Quoted By:
Lots of IQ testing is based on pattern recognition, which (at some point) comes down to intuition.
So we might say that /sci/entists, trained in what we will, for the purposes of this conversation "rigorous, formal and/or scientific thinking" have a slight disconnect between INTUITING a pattern and deciding that the pattern represents an ANSWER, or a distinctly true statement.
By contrast, /lit/ citizens who read dense texts like Joyce and decipher poetry, are seeking patterns in something that may be apparently without pattern or meaning but, upon revelation of their particular insight into the text, requires no further elaboration: the text speaks for itself. This would make them quicker at picking up on intuitive patterns as presented in an IQ test.
Of course, we know the graph is also bullshit.
