Rand is a tricky specimen. Calls for tricky tactics. Posting for Zing, rate me 1 or whatever Idc
I think he knew that. god, i hope he did.
When you get your undergraduate degree you always have 1+ majors and can if you so desire pursue a minor. I wasn't suggesting he was under 18 years old :P
I think he's well over 18 years old.
Minor?
Hardly!
Philosophy major?
I might be a shitty player these days, but I still can grind people down with mindless argumentation!
Thanks Otoron, that's what I wanted to say.
I concede the point.
Also, while the correlation might be strong, I would contend that if you control for a variety of other factors, it's gonna drop in substantive and statistical significance fairly quickly.
One substantial problem is that you are assuming the universe of cases to be non-immigrants in the United States. That's a very skewed sample of the entire population, given that most of your cases were not trained in multiple languages from an early age.
In fact, we have reams of research showing that you can teach most anyone multiple languages if you start early enough.
At later ages, it is fundamentally a function of rote memorization and practice... neither of which is closely related to what we say when we mean 'intelligence.' It's like (although not perfectly comparable, of course) someone who knows shitloads of random facts, be they baseball statistics or historical dates. Recall that accurate IQ tests are supposed to be accurate regardless of the subject's age, even though older people 'know' a lot more than kids.
I've dealt with so many idiots who can speak multiple languages--some who can speak four or five--that the idea that being fluent in two is somehow evidence of intelligence, when it is (typically) a function of opportunity, is absurd.
Nope, I've seen plenty of complete idiots that were bilingual.
I think the correlation is stronger than you're suggesting, Otoron, and while it's insufficient to come to a definite conclusion, being fluently bi+lingual suggests some degree of reasonable/high intelligence.
While it's not enough to generate a theoretical certainty, knowing more languages certainly does offer a good basis for speculation. (it's certainly more reliable than 'Kobe Bryant frequently scores double digits regardless who he's playing against, so it stands to reason that in his next game, in 2 games in n games he will probably score in the double digits' -- which is definitely a speculation I'd get behind. I suppose your rational standards for belief are higher than mine, or you have some compelling other piece of data which I don't share which is more compelling that the support for my speculation.)
While knowledge of languages might trend with intelligence in some broad sense, I think we can all admit that it's hardly a necessary/sufficient relationship. So your argument is meaningless, Tireless.
And if you want to compare a top-notch competitive gymnast with someone who knows languages, you should probably be comparing them to someone whose mastery of languages pushes into the double digits.
And it's not hard to be a competitive gymnast if you started when you were 4. But most of us didn't, and gymnasts are goddamn impressive. So are linguists.
It's not hard to be fluent in two languages if you were taught them as a child by your parents.
Sure. I'll agree with you on everything you said, Pounder. (re:not bright person -- I'll grant you that you have sufficient grounds to make the claim, though in agreeing to that I don't also make the claim myself. Among other things, I present as a counterargument that Rand is basically fluent in at least two languages -- something that cannot be said of most of us.)
Hahahaha, Tireless, I could post some easy logs to discredit you in about a second. He's good, I never said that, but good can mean different things. I respect his brother much much more on an an intelligence standard for reasons people who look at the two objectively would understand. Rand IS a good killer, he is NOT an amazingly bright person however. They are not mutually exclusive. Tireless, you are for instance the exact opposite. Your intelligence is pretty sound, your player killing instincts at least when I partied with you were fairly horrible (granted you can work on those a lot easier than general intelligence ability). Myself, I tend to know my quickness to reaction varies rediculously too much to be a good killer, but my knowledge of the game and reasonable ability to think make me a fairly good defensive player against PK. I could go on rating other pkers, but people would just argue against the subjectiveness of my ratings. I might put that on my site when I feel the urge to fix it. :P
Ugliest. Prompt. Ever.
Rand is far and away better than most of his critics. Yes, that means you.
its not his fault he sucks:O
It's not at all hard to outthink Rand, but its still hilarious when it happens. :P
Hilarious.
Enjoyed the read.b
I love expert comments like Mordhred's. Let me say it to you with your own words: STFU NOOB!
fdl poor rand, switching sides with the newbie
funny log, but its not a 6 you weirdos
Correct Shabba, a failed attempy by Rand is always funny.
That's pretty funny :p