>>8016516
Did you remember to divide out sociopaths?

Let's not forget that even a rock can drastically reduce the intelligence of a single person.

>>8016516
We should just have every politician in office take an IQ test and then we get the average IQ of the people in charge.

If we want to get creative we could 'weigh' the IQs. Have the president's IQ count as if he was 100 people so that if he has a low or high IQ, it impacts more the overall sum. Mayors should count only as 1 person, and people like senators like 5, etc.

Then we do the same for every first world country and then we could know which country is the smartest country.

Then we could compare that ranking to the countries with least crime, highest GDP, etc. and see if having smarter people at the top is actually visibly good.

But of course, this will never happen because of Senator Whitey McWhitey gets an IQ of 125 and Obama gets an IQ of 124 then immediately the study will get called racist, sexist and homophobic.

I rate fuckingregressives/10

>>8016589
That would only give us the organizational intelligence of a civilization, not the collective emergent potential of an entire population. Nice idea on measuring the effectiveness or authority though.

How about, btw this is shit but just for thought experiment.

Average g of the population (genotypic intelligence if possible)
Average g of top 1% economically (genotypic intelligence if possible)
General range of ideologies found in top 1% relative to other societies
Total Population

These four variables could be pretty good at predicting the cognitive power of a society when combined into a single metric. The range of ideologies at the top 1% would give a pretty good measure of open mindedness and ability to adopt new knowledge. Top 1% vs Average g gives a good idea if the society is meritocratic. Population gives a good general multiplier.

(Population * 6^(Average IQ/10)) Then some bullshit here for the difference of the top 1% from the expected top 1% range of IQs in the society, with an exponential decline in brain power the further it is.

The 1% should be replaced with something like group of population that controls 50% of wealth.

Every 10 IQ points gives a 6 times multiple
For instance a 90 IQ society has 1/6th the brain power of a 100 IQ society of similar population. A 120 IQ society would have 36x brain power.

The top 1% of a society in terms of wealth (including government) should be +2 STDev from average IQ. The lower it is from this goal causes exponential negative effects on brain power, and higher it is there are exponential good effects on brain power.

From this you get a single metric for the brain power of a society and the single greatest predictor for their relative power.

>>8016516
I wouldn't, but let's save that for later.

First, construct a graph with one node per person.

Then ignore everything about the state of the world and compute an ideal economy for those agents. I don't care what method you use so long as you're sure to understand game theory at every link in all the resulting graphs. If you can't compute a graph for every such agent's game-theory-informed alter, substitute that node for a fairy and recompute the entire economic network while optimizing towards minimal transcendental deception. This will give you what I call a fairy network, which you might suppose was an ideal-case Nash equilibrium.

Oh wait you said 'rough' calculation. I'll assume that implies you don't have means to simulate all possible agents. In that case...

Do everything I just said, but crowdsource it based on character approximations. ie., find a bunch of highly intuitive people and ask them how a given agent would react in so-and-so many situations. If you mean to create a hidden calculation, then die. No singular agent could ever benefit from having a total map of all possible economic activity. Rough calculation would involve measuring the difference between a given civilization and its corresponding fairy net. It's a your-economy-vs.-mine scenario if you can actually compute ideal economies. The one that maximizes local intelligence wins as far as cognitive collective measurement is concerned.

>>8016820
>game theory
>works in real world

lost you here

>>8016832
>ignore everything about the state of the world
It doesn't have to work in the real world so long as the economy you compute works in the real world.
All we're doing is generating a measurement type.

>>8016516
Nice pic. Taeyeon a cutie.

>>8016516

Society is only as smart as its smartest person