![music-makes-you-dumb[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/F35olib.png "music-makes-you-dumb[1].png")
There's a proven correlation between low iq and the enjoyment of certain music genres (e.g. hip-hop). Therefore, isn't it correct to claim that genres/artists that require higher iq from its listeners are objectively superior?
The correlation is probably real but it's not an equivalent of "requirement".
>U2
lmfao
>>64396838
Hey OP, why did you crop out the rest of this picture? I want to see what kind of music the most intelligent people listen to.
>>64396878
Beethoven, Bach, the list goes on...
>>64396863
what do you mean?
>>64396878
I didn't, Sufjan is at the end of the spectrum
>>64396945
yeah, but that's a given
we are talking about averages here, certainly there are outliers
Wouldn't a higher number of dumb people liking something just mean more people in general like something? Something being popular and generally consumed by the masses doesn't necessarily make it an inferior product. Statistics on fans don't prove anything about quality. U2 and Counting Crows being near the top should prove that.
>>64396994
lol didn't you study basic statistics at school? cringe
>>64396838
I think there are many conclusions to draw.
Something I've just come up with right now:
>Higher SAT score meany you study more
>you study more means that you have less time for hobbies
>if you don't care for music as much, you're going to end up with popular music that is also well respected (U2, Radiohead make sense)
>>64396838
>correlation implies causation
It's a good bait but anybody who finished second grade can see through it, OP.
I'm not a SJW, but that chart is racist as fuck
>>64396900
>I didn't, Sufjan is at the end of the spectrum
>>64396838
how in the hell is SOAD higher than The Doors?!
Glad to hip see hop, r&b and rap in the lower ends
>>64397192
Thanks Anon
>>64396838
>>64397192
Why is the horizontal axis unlabeled?
What is it? It's certainly not IQ given the numbers, this chart is dumb.
>>64397192
I copypasted that image from an article, didn't know it was incomplete
>that gap between Beethoven and the 2nd place
>>64397135
this makes no sense, there are popular acts spread through the whole chart
>>64397290
It's SAT scores.
>>64397291
>didn't know it was incomplete
>even though words are literally clipped off and Metal wasn't even coded as a key
still b8in?
>>64397317
http://www.labnol.org/internet/music-taste-linked-to-intelligence/7489/
>>64397359
If you checked their source, you'd see it was clipped.
Either way you are retarded. Because the graphic illustrates SAT scores, not IQ (as you claimed)
>>64397399
>he doesn't know the SATs are strongly correlated to IQ
>>64397307
There actually aren't. Other well respected bands are either old (classic), or have their fair share of stupid fanbases (Muse for example, still pretty high up the chart)
>>64397430
>he thinks a correlation is proof
>>64397458
only if you're using /mu/'s average taste as metric
coldplay, foo fighters, outkast, soad, kanye west, beyonce: all popular and respected by the media
>>64397493
I don't need proof, the correlation is so strong that it's reasonable to make the scores interchangeable
stick to hiphop, pleb
I'm glad this board has finally figured something out for certain!
>>64397589
>I don't need proof
You do, because you stated in the OP it was proven.
Please provide proof that is not based on correlation
>stick to hiphop, pleb
I don't like hip-hop. Nice try though.
>>64397561
>coldplay, foo fighters,
fair share of stupid fanbases
especially coldplay
>outkast
fair, but again outkast ranks fairly highly anyway
>soad
I don't think soad fits the criteria. Someone who studies most of his time wouldn't be listening to soad.
>kanye west
again, fair. However, Kanye is way too popular so I'd say he isn't really a discriminative factor. Everybody listens to Kanye.
>>64397644
that's not how statistics work, kiddo
>>64396838
>Music created for and by the systemically uneducated is inferior
ok
>>64397675
you're clinging to anedoctal evidence at this point
in fact, you were doing this since the beginning
>>64397681
Prove it.
>>64397714
Never implied the opposite. I'm just trying to prove how easy it is to fabricate the statistics in your favor. To sum it up:
>>64397142
>>64397712
>I'm neither stupid or lacking proper work ethic, it's the system that's putting me down!
>>64396838
I love this chart
It correlates small sample sizes of people's music tastes to the tastes of their entire school, and then links that to the average SAT score of the school which everyone that posts or directly connects to intelligence
what the fuck, sat scores are based on 2400. these scores are low as fuck
