thing in itself? And don't some psychoactive chemicals cause a certain loosening of those distinctions?
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 03, 2010, 08:04:47 PM
Mr. Language was talking about the birth of written language last night; he thinks there is a strong correlation between use of mind-altering substances and humans becoming literate.
He might just be a filthy hippie, but I'm not the linguistics professor.
I think that's a mildly popular theory, but I can't remember any of the supporting arguments.
Quote from: LMNO on May 03, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 03, 2010, 08:04:47 PM
Mr. Language was talking about the birth of written language last night; he thinks there is a strong correlation between use of mind-altering substances and humans becoming literate.
He might just be a filthy hippie, but I'm not the linguistics professor.
I think that's a mildly popular theory, but I can't remember any of the supporting arguments.
I'd never heard it before. I'm assuming that, being a guy who is completely obsessed with language, has a grant to open a language school, and teaches college classes on teaching language, he probably knows more or less what he's talking about in terms of research.
So tell him :cn: cause I really want to see that!
In Guns, Germs, and Steel, they talk about the different kinds of language, from pictograms to alphanumeric, and the relative ages and paths of each style of language.
Although a good case is made for language starting out as a method of accounting/bookkeeping, there had to be a point where things got abstracted, where a headspace was required that combined two previously unrelated things in a meta sort of way.
It's not hard to imagine psychotropics having some hand in this. But like I said, I'm not sure if there's any concrete proof of this.
I'll bring it up when I see him on Sunday; maybe he can refer me to some books or something supporting it.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 03, 2010, 04:24:29 PM
Maybe it's as simple as people with better vocabularies being more likely to have money to spend on alcohol?
Possibly. Another factor is that people in college drink a lot more.
What I think is most puzzling, even, is not that the correlation is so strong and monotone-increasing, but seemingly linear!
A few quick googles don't tell me really what the WORDSUM test actually is, except that everybody quotes it as "correlating 0.8 with IQ", someone mentioned it's a quickie IQ test consisting of 10 multiple choice vocabulary questions. It's not even on Wikipedia. I just got back from Ju-jitsu so my [mental] google-fu is a bit weak right now.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 03, 2010, 08:04:47 PM
Mr. Language was talking about the birth of written language last night; he thinks there is a strong correlation between use of mind-altering substances and humans becoming literate.
He might just be a filthy hippie, but I'm not the linguistics professor.
Terrence McKenna wrote a book
Food of the Gods which is about hallucinogenic mushrooms, that supposedly triggered/activated/helped develop our language instincts. Though IIRC that was about language, not literacy.
I'm not aware of any actual evidence for this theory though, except McKenna's writings. Though maybe McKenna cites some stuff, I never read the book. I had the PDF on my old HD, so I guess it's easy to find on the torrents.
For all I know, this theory of his is based on his own research. I really have no idea, at all. He's Nerdly McNerdington.
Quote from: LMNO on May 03, 2010, 08:28:15 PM
In Guns, Germs, and Steel, they talk about the different kinds of language, from pictograms to alphanumeric, and the relative ages and paths of each style of language.
Although a good case is made for language starting out as a method of accounting/bookkeeping, there had to be a point where things got abstracted, where a headspace was required that combined two previously unrelated things in a meta sort of way.
It's not hard to imagine psychotropics having some hand in this. But like I said, I'm not sure if there's any concrete proof of this.
But as far as we know, written language has been invented independently four times throughout history, so it's completely possible that different cultures came to develop it through different means.
Quote from: Triple Zero on May 03, 2010, 08:45:09 PM
A few quick googles don't tell me really what the WORDSUM test actually is, except that everybody quotes it as "correlating 0.8 with IQ", someone mentioned it's a quickie IQ test consisting of 10 multiple choice vocabulary questions.
This seems to be correct from a paper I dug up about WORDSUM.
I must add to this electronic message board a posting thus: what a splendiferous happenstance my most keenly astute Dutchman, for at this very interval I am altogether inebriated from no less than a pair of quaffs off of my quite parlous alcoholic beverage and upon tempestuous rumination whether the original inquiry's concatenation (to which I now fully am experiencing its haecceity) was but a spatchcock of ultracrepidation that only tregetour would vilipend.
This seems entirely possible, however the control group of wasted drunks I know who aren't linguistically gripping or any other gripping at all makes me sceptical.
Trip beat me to mentioning McKenna's book, Food of the Gods. He makes some interesting and well researched conjecture about the diets of prehistoric humans, but sadly the book's science gets a little overshadowed by his main thesis, which basically talks about how psychotropic drugs are the utopian key to moving us away from alcohol and sugar based "Dominator Culture" (aka patriarchy).
As for the correlation between vocabulary size and drinking -- there are an astounding number of literary figures who have been alcoholics. Cliff Pickover has a few chapters about this in A Beginner's Guide to Immortality, in which he points out that people of unusual intelligence also tend to have some very abnormal traits or behaviors. Genius is a double-edged blade - it may make you excellent at something, but it also puts you far outside the statistical norm, into a very lonely place.
Educated people do NOT drink more than anyone else.
See NASCAR please.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 04:04:56 PM
Educated people do NOT drink more than anyone else.
See NASCAR please.
This is about drinking at all, not how much they drink.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 04:59:17 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 04:04:56 PM
Educated people do NOT drink more than anyone else.
See NASCAR please.
This is about drinking at all, not how much they drink.
Garbled syntax - he's positing that a larger number of uneducated people (broadly classified as NASCAR fans, perhaps unfairly) drink alcohol than the number of educated people.
As far as I'm concerned, the amount of people who drink can be considered a constant; however, educated people are probably more pompous about it, and therefore talk about drinking more.
Quote from: LMNO on May 04, 2010, 05:01:42 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 04:59:17 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 04:04:56 PM
Educated people do NOT drink more than anyone else.
See NASCAR please.
This is about drinking at all, not how much they drink.
Garbled syntax - he's positing that a larger number of uneducated people (broadly classified as NASCAR fans, perhaps unfairly) drink alcohol than the number of educated people.
As far as I'm concerned, the amount of people who drink can be considered a constant; however, educated people are probably more pompous about it, and therefore talk about drinking more.
Correct. Drinking beer that's been through a cow is as Nascar as bouncing your wife off the walls three times a week.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=72935§ionid=3510210
QuoteA new study has found that higher intelligence scores at age 10 are associated with higher levels of alcohol intake during adulthood.
According to the study published in the American Journal of Public Health, girls with higher IQ levels are more likely to develop alcohol drinking problems in adulthood.
The study showed that every 15-point increase in childhood mental ability score is associated with 1.38 and 1.17 times increase in drinking problems among women and men, respectively.
Previous studies had linked heavy drinking with certain genes. Two genes protect individuals against heavy drinking, the absence of which places individuals at a greater risk of alcoholism.
Fortunately for me, I've always been a dumbass. :lulz:
Dok,
Doesn't drink.
Quote from: Cramulus on May 04, 2010, 03:20:47 PM
Trip beat me to mentioning McKenna's book, Food of the Gods. He makes some interesting and well researched conjecture about the diets of prehistoric humans, but sadly the book's science gets a little overshadowed by his main thesis, which basically talks about how psychotropic drugs are the utopian key to moving us away from alcohol and sugar based "Dominator Culture" (aka patriarchy).
As for the correlation between vocabulary size and drinking -- there are an astounding number of literary figures who have been alcoholics. Cliff Pickover has a few chapters about this in A Beginner's Guide to Immortality, in which he points out that people of unusual intelligence also tend to have some very abnormal traits or behaviors. Genius is a double-edged blade - it may make you excellent at something, but it also puts you far outside the statistical norm, into a very lonely place.
This is another thing Mr. Language and I were discussing the other night; our personal correlations between drinking and writing. Both of us find that we are better and more prolific writers when we drink.
My social circle is mostly people of very high intelligence (I have no idea what their IQ scores are, I'm just basing this on their educational, career, and creative accomplishments... and of course, their vocabularies and ability to communicate), and I have often marveled somewhat at what a bunch of unabashed drunks they are, overall. It's interesting that this has been independently statistically observed, though I would hesitate to offer any theories on why it is. I bet Mr. Language will, though.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 05:20:37 PM
This is another thing Mr. Language and I were discussing the other night; our personal correlations between drinking and writing. Both of us find that we are better and more prolific writers when we drink.
I get more writing done when I'm fucked up on pills. I throw 90% of it away, but the remaining 10% is twice the amount I do when my head is clear.
Ok, I am not being clear. I posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks. I have been a blue collar hillybilly most of my life and also rubbed shoulders with highly educated people. It has been MY experience that a cowboy bar is a hell of a lot more fun on Friday night that a yuppie bar. Cowboys are out to have fun a d raise hell and the Yuppies seem to be more interested in impressing others with their wit. I bet a cowboy bar with a decent band sells a hell of a lot more alcohol than the yuppie bar does.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
To be honest, in my professional opinion, the data as it has been presented leaves a little to be desired. First, he doesn't look into economical variables, or at least he didn't publish them. My hunch is that may be a variable influencing the trend. Second, what does "drink" mean? Is it defined as someone who drinks regularly? Does it include people who tried alcohol once or twice but no longer drink?
It's clear from what he writes that the trend cuts across the variables he did discuss which is primarily gender, religion, and region, but this means he is missing something, or multiple somethings.
Also, it would be helpful to have more information on WORDSUM. Who takes it? Where? My guess is that is also a confounding variable.
WORDSUM is part of the General Social Survey where he gets all his data. This is a big national survey done every few years (16 times between 1974 and 2007) with in home interviews.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
Ok, I am not being clear. I posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks. I have been a blue collar hillybilly most of my life and also rubbed shoulders with highly educated people. It has been MY experience that a cowboy bar is a hell of a lot more fun on Friday night that a yuppie bar. Cowboys are out to have fun a d raise hell and the Yuppies seem to be more interested in impressing others with their wit. I bet a cowboy bar with a decent band sells a hell of a lot more alcohol than the yuppie bar does.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
'uneducated people who go to bars' is a hell of a bias when you're talking about drinking habits.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 04, 2010, 05:35:03 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 05:20:37 PM
This is another thing Mr. Language and I were discussing the other night; our personal correlations between drinking and writing. Both of us find that we are better and more prolific writers when we drink.
I get more writing done when I'm fucked up on pills. I throw 90% of it away, but the remaining 10% is twice the amount I do when my head is clear.
Yes, this factor. Sometimes, or even often, taking something like alcohol or pills seems to knock out my little "this is no good" self-censor, which means that I write a lot of crap and a lot of incomplete ideas, but even so the amount of good stuff that gets through is vastly increased.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 06:08:39 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 04, 2010, 05:35:03 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 05:20:37 PM
This is another thing Mr. Language and I were discussing the other night; our personal correlations between drinking and writing. Both of us find that we are better and more prolific writers when we drink.
I get more writing done when I'm fucked up on pills. I throw 90% of it away, but the remaining 10% is twice the amount I do when my head is clear.
Yes, this factor. Sometimes, or even often, taking something like alcohol or pills seems to knock out my little "this is no good" self-censor, which means that I write a lot of crap and a lot of incomplete ideas, but even so the amount of good stuff that gets through is vastly increased.
Yep. My problem is that I think everything I write is crap, so I need the old inhibitions lowered a bit.
This article contains more detail: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/news/researchers-suggest-iq-alcohol-correlation-1.849034
but I'd like to see the study itself.
I also think it's worth noting that while there may be creative benefits to alcohol and/or drug consumption, absolutely no one is saying that drinking heavily is a good thing. If anything, if this correlation is confirmed with future studies, it should set off alarm bells because it would mean that high-IQ children are at increased risk for alcoholism.
Also, Hawk, "yuppies in trendy bars" aren't necessarily smarter than "NASCAR rednecks". They're just from a different economic demographic. Your observation is essentially irrelevant.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 06:07:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
Ok, I am not being clear. I posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks. I have been a blue collar hillybilly most of my life and also rubbed shoulders with highly educated people. It has been MY experience that a cowboy bar is a hell of a lot more fun on Friday night that a yuppie bar. Cowboys are out to have fun a d raise hell and the Yuppies seem to be more interested in impressing others with their wit. I bet a cowboy bar with a decent band sells a hell of a lot more alcohol than the yuppie bar does.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
'uneducated people who go to bars' is a hell of a bias when you're talking about drinking habits.
Wut? Where did I say 'uneducated'?
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 06:22:14 PM
This article contains more detail: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/news/researchers-suggest-iq-alcohol-correlation-1.849034
but I'd like to see the study itself.
I also think it's worth noting that while there may be creative benefits to alcohol and/or drug consumption, absolutely no one is saying that drinking heavily is a good thing. If anything, if this correlation is confirmed with future studies, it should set off alarm bells because it would mean that high-IQ children are at increased risk for alcoholism.
Also, Hawk, "yuppies in trendy bars" aren't necessarily smarter than "NASCAR rednecks". They're just from a different economic demographic. Your observation is essentially irrelevant.
College.
And I'm amazed this study didn't address that. They kind of get at it by looking at professions, but it is not directly addressed. But I think if the researchers had looked at attending a 4 year college as a factor, it would have shed some light on their results.
Kids with higher mental abilities are more likely to attend a 4-year college and colleges, as we know, are hot-beds for social drinking.
So I don't think it is the IQ, my hunch is it is more to do with whether or not the kid attends college.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 06:05:16 PM
WORDSUM is part of the General Social Survey where he gets all his data. This is a big national survey done every few years (16 times between 1974 and 2007) with in home interviews.
How do they choose the homes?
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 06:22:14 PM
This article contains more detail: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/news/researchers-suggest-iq-alcohol-correlation-1.849034
but I'd like to see the study itself.
I also think it's worth noting that while there may be creative benefits to alcohol and/or drug consumption, absolutely no one is saying that drinking heavily is a good thing. If anything, if this correlation is confirmed with future studies, it should set off alarm bells because it would mean that high-IQ children are at increased risk for alcoholism.
Also, Hawk, "yuppies in trendy bars" aren't necessarily smarter than "NASCAR rednecks". They're just from a different economic demographic. Your observation is essentially irrelevant.
I in no way intended to imply a difference in level of education includes a difference in intelligence. Many factors can come into play when it comes for the opportunity for a higher education.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on May 04, 2010, 06:36:39 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 06:22:14 PM
This article contains more detail: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/news/researchers-suggest-iq-alcohol-correlation-1.849034
but I'd like to see the study itself.
I also think it's worth noting that while there may be creative benefits to alcohol and/or drug consumption, absolutely no one is saying that drinking heavily is a good thing. If anything, if this correlation is confirmed with future studies, it should set off alarm bells because it would mean that high-IQ children are at increased risk for alcoholism.
Also, Hawk, "yuppies in trendy bars" aren't necessarily smarter than "NASCAR rednecks". They're just from a different economic demographic. Your observation is essentially irrelevant.
College.
And I'm amazed this study didn't address that. They kind of get at it by looking at professions, but it is not directly addressed. But I think if the researchers had looked at attending a 4 year college as a factor, it would have shed some light on their results.
Kids with higher mental abilities are more likely to attend a 4-year college and colleges, as we know, are hot-beds for social drinking.
So I don't think it is the IQ, my hunch is it is more to do with whether or not the kid attends college.
I haven't found the text to the actual study, do you have a link?
Quote from: LMNO on May 04, 2010, 05:01:42 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 04:59:17 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 04:04:56 PM
Educated people do NOT drink more than anyone else.
See NASCAR please.
This is about drinking at all, not how much they drink.
Garbled syntax - he's positing that a larger number of uneducated people (broadly classified as NASCAR fans, perhaps unfairly) drink alcohol than the number of educated people.
Drinking with a group of people encourages story-telling (especially about other times those people got drunk), and also ecourages the development of 'jargon' specific to that group of drinkers. I can guarantee that NASCAR fans have jargon that you won't even begin to grok the origin/meaning of until you're buzzed and screaming it at a car that's been turning left for an hour.
Garbled Syntax indeed.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 06:07:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
Ok, I am not being clear. I posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks. I have been a blue collar hillybilly most of my life and also rubbed shoulders with highly educated people. It has been MY experience that a cowboy bar is a hell of a lot more fun on Friday night that a yuppie bar. Cowboys are out to have fun a d raise hell and the Yuppies seem to be more interested in impressing others with their wit. I bet a cowboy bar with a decent band sells a hell of a lot more alcohol than the yuppie bar does.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
'uneducated people who go to bars' is a hell of a bias when you're talking about drinking habits.
Wut? Where did I say 'uneducated'?
QuoteI posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks.
That would imply you felt the yuppie bars are full of the educated and the cowboy bars aren't.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 07:04:21 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on May 04, 2010, 06:36:39 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 06:22:14 PM
This article contains more detail: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/news/researchers-suggest-iq-alcohol-correlation-1.849034
but I'd like to see the study itself.
I also think it's worth noting that while there may be creative benefits to alcohol and/or drug consumption, absolutely no one is saying that drinking heavily is a good thing. If anything, if this correlation is confirmed with future studies, it should set off alarm bells because it would mean that high-IQ children are at increased risk for alcoholism.
Also, Hawk, "yuppies in trendy bars" aren't necessarily smarter than "NASCAR rednecks". They're just from a different economic demographic. Your observation is essentially irrelevant.
College.
And I'm amazed this study didn't address that. They kind of get at it by looking at professions, but it is not directly addressed. But I think if the researchers had looked at attending a 4 year college as a factor, it would have shed some light on their results.
Kids with higher mental abilities are more likely to attend a 4-year college and colleges, as we know, are hot-beds for social drinking.
So I don't think it is the IQ, my hunch is it is more to do with whether or not the kid attends college.
I haven't found the text to the actual study, do you have a link?
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/98/12/2237
But you need to pay to see the entire article and I don't have access.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 07:19:28 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 06:07:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
Ok, I am not being clear. I posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks. I have been a blue collar hillybilly most of my life and also rubbed shoulders with highly educated people. It has been MY experience that a cowboy bar is a hell of a lot more fun on Friday night that a yuppie bar. Cowboys are out to have fun a d raise hell and the Yuppies seem to be more interested in impressing others with their wit. I bet a cowboy bar with a decent band sells a hell of a lot more alcohol than the yuppie bar does.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
'uneducated people who go to bars' is a hell of a bias when you're talking about drinking habits.
Wut? Where did I say 'uneducated'?
QuoteI posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks.
That would imply you felt the yuppie bars are full of the educated and the cowboy bars aren't.
Why?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 07:19:28 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 06:07:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 05:43:59 PM
Ok, I am not being clear. I posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks. I have been a blue collar hillybilly most of my life and also rubbed shoulders with highly educated people. It has been MY experience that a cowboy bar is a hell of a lot more fun on Friday night that a yuppie bar. Cowboys are out to have fun a d raise hell and the Yuppies seem to be more interested in impressing others with their wit. I bet a cowboy bar with a decent band sells a hell of a lot more alcohol than the yuppie bar does.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
'uneducated people who go to bars' is a hell of a bias when you're talking about drinking habits.
Wut? Where did I say 'uneducated'?
QuoteI posit the amount of education does not in any way pertain to how much one drinks.
That would imply you felt the yuppie bars are full of the educated and the cowboy bars aren't.
Any implication of such is yours and not mine. And just for fun what would you estimate the difference between the two types of bar average as far as education? Please keep this in context with
higher education which was my actual statement.
warning!
joe sixpack vs northeastern elitism thread incoming!
brace for impact in 4... 3... 2...
Quote from: Cramulus on May 04, 2010, 07:41:47 PM
warning!
joe sixpack vs northeastern elitism thread incoming!
brace for impact in 4... 3... 2...
Am I a bad panda?
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 07:39:55 PM
Any implication of such is yours and not mine.
You were talking about the relationship between education and drinking... then you talked about the difference between yuppie and cowboy bars, and the two topics were not in any way related.
I see.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 07:45:33 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 07:39:55 PM
Any implication of such is yours and not mine.
You were talking about the relationship between education and drinking... then you talked about the difference between yuppie and cowboy bars, and the two topics were not in any way related.
I see.
And as for my question to you?
Fuck the semantics argument though, my point is that you're only considering people who go to bars.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 07:46:45 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 07:45:33 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 07:39:55 PM
Any implication of such is yours and not mine.
You were talking about the relationship between education and drinking... then you talked about the difference between yuppie and cowboy bars, and the two topics were not in any way related.
I see.
And as for my question to you?
You'll have to ask it again, it made no sense.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 07:47:31 PM
Fuck the semantics argument though, my point is that you're only considering people who go to bars.
To you.
Jesus H Christ.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 07:48:44 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 07:47:31 PM
Fuck the semantics argument though, my point is that you're only considering people who go to bars.
To you.
I see, you talked about people who go to bars, but you meant something completely different. Clearly I should stop trying to know what you mean based on the words you say.
Okay, which one of you is implying that cowboy bars are populated with idiots, and which one of you are implying that yuppie bars are full of idiots?
No wimping out. Speak your piece.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 04, 2010, 07:56:50 PM
Okay, which one of you is implying that cowboy bars are populated with idiots, and which one of you are implying that yuppie bars are full of idiots?
No wimping out. Speak your piece.
Neither. I will go public by saying there are more that likely more Ivy League graduates in yuppie bars however. Again Dok the lack of opportunity for a higher education does IN NO WAY imply idiocy, but instead simply a lack of opportunity.
Requiem, I don't put subliminal or hidden messages in what I write. I try to be as plain and to the point as possible.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 08:02:01 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 04, 2010, 07:56:50 PM
Okay, which one of you is implying that cowboy bars are populated with idiots, and which one of you are implying that yuppie bars are full of idiots?
No wimping out. Speak your piece.
Neither.
Okay. Requia?
I have no idea what kind of people go to cowboy bars.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 08:22:56 PM
I have no idea what kind of people go to cowboy bars.
Okay, so neither of you has an opinion on which group is dumber.
Then what are you arguing about?
Semantics.
I am however *trying* to argue that Hawk can't base knowledge on people's drinking habits based around people who go to bars. Because that's a *huge* sample bias given the topic.
I'll try to re-phrase:
1. Intelligence is only mildy correlated to level of education, and that correlation is not a proven causation.
2. The ratio of intelligent to non-intelligent people (disregarding level of education) is more or less constant regardless of demographic.
3. The ratio of drinkers to non-drinkers is also more or less constant regardless of demographic.
4. For reasons that may or may not be explained in the OP report (which we can't easily obtain), alcohol consumption is correlated with a higher level of intelligence. Again, the correlation is in no way a causation.
So let's stop talking about how "smart" or "intelligent" or "educated" certain demographics are, ok?
Dumb is a universal constant.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 08:26:50 PM
Semantics.
I am however *trying* to argue that Hawk can't base knowledge on people's drinking habits based around people who go to bars. Because that's a *huge* sample bias given the topic.
I am dense. Are you saying that people who go to bars don't determine who drinks? I would certainly see your point if I had said Baptists drink more than Catholics.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 08:26:50 PM
Semantics.
I am however *trying* to argue that Hawk can't base knowledge on people's drinking habits based around people who go to bars. Because that's a *huge* sample bias given the topic.
Should he have used AA meetings instead?
Quote from: LMNO on May 04, 2010, 08:33:06 PM
Dumb is a universal constant condition.
Fixed for accuracy.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 08:26:50 PM
Semantics.
I am however *trying* to argue that Hawk can't base knowledge on people's drinking habits based around people who go to bars. Because that's a *huge* sample bias given the topic.
Hold on... Are you saying that only people of a specific intelligence level go to bars?
I'd still like to see the text of the actual study. What I have read so far is that they found eight thousand something public school kids at age ten, tested their intelligence, and then went back 20 years later and surveyed them for alcohol consumption, then noting that the kids who scored higher on the intelligence tests were more likely to be in management/administrative work and also more likely to drink heavily.
This raises a whole lot of questions. I doubt a study like this is meant to be a stopping point, but a beginning point for more studies.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 09:16:41 PM
I'd still like to see the text of the actual study. What I have read so far is that they found eight thousand something public school kids at age ten, tested their intelligence, and then went back 20 years later and surveyed them for alcohol consumption, then noting that the kids who scored higher on the intelligence tests were more likely to be in management/administrative work and also more likely to drink heavily.
This raises a whole lot of questions. I doubt a study like this is meant to be a stopping point, but a beginning point for more studies.
How about a study that claims stressful jobs can lead to heavy drinking?
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 09:45:12 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 04, 2010, 09:16:41 PM
I'd still like to see the text of the actual study. What I have read so far is that they found eight thousand something public school kids at age ten, tested their intelligence, and then went back 20 years later and surveyed them for alcohol consumption, then noting that the kids who scored higher on the intelligence tests were more likely to be in management/administrative work and also more likely to drink heavily.
This raises a whole lot of questions. I doubt a study like this is meant to be a stopping point, but a beginning point for more studies.
How about a study that claims stressful jobs can lead to heavy drinking?
First there would need to be a study identifying stressful jobs.
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 08:33:59 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 08:26:50 PM
Semantics.
I am however *trying* to argue that Hawk can't base knowledge on people's drinking habits based around people who go to bars. Because that's a *huge* sample bias given the topic.
I am dense. Are you saying that people who go to bars don't determine who drinks?
Yes. Almost all the people in bars are drinkers.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 11:39:06 PM
Quote from: Hawk on May 04, 2010, 08:33:59 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 08:26:50 PM
Semantics.
I am however *trying* to argue that Hawk can't base knowledge on people's drinking habits based around people who go to bars. Because that's a *huge* sample bias given the topic.
I am dense. Are you saying that people who go to bars don't determine who drinks?
Yes. Almost all the people in bars are drinkers.
So are a lot of people who don't go to bars.
True, but the point is that if you only look at people in bars, then you will find a higher number of drinkers than if you look at all people in a demographic, regardless of whether or not they go to bars.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 11:48:51 PM
True, but the point is that if you only look at people in bars, then you will find a higher number of drinkers than if you look at all people in a demographic, regardless of whether or not they go to bars.
Yes, that is very true, although it has nothing really do do with the study. Or is that the point you are making? I may be a little lost.
It has to do with Hawk saying he doesn't think education and drinking habits are correlated, then telling us about the bars he's been too in order to back this up.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 11:59:00 PM
It has to do with Hawk saying he doesn't think education and drinking habits are correlated, then telling us about the bars he's been too in order to back this up.
Oh, OK, so basically you were saying that observing behavior in bars is irrelevant to the study. Gotcha!
Somebody mentioned a possible link between College and drinking, so I ran the GSS data with education (highest grade completed) as a control.
In the high school graduate/no college range, the correlation is still there.
There /is/ a correlation with highest level of education and alcohol though. 74.6 of high school grads drink, 82.3% of the college grads do, only 54% of people without a high school diploma drink.
That is really interesting.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 11:48:51 PM
True, but the point is that if you only look at people in bars, then you will find a higher number of drinkers than if you look at all people in a demographic, regardless of whether or not they go to bars.
Yeah. So you take that group, and figure out what their education levels are. I fail to see a problem.
Hmm, point, though that data was not provided.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 05, 2010, 01:21:11 AM
Hmm, point, though that data was not provided.
We maintenance geeks are used to looking at things all backwards.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 05, 2010, 01:15:44 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 04, 2010, 11:48:51 PM
True, but the point is that if you only look at people in bars, then you will find a higher number of drinkers than if you look at all people in a demographic, regardless of whether or not they go to bars.
Yeah. So you take that group, and figure out what their education levels are. I fail to see a problem.
There are a number of problems. For one thing, the study was on IQ and drinking, not education level and drinking. Also you may be accidentally excluding introverted people, and people who fall at either end of the income spectrum; those who either don't have enough money to go to a bar, or who have enough money that they are more likely to attend private parties.
The original study probably provides all KINDS of interesting information and correlations not covered by the rather skimpy article.
That article is the study, sortof. Its using data from a different study. There was a link to that (where I got my information on high school grads) all the data, and tools to plot and so forth, can be found here (http://sda.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/hsda?harcsda+gss08nw).
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 05, 2010, 12:29:57 AM
Somebody mentioned a possible link between College and drinking, so I ran the GSS data with education (highest grade completed) as a control.
In the high school graduate/no college range, the correlation is still there.
There /is/ a correlation with highest level of education and alcohol though. 74.6 of high school grads drink, 82.3% of the college grads do, only 54% of people without a high school diploma drink.
The clincher would be to look at the cohort of people who graduate from high school but don't go on to college.
A lot of heavy drinking habits are established in college. It is a social event. In high school it is as well, but there are more barriers because kids are living under their parents roofs and, well, they are in high school. The opportunities for unsupervised social drinking are fewer compared to college dorms where you are away from your parents, and there isn't a lot of effort put into discouraging underage drinking.
Now, the person who doesn't go to college may have a circle of friends and engage in social drinking. But this person is going to need some kind of income which means they will likely have some kind of job which, again, will provide less opportunities for social drinking.
So, basically, in a nut shell, when you are looking at mental capacity and drinking, what I think you are really seeing isn't necessarily the IQ itself making one prone to drinking, but the opportunities for that person (e.g. College) laying the groundwork for more opportunities to engage in heavy and social drinking.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 05, 2010, 01:21:11 AM
Hmm, point, though that data was not provided.
Here I must agree. My only data is personal observations. Here in we have a place called . It is about 6 blocks of mostly bars close to . Even I don't go there on the weekends. ESPECIALLY when plays here. I am way past the puking and fighting stage and I have already seen plenty of boobs in my lifetime.
Well, what about any of the "restaurant rows" in any major city?
For example, in Boston's South End, there is a four to six block area that is packed with medium-to-high end eateries. And everyone there is drinking. To be sure, most aren't binge drinking (which I assume is happening in Aggieville), but they are drinking. And unlike Aggieville, those places do heavy business every night of the week, not just on weekends.
Or, perhaps we could take my parents as an example. They have had wine with dinner every night of the week for the past 40 years. Can't rule out that type of drinker, either.
That goes back to one of my earlier questions/comments.
How you define "drinking" matters. You can't really lump the casual drinker in with the weekend social drinker with the 7 day a week-drink it like it's water drinker.
In my line of work of course we look at adolescent drinking and the general idea is that any kind of drinking isn't a good thing. However, we still have different strata of adolescent drinkers. We look at life time use and ask kids how many times they've ever used alcohol. We then look at frequency by asking if they drank in the past 30 days, and then we ask about binge drinking, drinking more 5 or more drinks in a sitting.
You need to do that same thing with adults, I think, to get more meaningful data. So what I'd really like to know, going back to this IQ/WORDSUM thing, is that how many of the 70-80% of high scoring WORDSUM drinkers binge drink? How many of them just have wine with dinner? How many of them just have a few during the weekend?
Wasn't there a study back in the dark ages about more intelligent people being more likely to use drugs simply out of boredom? I have a formal 9th grade education with a GED and some junior college. I drink 7 evenings a week on average of about 3 -4 drinks per night. I am reasonably intelligent but sadly under educated.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on May 04, 2010, 05:54:00 PM
To be honest, in my professional opinion, the data as it has been presented leaves a little to be desired. First, he doesn't look into economical variables, or at least he didn't publish them. My hunch is that may be a variable influencing the trend. Second, what does "drink" mean? Is it defined as someone who drinks regularly? Does it include people who tried alcohol once or twice but no longer drink?
It's clear from what he writes that the trend cuts across the variables he did discuss which is primarily gender, religion, and region, but this means he is missing something, or multiple somethings.
Also, it would be helpful to have more information on WORDSUM. Who takes it? Where? My guess is that is also a confounding variable.
Yeah absolutely.
I'm not arguing this article shows that drinking alcohol makes you higher class, or smart (duhh :) )
It's just the correlation .. even with other variables influencing the trend, it's interesting to say the least. I know correlation is not causation, so it's interesting to wonder about what is really going on.
One thing, obviously, is college. I think I said that already? (maybe I just thought it) People drink a lot in college.
Another interesting thing is what Nigel said about how high intelligence often seems to come with strange quirks, cause you're a statistical outlier. I know there are some people that are inherently (genetically?) more prone to addiction than others. I'm probably one of those myself, I'm good at observing my own thoughts so I take care of that (it's hard). It wouldnt surprise me if certain types of high intelligence (but not all, some people are just smart), correlate with prone-ness to addiction, and alcohol being the most legal most prevalent hard-drug of choice, drinking.
So it doesn't mean you'd be smarter or more creative when drinking, but rather that being a smart and creative person, has an elevated probability of drinking.
I gotten a long way since college, but still I battle addictions. Mostly smoking btw, but damn fuck I dont wanna be an alcoholic, but I feel I got the possibility in me.
Then don't drink. For real.
There are other ways to pass the time.
I'm interested in the assumption everyone seems to be stuck to, that for the most part only people of particularly high IQ attend college.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 05, 2010, 06:18:03 PM
I'm interested in the assumption everyone seems to be stuck to, that for the most part only people of particularly high IQ attend college.
This is an excellent point.
When I was in university, I knew plenty of dumbfucks.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on May 05, 2010, 02:07:19 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 05, 2010, 12:29:57 AM
Somebody mentioned a possible link between College and drinking, so I ran the GSS data with education (highest grade completed) as a control.
In the high school graduate/no college range, the correlation is still there.
There /is/ a correlation with highest level of education and alcohol though. 74.6 of high school grads drink, 82.3% of the college grads do, only 54% of people without a high school diploma drink.
The clincher would be to look at the cohort of people who graduate from high school but don't go on to college.
That's exactly what I looked at. It is not admittedly, quite so shocking as the chart in the article.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 05, 2010, 06:18:58 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 05, 2010, 06:18:03 PM
I'm interested in the assumption everyone seems to be stuck to, that for the most part only people of particularly high IQ attend college.
This is an excellent point.
When I was in university, I knew plenty of dumbfucks.
Yep. Dipshits go to college too, especially nowadays when your parents paying for college is the best indicator for going to college.
Actually, a while ago I read an article that talked about how ability is a factor, but ability is not always directly linked to IQ, and that the average IQ of people getting an undergrad degree has dropped 9 points in the last 30 years. There was also something about how people with a below average IQ are likely to struggle in college, but if it's average or even slightly above average they usually do just fine. I imagine that has something to do with most things in life being oriented to the average, which is not really a bad thing if it helps the majority of people be successful at fending for themselves.
I dunno about IQ, but if we consider a (very subjective) idea of "smartness", then yeah. Absolutely.
Just as much dumbfucks in college, and just as much smart people outside of it. (please notice I'm not saying either one has less of either)
I went to college for a long time, it took me a while to realize this fact. It kind of came shortly after the realization that all fraternity-hazing-club-peoples are not all assholes either (maybe a bit rarer, but not all of them by a long shot) and that the average guy anywhere might just be fucking smart, especially on the life-experience front. Also when I got involved in Discordia btw. Might be something to do with--dare I say it--monkeys.
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 05, 2010, 06:18:03 PM
I'm interested in the assumption everyone seems to be stuck to, that for the most part only people of particularly high IQ attend college.
It's not about
only, it's about
more likely. Theoretically, someone with greater mental capabilities is going to do better in high school. People who do better in high school are going to
tend to go to college in higher percentages. Obviously people who struggle a little more in high school still manage to go to college, but percentage wise, it most certainly is going to be in lower numbers. Smart kids get scholarships that help pay for the college. That's another factor.
But when it comes to this kind of data analysis, you aren't looking for absolutes and "onlys", you want to look at the "tends to". And even then, it isn't about finding a silver bullet or the "eureka", it's just another piece of the context.
Another bar in the cell, if you will.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 05, 2010, 06:18:58 PM
Quote from: The Lord and Lady Omnibus Fuck on May 05, 2010, 06:18:03 PM
I'm interested in the assumption everyone seems to be stuck to, that for the most part only people of particularly high IQ attend college.
This is an excellent point.
When I was in university, I knew plenty of dumbfucks.
I've been to a couple of different community colleges over the last couple of years, and even attempting generous assumptions about other people, the fact in my perspective, is that college students are mostly average people who realize the importance of an education. There are a couple brilliant people, usually one or two in a classroom. Students, even in a high-brow elective like social psychology 300 have the standard range of IQ.
Hmm, this reminded me of an article that I read a few weeks ago:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/study-finds-graduates--to-a-greater-degree--are-unhappy-20100420-sru3.html
TLDR, the article says that university graduates are less happy than people who didn't go to uni at the age of 25 (ie just after graduates have entered the workforce).
The paper it's based on is here:
http://www.ncver.edu.au/lsay_pubs/research/LSAY_2239.pdf
That's interesting.
I'm interested in any research (not anecdotes) regarding college graduates and IQ, drinking and IQ, etc... if you happen upon any, would you post them here? Especially the source study rather than synopsis articles.