Do you have "dumb" taste in music and literature? - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Ro · 02-12-2008, 04:13 PM

If you like "Lil' Wayne" or "The Holy Bible," then...

...yes, you do!

http://booksthatmakeyoudumb.virgil.gr/index.php

http://musicthatmakesyoudumb.virgil.gr/index.php

Cowperson · 02-12-2008, 04:27 PM

I'm always interested in what might cause the ethereal snobs around me to hold their noses.

Like Nickelback for instance.

Cowperson

Pagal4321 · 02-12-2008, 04:28 PM

Sufjan Stevens?

Well according to this I'm pretty dumb.

Tyler · 02-12-2008, 04:49 PM

I am so brilliant.

My indie cred obviously means I'm smarter than all the rest of you dumbasses :P

burn_this_city · 02-12-2008, 04:52 PM

Notice how rap makes up the bulk of the bottom.. Shocking..

ShaolinFlame · 02-12-2008, 04:56 PM

If I wasn't so lazy I would photoshop ODB in at 1600, we all know that's where he belongs at.

Bill Bumface · 02-12-2008, 05:00 PM

I listen to bands that haven't even been formed yet.

RougeUnderoos · 02-12-2008, 05:06 PM

The whole genre of jazz is for dumb people? Same with the novel "Their Eyes Were Watching God". I don't buy it. That's kind of an, ahem, interesting pattern.

rubecube · 02-12-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The whole genre of jazz is for dumb people? Same with the novel "Their Eyes Were Watching God". I don't buy it. That's kind of an, ahem, interesting pattern.

I think the point of that, just by looking at some of the comments, were that people who were able to name individual jazz artists as opposed to just the genre were considered smarter.

burn_this_city · 02-12-2008, 05:09 PM

^^ Some of it is pretty inconsistent.. Theres genres mixed in with specific artists.. weird list..

AC · 02-12-2008, 05:14 PM

At this point I'd like to mention that a disproportionate amount of intelligent students listen to metal:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/music/20..._brainier.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected...1/nmetal21.xml

jammies · 02-12-2008, 05:18 PM

He even says in his notes that correlation doesn't equal causation - except, of course, for Nickelback, which has actually been proven to destroy brain cells on contact (cf Riemann/Wiltz Neurological Effects of Selected Rock Artists 1969-2003, American Journal of Psychiatry, Nov. 2004, vol ii pp 106-143).

However, I don't know if I can trust a guy whose FAQ page (link) is black on dark salmon, perhaps one of the least readable choices possible inside the visual visible spectrum. Clearly he's much more of a Dan Brown reader than Nabokov.

llama64 · 02-12-2008, 05:27 PM

This is exactly why I hate sociology. It tries to make a point out of crap data like this.

It's trying to do a cross-analysis of SAT scores to individual students "Facebook" pages. It might be a fun thing to do but the limitations are to massive to derive any useful knowledge from the study.

My chief argument would be: SAT's are designed to test for a specific type of person. They are not designed to let non-standard intellects to score well. These non-standard intellects and rather loosely as "creative type" people. These creative type people might be more inclined to listen to abstract types of music (ie Jazz). Just a quick hypothesis that immediately jumped out to me when scanning the list.

llama64 · 02-12-2008, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jammies

He even says in his notes that correlation doesn't equal causation - except, of course, for Nickelback, which has actually been proven to destroy brain cells on contact (cf Riemann/Wiltz Neurological Effects of Selected Rock Artists 1969-2003, American Journal of Psychiatry, Nov. 2004, vol ii pp 106-143).

... are you being serious? I could look it up but I'm lazy. This is too good to be true.

Hakan · 02-12-2008, 05:35 PM

I mean their conclusions are stretched but the data seems pretty fantastic from a social science perspective. You have accurate SAT scores for thousands of people coupled with stated preference in music and books.

That's a researcher's goldmine right there.

Hakan · 02-12-2008, 05:38 PM

By stretched conclusions, I mean to say that they are implying a causal relationship when they can only claim there to be correlation.

Hakan · 02-12-2008, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze

Then explain the counting crows effect.

I'll see your three red squares with three blue squares.

MarchHare · 02-12-2008, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pagal4321

Sufjan Stevens?

Well according to this I'm pretty dumb.

I think you read the graph incorrectly. People who listed Sufjan Stevens as one of their favourite artists had statistically one of the higher average SAT scores.

jammies · 02-12-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by llama64

... are you being serious? I could look it up but I'm lazy. This is too good to be true.

I'm afraid this falls into the realm of things that merely should be true.

However, it did look pretty convincing, didn't it? Sorry.

Ro · 02-12-2008, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I think you read the graph incorrectly. People who listed Sufjan Stevens as one of their favourite artists had statistically one of the higher average SAT scores.

If I know Pagal it's not a comment about Sufjan Stevens, but a comment about how the majority of the hip hop artists listed fall on the left side of the graph.

Word.