In terms of intelligence you cannot speak about groups in this way; only about individuals.
You do not condone speculative theory indicting an entire group; even when these particular groups model their collective behavior after learned traits and force their professional invented ideals upon an individual who must then critique the present group which is responsible for oppressing or discombobulating populations? However, you do condone the victimization of the individual, because of analytical compilations reinforcing group psychology?
I suppose it is easier to treat surface symptoms. Inherit systems of socialized operation accumulate as math equations for you. What kind of detached formulation do you follow?
A group will have a spread of intelligence in the form of a bell curve.
Mechanical curvature makes more sense in your world of compartmentalized knowledge and specialization, even though these split intellects will be grouped as some statistic for your platitudinous sympathy. Empathy for the clinically inane majority. Criminalization or alienation for those individuals who deviate from the popular pattern (or shallow bell curves, in your defense). What you do not understand- intrinsic connections linking each individual within your pattern recognition symbol, you call a bell curve.
Artists must rebel to transform decadent culture... It is the delicate interplay of the politician, who, through promotion of authority given to the politician by the tyrannical majority (constituents), regurgitates rear-view mirror policy while addressing our future. Whereas the artist responds to the politicians backward forecast, with fresh and new insights regarding the now, present, here, this moment, and the next.
In your world of comfort and delusional symbolist curvature, you'd rather destroy the artist (individual) once he deviates from the popular pattern or mode of perception which is guarded by the politician (group).
You could say the average intelligence of artists is higher than politicians, but then your into a minefield as to who you select.
A minefield of novel possibility, perhaps? I do not care for the middle ground of mediocrity and conformed methodology.
Before you can speak of benifit you must define what you mean by that term. That is an immensely difficult task. I certainly would find it almost impossible.
The politician guards the past, the artist is ready to confront humanities future. This is why the artist will always be more intelligent and beneficial to humanity than the politician ever can be.
OMH wrote
Oh, welcome to pofo magnocrat. tread lightly, understanding physical absolutes isn't tolerated well.
Exactly, and this is why time is relative and not absolute... look how long that delusion held man back from physical progress