What does "conditioning" mean? Does it mean classi

101 iq here, what does your pic mean?

Probably conditioning in the sense of following the status quo from authority, latest trends and whatnot

I think its referring to classical conditioning

Think about it like this, normalfags all tend to behave the same, right? That's because their behaviour is easily influenced by others, they tend to follow the majority

They are easily conditioned into following certain behaviours.

Just like a lot of people here.

Remember to always be critical of everything. Never be a slave.

>>26348276
Surely not everyone <145 IQ is a slave to conditioning though?

>>26348093
Huh, that's a long time that I saw that picture.

Not on 4chan, on its original page.

It's from the high IQ people profiles page, isn't it?


Either way, OP, I recommend Paul Cooijmans.

http://paulcooijmans.com/genius/subgroups_of_traits_clarified.html

>>26348314
You'd be surprised.

Ever wonder why everybody is so left wing? And why they all tend to have the same opinions?

You could say they've been conditioned by the media. If done subtly, it can affect even the not intelligent of people.

>>26348314
Surely you realize that pointing out existence of exceptions is, to quote Imhotep, a 'pedestrian reply'?

>>26348329
I linked the page in the OP

>>26348285
>Remember to always be critical of everything.

Reminder that the stupider one is, the more one stresses the importance of critical thought.

It's not even the Dunning-Kruger, it's just that one lacks better, more fitting remarks, regarding the specifics of the system (legal, mechanical, technical, transportative, biological, any at all) in question, so one's reduced in one's preaching to blanket stressings of rationality is important.

>>26348435

>transportative

kill yourself pseudo-intellectual retard

>>26348480
It's quicker to coin a word than to look it up. I could've said 'transit' or 'transportive' had I been a native speaker and thought of those.

>>26348435
this would make more sense if we weren't talking in general about things in the first place. I'm sure he could elaborate on what he meant by critical thinking in each subject he was referring to.
dick

>>26348554
Sure that particular poster is intelligent and able to elaborate, but the general relationship I described still stands.

>General IQ thread I guess, for the millionth time this week

Here's a new test for robots. Supposedly it should be "advanced" and for those who do well in other tests. You can write your answers and check them at the next page.

http://sacft.tripod.com/

I used about one hour to solve them and scored 134. Afterwards I've solved most of them and wondered if they really are as hard as supposed.

>>26348505

You could've known what the fuck you were talking about instead of spouting bullshit... but that would require critical thinking, now wouldn't it.

>>26348644
Reminder that erroneous implications that I think myself intelligent only because I'm contributing to an IQ thread are... very very common. My IQ is 92.

Back to the topic, I don't think that Low IQ necessarily means that somebody is more prone to conditioning because the very nature of conditioning is to hijack behavior to induce a desired effect. Even high IQ people can be conditioned. I don't think by the strict definition of classical conditioning, somebody can't really just resist it.

>>26348908
Well, it does say "and often above" in the OP picture so yes high IQ people can be conditioned but not as easily as lower-IQ people.

>>26348908
This is true.

Think of it this way:

IQ is your capacity to think; 'conditionability' is your vulnerability to yield to social suggestions what to spend your IQ on thinking about.