'@Edelstein9' let's see. First I addressed a point that is mentioned, but not argued. Since it's not a private conversation, it means that both points will be read by someone else. "I could say X, but I won't" is still saying X, so argument against it is useful.
Then I mentioned that depending on definition of smart, statement "smart people are evenly distributed between rural and urban populations" may be incorrect and that defining vague terms is important. Especially since it is now obvious that original commenter didn't limit definition of "smart" to intelligence alone.
Then I disagreed on usefulness of stereotypes.
Still can see where I've agreed with something. Especially now that I can say that average estimated IQ of California, one of the most populous and urbanized states in US, is lower than that of Vermont or Maine, leaders by percentage of rural population.
317
'@Edelstein9' let's see. First I addressed a point that is mentioned, but not argued. Since it's not a private conversation, it means that both points will be read by someone else. "I could say X, but I won't" is still saying X, so argument against it is useful.
Then I mentioned that depending on definition of smart, statement "smart people are evenly distributed between rural and urban populations" may be incorrect and that defining vague terms is important. Especially since it is now obvious that original commenter didn't limit definition of "smart" to intelligence alone.
Then I disagreed on usefulness of stereotypes.
Still can see where I've agreed with something. Especially now that I can say that average estimated IQ of California, one of the most populous and urbanized states in US, is lower than that of Vermont or Maine, leaders by percentage of rural population.