reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The MoCA test is a question-based assessment using a sheet of paper to help diagnose dementia. The MoCA scores range from 0 to 30. A score of 0 to 21 indicates some kind of cognitive decline or dementia, 21 through 26 indicates mild cognitive decline, 27 through 30 indicates normal cognition. One woman scored 15 on her MoCA when she came to the group, and after about seven or eight months she scored 26, moving nearly into the normal range. She lives in an apartment in Seattle, and she and Marie Anne Rick are now good friends. She is thinking about moving down to help with the described work.

About 25% of kids with autism are nonverbal, not toilet trained, and exhibit stereotypical behaviors, and this population is growing. While many individuals with autism are doing well, the speaker focuses on this specific group with severe disabilities. The media promotes the idea that increased autism rates are due to better recognition or changing diagnostic criteria, but studies disprove this. In 2013, the California legislature asked the Mind Institute at UC Davis to investigate whether the rise in autism is real or due to increased awareness. The Mind Institute concluded it is a real epidemic. The speaker argues that this epidemic is unique to children, as full-blown autism (nonverbal, non-toilet trained) is rarely seen in older adults. While the speaker has encountered people with Asperger's or on the spectrum who are their age, they have never seen an older individual with full-blown autism, despite its prevalence in children, affecting one in twenty boys, and in California, one in 12.5 boys.

The transcript presents a sequence of testimonies and extracts arguing that Adolf Hitler possessed exceptional intellect, memory, and strategic genius, contrary to prevailing liberal and popular stereotypes. - IQ and intellect at Nuremberg: It is stated that the Allies found the IQs of National Socialist leaders on trial to be much higher than expected, with some sources suggesting Hitler’s IQ around 140+ or higher. Jaalmar Schacht is cited as saying Hitler’s IQ was 150 or more; Schacht’s own IQ was tested at 143, and ministers reportedly averaged 129, with many acknowledging Hitler’s superiority. The text asserts Hitler read voraciously, with a private library of over 3,000 books, and could lead discussions on any topic, possessing strong verbal ability, memory, and autodidactic learning. - Personal recollections on Hitler’s learning and memory: Excerpts from He Was My Chief (Christa Schroeder), Was Hitler Really a Dictator? (Friedrich Christian), Hitler Democrat (Leon deGrell), and The Hitler I Knew (Otto Dietrich) emphasize Hitler’s extraordinary memory and lifelong study. Schroeder describes Hitler reading 500 Vienna reference library volumes in youth, recalling minute details of places, architecture, and conversations, as well as recalling names, books, statistics, faces, and the atmosphere of rallies. Dietrich notes Hitler’s ability to memorize a book in a single sitting and to notice engine discrepancies on a plane, while deGrell highlights Hitler’s wide range of knowledge—from Buddha to Shakespeare to Tacitus, from theology to physics and biology—and his habit of reading at least one book daily and quoting long passages from memory. Dietrich also stresses Hitler’s equal facility in architecture, philosophy, and science, and his almost universal command of knowledge across disciplines. - Hitler’s cognitive and technical leadership in strategy: The narrative contends Hitler could devise audacious military strategies that surprised even his top commanders. It recounts that Hitler rejected a conventional Schlieffen-inspired plan and instead developed a bold, integrated approach to the 1940 West campaign. In Winiza and at his headquarters, Hitler supposedly explained and reviewed his strategic process, using a binded map collection of the France campaign to illustrate decisions, including the choice to strike at Sedan and to coordinate a rapid armored thrust with air superiority. He allegedly insisted on secrecy, careful data gathering, and a seamless integration of tactical details under a single strategic idea. - The Western campaign and Dunkirk: The text describes the May 1940 offensive (the Zickelschnitt or sickle cut) as a decisiive success, with the Wehrmacht breaking through using a combination of armored thrusts and flanking maneuvers, advancing from Sedan toward the coast, and ensuring the encirclement and isolation of Allied forces. Hitler is portrayed as acknowledging—yet regretting in hindsight—the Dunkirk decision, explaining he did not destroy the entire British force because of the danger to further operations and time, arguing the need to avoid excessive losses and preserve strength for subsequent operations. The account attributes a rational, strategic calculus to Hitler, including concerns about Eastern possibilities and peace prospects. - Post-Dunkirk reflections and leadership style: The transcript portrays Hitler as calm under pressure, capable of long, rational discussions with staff after shocking events like Arnhem, and capable of endurance through fatigue. It also emphasizes his interpersonal trust with his inner circle, including his architect Heinrich Himmler and Speer, and notes various personal anecdotes illustrating his restraint, discipline, and occasional moments of levity. Keitel, Jodl, and Manstein are referenced as colleagues whose assessments evolved to align with Hitler’s strategic vision, while some allied commanders are depicted as underestimating his genius. - Conclusion on Hitler’s genius: The compilation argues that Hitler was “one of the most cultivated men of the twentieth century,” with “military genius” and “an invention of modern strategy,” whose leadership integrated a mass of tanks and air power in ways other militaries failed to conceive. While it acknowledges criticism of certain decisions (e.g., Dunkirk), it credits Hitler with transcending conventional military thought, guiding not only German policy but also shaping European strategic doctrine through a fusion of meticulous planning, memory, and intellectual breadth.

In one study, they found a folate deficiency in between fifty six and seventy five percent of autistic brains. In another trial, that synthetic folate boosted the IQ 20 to 50% compared to placebo.

What if I told you that every single day kids go to school, they become less intelligent? The speaker argues that there is so much more than just one type of intelligence. While school can increase academic intelligence by teaching subjects like physics, algebra, and calculus, it is diminishing the children's creative intelligence. The claim is that schooling teaches them to think in a particular way, to follow a defined path in life rather than exploring a broader range of possibilities. The argument continues that school promotes a conventional sequence: go to high school, get a diploma, go to a good college, and then find a stable, respectable job. It is suggested that this path is presented as the ticket to success. The speaker questions this premise by posing a rhetorical counterexample: if that predefined path were truly the key to success, how is it that the speaker stands there today? How did the speaker, described as a straight C student, start a technology company at the age of 16? The implication is that there are dimensions of intelligence and potential that academic performance alone does not capture, and that real innovation and achievement can arise from abilities beyond traditional academic measures. From this perspective, the central message is that conventional expectations about education and success may overlook or undervalue nonacademically measured talents and ingenuity. The speaker emphasizes that there must be facets of intelligence—creative, practical, entrepreneurial capabilities—that do not align neatly with standard academic metrics. The claim is that meaningful impact and world-changing outcomes often come from deviating from the standard script prescribed by societal norms about education and career paths. In closing, the speaker delivers a single, pointed takeaway: no one has ever changed the world by doing what the world has told them to do. This concluding assertion reinforces the idea that transformative progress typically arises when individuals pursue paths that challenge conventional wisdom and resist the pressure to conform to a uniform route. The message ends with a simple expression of gratitude: Thank you.

Out of 88,405 participants, the results of the poll on mandatory vaccinations were surprising. Contrary to recent newspaper surveys, 38.88% voted yes, while 61.12% voted no. However, it is worth noting that the first eight minutes had the opposite outcome. Considering this, we will reset our polls and ask the question again.

An internal document from the prestigious investment bank Rothschild & Co reportedly reveals results from an intellectual evaluation of Emmanuel Macron, aged 30, before his recruitment. According to the document, Macron allegedly obtained an IQ of eighty-nine. A second document suggests evaluators noted signs described as a narcissistic personality disorder during the same procedure. These documents, provided by an anonymous internal Rothschild & Co source due to the sensitive nature of the information, date to late 2008. The evaluation was part of a standard psychological and cognitive study conducted for new associates. It is widely known that Emmanuel Macron joined Rothschild & Co in 2008 at age 30 as an investment banker in charge of mergers and acquisitions. While French media later nicknamed him “the dour financier,” an former colleague told journalists that Macron was far from an expert in finance, stating that during meetings, they mocked him. “Here is another gem of Macron.” The report also reveals that before starting his career at Rothschild & Co, Macron had failed the entrance exam to the École normale supérieure twice. With an IQ of eighty-nine, Macron is positioned in the lower end of average, while about seventy-seven out of 100 people have a higher IQ. This score is lower than the IQ of eighty-nine, often attributed to former U.S. president George W. Bush. For comparison, the famous gorilla Coco was estimated at an IQ of ninety-five. At the same time, several experts publicly stated that Emmanuel Macron could have narcissistic traits, and his detractors have sometimes described him as someone with narcissistic personality disorder, even narcissistic psychopathy. Some theories explain this by a presumed childhood trauma or by his family relations, in which Macron was closer to his grandmother than his parents. The only question this raises is: how could a person who obtained such results go on to build a career at Rothschild & Co and eventually become president of the Fifth Republic?

I'm a 21-year-old high school graduate working in the marine corps. I'm a 30-year-old with a PhD in cancer biology, working in the biotech industry. I went to the University of South Carolina for grad school and the University of Florida for undergrad. I'm a cancer biology scientist in a biotech company that produces COVID-19 testing kits. We ranked each other based on intelligence and EQ. Raymond is number 1, followed by Kaley at number 2. Tyler is number 3, Shada is number 4, Sean is number 5, and Maria is number 6.

We conducted a vote on whether multiculturalism is working. The results are in: 5% of voters said yes, while 95% said no.

According to US Magazine, my next guest is the smartest woman in the world, with an IQ of 230, the highest ever recorded. Please welcome Marilyn Vos Savant. It's great to see you! Can you tell us about your name, Vos Savant? Vos Savant is my last name, and it's not a pen name. "Vos" was my grandmother's name before she married. Does it have a literal meaning? It’s supposed to mean "wise man," which is quite a coincidence. Indeed, it is interesting that the smartest person in the world has that name. You might think I made it up, but I didn’t! No, I didn’t think that at all.

Richard Feynman, with an IQ of 125, worked on the Manhattan Project, discovered the cause of the Challenger disaster, and won a Nobel Prize in Physics. Despite these accomplishments and an IQ higher than the average of 100, Feynman's IQ was not high enough to qualify for MENSA, which requires a score of 132 or higher, representing the top 2%. Feynman considered himself an ordinary person who studied hard and did not believe in miracle people. He attributed his success to his curiosity.

IQ differences are a tough reality with biological and heritable roots, making cognitive gaps hard to change. It's uncomfortable to accept these differences, especially when they vary among genders and ethnicities, challenging the ideal of total equality.

Speaker 0 described designing a measure to test people's mindsets about stress. The measure uses simple questions, such as to what extent you agree or disagree with statements like "stress enhances my performance and productivity" and "stress heightens my vitality and growth." They found in a number of correlational studies that a more enhancing stress mindset was linked to better health outcomes, better well-being, and higher performance.

The mentally retarded are classified into educable, trainable, and custodial categories, with individual assessments being crucial. Custodial individuals may exhibit random movements, sometimes leading to self-injury, while many can learn various skills. Abilities among the educable vary widely, influenced by intelligence and the presence of a stimulating environment. It's important to set realistic expectations for learning. Trainable individuals can handle certain household tasks, often more complex than assumed. While they may not become master craftsmen, they can still contribute meaningfully in skilled trades. Ultimately, mentally retarded individuals are diverse, encompassing all genders, sizes, and backgrounds, and they exist in every community.

In the 1960s, NASA commissioned a study to understand how to hire more geniuses. George Land and his team tested a group of 5-year-olds for creativity. They defined genius as using creative imagination to solve problems. Surprisingly, 98% of the 5-year-olds qualified as geniuses. However, when the same group was tested at ages 10, 15, and as adults, the percentage of geniuses decreased significantly. By adulthood, only 2% of the participants were considered geniuses. George Land attributed this decline to the influence of school, stating that uncreative behavior and thinking are learned.

IQ is falling in Western Europe and the USA since the 21st century. Studies show extreme orient countries like China, Japan, and Singapore perform best in mathematic comprehension. In France and the USA, 30% of people cannot read and understand one written page. Politicians are not clever, which is why they do stupid things. To change things, one must fight these people.

IQ research reveals uncomfortable truths about biological and heritable differences in cognitive performance, which people find hard to accept due to its permanence and practical implications. The fact that these differences also exist between genders and ethnicities is especially painful and challenges the idea of pure egalitarianism.

The people here are smart. I'm running against someone with a low IQ.

The mentally retarded are classified into educable, trainable, and custodial categories, with individual assessments necessary for their abilities. Custodial individuals may exhibit random movements, sometimes leading to self-injury, while the majority possess the capacity to learn. The range of abilities among the educable varies, influenced by intelligence and the presence of a stimulating environment. Realistic expectations are crucial; for instance, while they may not become master craftsmen, many trainable individuals can handle household responsibilities and contribute meaningfully in skilled trades. Ultimately, the mentally retarded are diverse individuals found in all walks of life.

A decline in IQ is evident in demographic studies, showing that lower IQ populations are having more children, while higher IQ individuals face challenges in starting families. Many high IQ individuals struggle due to economic barriers, such as high living costs and discriminatory hiring practices. For instance, civil service exams favored nonwhite candidates, making it difficult for qualified individuals to secure jobs. This creates a situation where lower IQ individuals, sometimes incentivized by government support, are having large families, while others are unable to afford to raise children. This trend raises concerns about the long-term impact on society and suggests a dysgenic influence on the population.

IQ has a greater impact on income than wealth. While some wealthy individuals inherit their money regardless of intelligence, there may be variations in intelligence between generations. It is unclear whether nature or nurture plays a role. Personal choices and factors like depression can also affect wealth. However, more studies connect IQ to income and wealth than oppose this correlation. Wall Street executives are often cited as having a high correlation with sociopathy, with estimates ranging from 1 out of 10 to even half of them being sociopaths.

Speaker: Jared Cooney Horvath I am a former teacher turned cognitive neuroscientist who focuses on human learning, and I do not receive funding from big tech. A sobering fact our generation faces is that our kids are less cognitively capable than we were at their age. Every generation has outperformed their parents, and that is what we want: sharper kids. The reason for this largely has been school. Each generation spends more time in school, and we use school to develop our cognition until Gen Z. Gen Z is the first generation of modern history to underperform us on basically every cognitive measure we have, from basic attention to memory to literacy to numeracy to executive functioning to even general IQ, even though they go to more school than we did. So why? What happened around 2010 that decoupled schooling from cognitive development? It can't be school. Schools basically look the same. It can't be biology. This hasn't enough time to change. The answer appears to be the tools we are using within schools to drive that learning. Across 80 countries, as Jean was just saying, if you look at the data, once countries adopt digital technology widely in schools, performance goes down significantly to the point where kids who use computers about five hours per day in school for learning purposes will score over two thirds of a standard deviation less than kids who rarely or never touch tech at school, and that's across 80 countries. Bring it home to The US. Let's go to The US. We have our NAEP. That's our big data. Take any state. Here's a fun experiment you can try. Take any state NAEP data. Compare that to when that state adopted one to one technology widely, and watch what happens. The NAEP data will plateau and then start to drop. And, of course, this is all correlative. What we really want is causation. To get causation, what you need is academic research, and you need mechanisms, explanations for why we're seeing what we're seeing. Luckily, we have academic research stretching back to 1962 that shows the exact same story for sixty years. When tech enters education, learning goes down. In fact, because what do kids do on computers? They skim. So rather than determining what do we want our children to do and gearing education towards that, we are redefining education to better suit the tool. That's not progress. As we go through our discussion today, there will be a lot of talk about smartphones and social media, rightly so. But I’m the voice here to remind you that even in schools, it doesn't matter what the size of the screen is. If it's a phone, if it's a laptop, if it's desktop, and it doesn't matter who bought it. Is it school sanctioned? Does it have the word education stamped on it? It doesn't matter. All of these things are also gonna hurt learning, which in turn are gonna hurt our kids' cognitive development right at the time when we need our kids to be sharper than we are.