this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
654 points (96.3% liked)

Today I Learned

16329 readers
154 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sept. 8, 2000 -- A man whose bid to become a police officer was rejected after he scored too high on an intelligence test has lost an appeal in his federal lawsuit against the city.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a lower court’s decision that the city did not discriminate against Robert Jordan because the same standards were applied to everyone who took the test.

“This kind of puts an official face on discrimination in America against people of a certain class,” Jordan said today from his Waterford home. “I maintain you have no more control over your basic intelligence than your eye color or your gender or anything else.”

He said he does not plan to take any further legal action.

Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took the exam in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training.

Most Cops Just Above Normal The average score nationally for police officers is 21 to 22, the equivalent of an IQ of 104, or just a little above average.

Jordan alleged his rejection from the police force was discrimination. He sued the city, saying his civil rights were violated because he was denied equal protection under the law.

But the U.S. District Court found that New London had “shown a rational basis for the policy.” In a ruling dated Aug. 23, the 2nd Circuit agreed. The court said the policy might be unwise but was a rational way to reduce job turnover.

Jordan has worked as a prison guard since he took the test.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MyDogLovesMe 165 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I applied in Canada to a Law Enforcement program with a past-secondary institution.

I was told by a VERY senior member of the force (family friend) that I was simply too smart for the rank and file and was consequently turned down. He said “…they don’t want people who will think for themselves and question their orders. The whole point is to have force who will follow the rules without question. You don’t fit that mold”. The “rules” in this case is really just the police culture, and status quo.

The man who told me this, rose to Police Chief of a Major Canadian city from uniformed officer. Retired now.

I believe him.

Dumb soldiers who apply force when told. That’s what they want, …mostly.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jakdracula 107 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Obtaining a barber license means that you have completed a minimum of 1,250 hours of instruction in barbering education within a period of at least 9 months or completed 1,250 hours of training. It takes 1,250 to 2,000 hours to be a cosmologist. Police in Germany get 2.5 years of training, and in Finland, police education takes three years to complete. Police in the USA get 750 hours.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Some police in america get 750. Others are merely elected to sheriff as a political appointment.

edit: This very silly and also somehow serious video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt5I3V5hWkU

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=gt5I3V5hWkU

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] shalafi 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You mean a cosmetology license. I dated a college instructor, there's more one needs to know than most would guess. Long story short, there's a lot of chemistry and health training. It's shockingly easy to fuck someone up.

One example she gave me, "You can't use $chemical on old people if their hands look like (whatever I forgot). That's a symptom of (whatever) and their fingernails will fall off." Heysus!

Or, "You can't mix this and that. Makes a wildly exothermic reaction."

And there's no grouping "police" in America. According to the FBI, there are 18,000 police departments. They range from LAPD gang bangers to Mayberry cops.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

This isn't saying it isn't hard to be a cosmetologist, it's saying it's far too easy to become a cop. I don't see anyone saying we should relax the regulations for cosmotology, rather we need to raise them on the police. It's just absurd that an LEO can order you around, arrest you, and sometimes kill you and the requirements for the job are so low.

[–] 3volver 89 points 3 months ago (4 children)

New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training

Yea sure, because they could get "bored". What you really mean is because they could start asking questions and potentially start changing the way things are typically done.

[–] finestnothing 23 points 3 months ago

And have to be bullied out or fired to prevent that, making the police department lose their expensive investment.

There are good cops - they just end up getting bullied out or fired for trying to do the right (and legal) thing

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

This exactly, if you have intelligent people as police, then maybe they will realize that they are doing more harm than good and want to change things. They might actually have morals and realize that arresting somebody for a crime that has no victim is bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

This was the most unrealistic part of The Wire. Somehow a few really smart guys managed to become detectives. Of course one was a dysfunctional womanizing drunk and the other was McNutty.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

There are policing organizations that are still very hungry for well-educated and intelligent recruits. In the USA, the FBI and the CIA both have high barriers to entry. The NSA is easily one of the biggest employers of mathematicians in the world. The IRS, the SEC, the FDA, the FCC, the DEA - all happy to hire smart young professionals.

You're not going to get a job as a beat cop, but you're very much in the running for the DA's office as a prosecutor or the state homicide detective's unit. And don't worry, there are plenty of very intelligent people who are also very dependable when it comes to taking a kickback and keeping their mouths shut.

[–] stoly 6 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Yes but those places don’t hire people who have ever used cannabis even though that is most of the college educated population. So really you’re screwed either way.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sure. But you can just... lie. When asked "have you ever used drugs", say no.

[–] AtmaJnana 4 points 3 months ago

Just as an FYI, whether lie detector tests are accurate or not, lying in a polygraph interview for a federal background check is a crime. Polygraph interviews can and do sometimes lead to criminal prosecution.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] yesman 7 points 3 months ago

Corrupt systems cannot be changed from within. By their nature they select against honest agents.

Just as a quick example it's common for police to pad their overtime. Now suppose Officer Honest always turns in an accurate timesheet. Officer Honest never makes arrests for bullshit. On paper, Officer Honest is lazy and unproductive compared to their dishonest peers.

[–] just_change_it 65 points 3 months ago (4 children)

2000 called, it wants it's 24 year old article back.

[–] Plopp 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hold on. Can't we all just go back to that time instead?

[–] stoly 6 points 3 months ago

Only if the time loop repeats on September 10, 2001. I wouldn’t want to relive the past 23 years.

[–] cloudless 9 points 3 months ago

Yeah I thought it was a mistake when I saw the article date.

[–] Asidonhopo 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I remember reading this on Fark.com

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is widely cited and I agree it happened and it's messed up, but I think it would be more interesting to see some kind of broader analysis of how common this practice is, which I haven't been able to find solid information on. I've seen this a number of times and there are always comments offering speculation on how the system works, and maybe a few anecdotes, but I've talked to people who are skeptical that this is a larger phenomenon and I can't exactly offer anything to prove it to them.

[–] kameecoding 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Not sure we should be doing IQ test for Police officers, EQ would be much more important, you'd rather have a slightly less intelligent police officer who tries to relate to you rather than an intelligent quasi sociopath happy to unload their magazine into you at first sign of trouble, wouldn't you?

Pretty sure IQ testing has a racist origin anyway, so let's just leave it behind

[–] garbagebagel 5 points 3 months ago

you'd rather have a slightly less intelligent police officer who tries to relate to you rather than an intelligent quasi sociopath

Sure, I would, but no way the sociopaths at the top would want that

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Smart people think too much to go along with the propaganda and indoctrination

"Great minds think for themselves"

[–] TempermentalAnomaly 12 points 3 months ago

Great minds and intelligence are different. Many intelligent people like to do the thing they like to do and not think about other things. The NSA is filled with these people. Other smart people think their way into justifying awful things like von Neumann and Edmond Teller who were both strong proponents of hydrogen bombs.

[–] NounsAndWords 23 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a lower court’s decision that the city did not discriminate against Robert Jordan

Amazing to think that if not for this poor hiring choice we never would have gotten the Wheel of Time series.

[–] stoly 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] NounsAndWords 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Robert Jordan also happens to be the pen name of the author of the Wheel of Time series, and I made a joke about it.

[–] stoly 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Oh fascinating. Nice one. I’ve not read the books but have seen the series. I didn’t know the author’s name until now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LazaroFilm 18 points 3 months ago

Welcome to COSTCO. I love you.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Jordan has worked as a prison guard since he took the test.

Obviously a much more engaging and mentally challenging job than police officer. I'm sure he'll stay in that job forever because of this.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Maybe he’s a corrupt power hungry sadist despite being blessed with an above average IQ. Maybe it’s the perfect job for him! Look on the bright side!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Or, the getting bored excuse is completely made up bs. Lots of intelligent people dream of having simple jobs where they don't need to exhaust themselves thinking so they'll have some brains left for things they actually care about on their free time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kemsat 16 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Has the average intelligence increased? As in, someone who scored a 100 in 2024 would definitely be smarter than someone who scored a 100 in 1969.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 24 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

The short answer is "Yes". Scores rise about 3-pts every decade and the "Q" is adjusted accordingly. That said, modern education and modern intelligence testing aren't independent of one another. It is very possible to train for an IQ test and improve your score (a thing that was originally argued as impossible when these tests were formulated). And - both consciously and unconsciously - we've geared our education system around improvements on standardized exams.

There's also a host of environmental improvements - better nutrition, fewer diseases, less heavy metal poisoning - which all contribute to higher cognition. These latter factors are suggested in no small part thanks to a leveling off of the Flynn Effect in later years, both thanks to marginal declines in all of the above and thanks to the diminishing returns once individuals reach peak performance.

But intelligence testing is also a very sketchy and misunderstood field, with lots of scams surrounding its practical application and enormous stigmas associated with any population that scores "below average".

Much like polygraph testing and dowsing (yes, American police still use dosing rods), its a methodology that police seem to cling to long after it has worn out its usefulness in practical terms.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 7 points 3 months ago

In general, yes. Average IQ increases by a point or two every few years, so the people who design the tests need to consistently create harder and harder tests to maintain a good baseline.

It’s a large part of why many people say IQ is a bad metric for intelligence; It really just tests your ability to solve problems within the context of your upbringing and life experience. A carpenter or machinist who constantly uses geometry in their day-to-day life will breeze through any geometry-based questions, for instance. And as jobs have become more complex and efficient, people have gotten better at basic problem solving.

[–] yesman 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Average IQ cannot increase or decrease. The test is calibrated so that 100 is always the average. It's for this reason and many others that comparing historical testing data is difficult.

In the revised version of his book "The mismeasure of man" (about biodeterminism and measurement) Gould was asked why he didn't draw the obvious comparison between IQ and phrenology. His answer was that such a comparison would be unfair... to phrenology. The methods of phrenology were bunk, but it's theory (that different regions of the brain were responsible for different functions) was sound. IQ fails both in methodology and theory.

[–] kemsat 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I understand that, but that means that the test has to be adjusted, which means that the middle point keeps moving. Similar to currency: $100 is $100, in 1920 or 2024 they are the same, but they also aren’t the same. Our current IQ would yield a higher score the further we go into the past, and a lower score as we travel to the future.

[–] ace_garp 5 points 3 months ago

Just cast LeadBeGone!! on a country, and watch the IQ rise.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Aptitude tests aren't measures of education.

[–] kemsat 5 points 3 months ago

No, but human intelligence increases over time. Just wondering if it’s been long enough since the invention of the test.

[–] lugal 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not applying to become a cop in the first place is the ultimate intelligence test

[–] Jarix 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What's your alternative to having cops?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

I didn't get a job I applied for a few years ago for a broadly similar reason. Also they thought (correctly) that I didn't know a lot about web development.

So I was rejected for being simultaneously overqualified and underqualified.

[–] 9point6 8 points 3 months ago
[–] Cosmicomical 7 points 3 months ago

Lol apparently judges are selected for low iq as well

load more comments
view more: next ›