What do you think about this image?

>>7792088
It make me think, "I wonder if this png can be optimized?"

File: y.gif (28KB, 741x643px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 741x643px

>>7792094
Here you go 1/3rd of the size.

>>7792088
>What do you think about this image?
I can't think
femanon here btw

File: Tassle.jpg (823KB, 1200x2005px) Image search: [Google]

823KB, 1200x2005px

>>7792106
>femanon here btw
Show tassles or GTFO

>>7792088
physics here. there werent many chicks, but they were all top 20% of class. where does business/commerce/finance go? most dots are missing names.

>>7792088
This is not sexist. Women objectively have lower IQs. Not abismal but they tend to hang out in the absolute average of IQs.

So, any career that is liked by women, will have its average IQ decreased as a result.

>>7792103
Looks like dogshit, but I'm still gonna save it

>>7792088
Why no stats on biology or chemistry?

>>7792138
Its prolly one of the dots in the middle.

>>7792134
You saved almost 40kb of bandwidth. You're welcome.

>almost 50% females in math

>>7792088
it's projected by SAT scores

so it's bullshit

t. physics major

>>7792153
>Jealous that mathematicians are the only STEM demographic that constantly gets pussy.

>iq-estimates-by-intended-college-major
>"INTENDED"

So they're using high school students. This graphic is effectively useless.

File: 1409917386434.png (23KB, 741x643px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 741x643px

>>7792088
>posting a shop

I think it's proof of the fact that all the formula-fags (aka engineers) can suck this big fat philosophy dick!

>>7792196
Not just that, they're estimating their intelligence using their quantitative SAT scores.

>>7792088
>covert IQ thread

have a sage. and a report

File: optimiziest.png (5KB, 741x643px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 741x643px

>>7792103
even smaller

File: 1453086134588s (1).jpg (2KB, 125x108px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x108px

>>7792243
even smaller

The only thing I see is that profession is completely unrelated to inherent intelligence.

It appears that all men have 150 IQ, and all women have 90 IQ, and that the average IQ for a profession is completely dependent on relative quantity of ovaries.

File: optimiziest2.png (2KB, 480x390px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 480x390px

>>7792244
~same filesize but readable, faggot

I have no idea how you can say that philosophy students have a high IQ. Most philosophical ideas sound like they were created with massive drug use - especially the way they are described.

>>7792276
Because it takes a ton of intellectual labour to decipher what the fuck most philosophical texts are trying to say, and writing philosophy in an obscure enough way so that nobody can tell you're full of shit is just as difficult.

>>7792281
I'm positive that certain philosophers were completely full of shit, and self aware of it, but nobody ever caught on.

>>7792281
Is it just me or does philosophy get more shallow as you progress. Like you start out with obvious stuff like "you can't know anything xD" and you end up with basically dissecting political systems.

>>7792281

If it takes so much intellectual labor to decipher something that is written so obscurely, is it even worth the effort? If philosophy student truly have such a high IQ then it is certainly a waste of talent.

IQ doesnt even mean anything u can have a 150 iq and still be a virgin loser, plus its proven that woman are better at basically everything that actually matters in the real world... but whatever helps u sleep at night i guess LOL

>>7792295
The only reason women score shit on IQ tests is because every single one writes "FUCK YOU PATRIARCHY" on the written portion

It resembles our understanding of the difference between the male and female bell curves. There are more females closer to the mean and more males at the extremes

>>7792262
can nobody compress it further?

>>7792088
Interestingly, the majority of my graduating Physics class was female.

philosophy majors btfo; we know its full b.s.

im a maths major; i know that physics majors are the most sharpest minded peeps; they are kings.

>>7792310
>>7792310
Hmmm, along with the positive female to male ratio in college, that would match up quite nicely.

>>7792287
Wouldn't that be less shallow then? Freshman philosophy 101 serves two purposes, to get the "LOL can't know anything for certain, brains in jars, sophilism is so cool and edgy XD" shit out of the way and give you a rough overview of everything else done so you can hang any new bits you learn in an appropriate mental context. Also most pure logic classes are in the philosophy department so you have those guys dragging the average up, and most marxist-feminist-gender-studies stuff has gone to sociology and "women's studies" freeing them of that burden of tumblr level reasoning. The average philosophy major has more money than practical sense and wants something that sounds cooler than "communication"

>>7792276
it takes an intellectual to work through the mental gymnastics required to "make sense" of a lot of philosophies.
the average man would have the wisdom to say something like this is foolish; but an intellectual is required to go through the effort to find out if it is foolish or not (it is).

>>7792519
No that stuff is actually deeper and more essential. Everything past that just seems like something you wouldn't even call philosophy. It's just political shit. It's like the difference between high and low level programming. It just seems to get higher and higher level. It starts with absolute truths and ends with opinions you would hear on mainstream news.

File: -1006963169.jpg (50KB, 500x588px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 500x588px

>>7792147
What makes you think it's not one of the unlabelled dots in the higher right or lower left?

>>7792303
You're giving them too much credit.

>>7792549
*higher left
*lower right
You get what i mean

>>7792535
Ah I see. The upper level stuff just sounds like so much OO marketing buzz words to sell the latest new programming add-on tool. Compared to the stuff that tool is built on it seems so much more fuzzy and bullshit laden right? Plato's dialogues where like that at the time he was alive though, like wise Turing's papers seemed like rather useless theoretical mathematics until we needed to break some codes. I think in 10 generations the "High Level" philosophy of today will have solidified into something that seems that concrete now. It just takes a long time for the bullshit to get hashed out.

Full disclosure: I have a philosophy minor, an unread and untouched copy of "A Critique of Pure Reason" sitting on my shelf, and a very well read copy of David Chalmers "The Conscious Mind".