Smart but not brilliant people dominate governments and corporations. From Alex Berenson at alexberenson.substack.com:
Why consensus can be so dangerous for science – and for the modern societies that depend on it
(Two for one special today since I haven’t written since last week.)
My virtual German buddy Eugyppius has a fascinating Stack today on a paper showing smart people were more likely to take the mRNA jabs.
The study drew on 750,000 Swedish men who were tested for their intelligence as part of their mandatory military service. The findings are clear: “The smarter participants had higher uptake and they got vaccinated more quickly.”
But the study has one fascinating hole. It shows smart people were more likely to take the jab – but not that the smartest people were. As Eugyppius notes, the top group represented
The equivalent of an above-average university student – the kinds of people who work as doctors and lawyers. We hardly needed a study to tell us that the most enthusiastic vaccinees are to be found precisely in this population.
Yep.
—
What the study really explains, Eugyppius argues, is why near-compulsory mRNA jabs became national policy in wealthy democracies. In those countries, this smart-not-smartest group dominates politics and most businesses (if not startups).
He draws on a 1985 paper called “Intelligence and personal influence in groups” to argue that the most intelligent people cannot argue down persuasively and so have limited influence.
