Until I met the post >>21970
, which implies (memeing aside, see >>21904
) that pattern recognition is intelligence level measurement, I ignored the thread.
So the question stands:
>How come the smartest, most high IQ men are usually radically left politically?
High intelligence quotient, let's spell this term out fully, is based on the idea that pattern recognition determines intelligence level as a whole. In popular mind, high IQ level is equal to "being the smartest".
But let's think, who are usually among proponents of right ideas? These are people, who gained much money, and they can't let themselves to lose the quality of life, which usually drops for them after left ideas realisation, from high social taxes to revolutions. And most of them are businessmen.
What is to own the business? Work skills aren't enough - you've got to sell yourself every deal. For a successful and rich deal, social skills are important as well. And the intelligence quotient as we know relates to social skills indirectly and not so much, as pattern recognition does.
High quotient isn't enough on itself to determine political views. But high quotient isn't enough to determine the level of social skills as well, which is very important for successful business, which gives a lot of money to its owner.