▲ 342 ▼ Gen Z is officially less intelligent than millennials, first recorded intergenerational IQ drop (www.wionews.com) submitted 1 month ago by Pratai@piefed.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world 161 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -59 points 1 month ago (9 children) LMAO… loving the excuses. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children) it’s not excuses, just (informed) theories about material conditions that could lead to this what’s your explanation for this? genuinely curious i’m kinda doubtful that the blanket "technology = bad" thesis in the article is true, honestly. i’m obviously not a neuroscientist but it seems super reductive and simplistic to me, and altho i believe that yes reliance on short-form content and ai summaries isn’t good for your attention span, that’s 1. not the same thing as intelligence and 2. faaaaar from being exclusive to gen z (or gen alpha for that matter). look at any older person with a phone and you’ll see it. my parents waste a ton of time on the glowing rectangle too and they treat the google summary like the gospel permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -33 points 1 month ago (7 children) Check the other comments. Someone posted links from better sources that cite the actual studies. You may not like the results, but that doesn’t make them less true. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (5 children) The idea that there's no reason, and they're less intelligent inherently with no causes is an entirely new kind of magical thinking. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -23 points 1 month ago (4 children) Yeah. Go ahead and disregard proof. And in doing so, you’re just proving them right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago (3 children) You haven't provided any proof to disregard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 30 points 1 month ago This has a ring of "it's not racist if it's true". The people aren't different, they were dealt a different hand. Nobody is disputing that the studies, which probably just measure test scores, are incorrect. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children) it’s not excuses, just (informed) theories about material conditions that could lead to this what’s your explanation for this? genuinely curious i’m kinda doubtful that the blanket "technology = bad" thesis in the article is true, honestly. i’m obviously not a neuroscientist but it seems super reductive and simplistic to me, and altho i believe that yes reliance on short-form content and ai summaries isn’t good for your attention span, that’s 1. not the same thing as intelligence and 2. faaaaar from being exclusive to gen z (or gen alpha for that matter). look at any older person with a phone and you’ll see it. my parents waste a ton of time on the glowing rectangle too and they treat the google summary like the gospel permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -33 points 1 month ago (7 children) Check the other comments. Someone posted links from better sources that cite the actual studies. You may not like the results, but that doesn’t make them less true. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (5 children) The idea that there's no reason, and they're less intelligent inherently with no causes is an entirely new kind of magical thinking. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -23 points 1 month ago (4 children) Yeah. Go ahead and disregard proof. And in doing so, you’re just proving them right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago (3 children) You haven't provided any proof to disregard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 30 points 1 month ago This has a ring of "it's not racist if it's true". The people aren't different, they were dealt a different hand. Nobody is disputing that the studies, which probably just measure test scores, are incorrect. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -33 points 1 month ago (7 children) Check the other comments. Someone posted links from better sources that cite the actual studies. You may not like the results, but that doesn’t make them less true. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (5 children) The idea that there's no reason, and they're less intelligent inherently with no causes is an entirely new kind of magical thinking. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -23 points 1 month ago (4 children) Yeah. Go ahead and disregard proof. And in doing so, you’re just proving them right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago (3 children) You haven't provided any proof to disregard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent [–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 30 points 1 month ago This has a ring of "it's not racist if it's true". The people aren't different, they were dealt a different hand. Nobody is disputing that the studies, which probably just measure test scores, are incorrect. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (5 children) The idea that there's no reason, and they're less intelligent inherently with no causes is an entirely new kind of magical thinking. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -23 points 1 month ago (4 children) Yeah. Go ahead and disregard proof. And in doing so, you’re just proving them right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago (3 children) You haven't provided any proof to disregard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -23 points 1 month ago (4 children) Yeah. Go ahead and disregard proof. And in doing so, you’re just proving them right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago (3 children) You haven't provided any proof to disregard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago (3 children) You haven't provided any proof to disregard. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Pratai@piefed.ca [S] -19 points 1 month ago (2 children) LMAO! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago LOL! permalink fedilink source parent [–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent
[–] victorz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago Counter-argument: ROFLCOPTER permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 30 points 1 month ago This has a ring of "it's not racist if it's true". The people aren't different, they were dealt a different hand. Nobody is disputing that the studies, which probably just measure test scores, are incorrect. permalink fedilink source parent