The Nightstar Zoo

Nightstar IRC Network - irc.nightstar.net
It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:45 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: IQ
PostPosted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 8:13 pm 
MSN is currently running a piece about how IQ doesn't really measure anything. Now, this isn't news--brain & cognition researchers long ago abandoned the idea of IQ as meaningless, and A.K. Dewdney devoted a chapter of his excellent book on bad science Yes, We Have No Neutrons to the topic (which Mr. Ansary's piece mostly summarizes)--but it's interesting to see it in mass media.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 9:09 pm 
IQ tests are pretty bad... Not that I've never actually bothered to take one myself. I figure it's a pain in the neck and I firmly believe that it tells me relatively little so what do I care? :?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 11:00 pm 
That's funny. I didn't know you could post as a guest and I just did it. :)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:59 am 
It tells you something.

For example, I've found that people boasting a high IQ are often asses.

I should know, I have a high IQ. Which just proves my point.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: IQ
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:54 am 
Offline
Reptile House Exhibit
Reptile House Exhibit
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2003 10:08 am
Posts: 305
Location: The Great Northern Deciduous Forests
gwalla wrote:
MSN is currently running a piece about how IQ doesn't really measure anything.

Sorry, but I've got to disagree with your statement. IQ tests most certainly do measure something... How well you write IQ tests!

I agree with the article, though. And the premise that there are several types of intelligence. I'd guess people like Wayne Gretzky and Michael Jordan would score reasonably high on IQ tests. But you'd find any number of people on your average university campus that'd score higher. Yet put them on hockey rink and basketball court respectively, and they are to that sport what Einstein was to science: able to see things that everybody else missed.

And that racial superiority thing of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th becomes a bit tiresome after a while.

Henk G.

_________________
Why are canines called canines when feline canines are bigger than canine canines?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2003 1:28 pm 
Actually, IQ does measure something. Just not intelligence.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2003 3:08 pm 
Well, IQ isn't a perfect measure of intelligence...But it's still a measure of some sort. Just not a comprehensive one.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:41 am 
What I always heard was that the standard, run of the mill IQ test measured how fast you could potentially learn something.

I had a guy back in middle school. Used to struggle with classes, would work and work and never get it. I usually did fine.

However, if I ever tried to disagree with him, he'd say, "I have a higher IQ than you, so you know I'm smarter."

....

Ass.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:13 am 
IQ ideally measures mental age over physical age. Basically, how mature your brain is. It's not actually bound by age, though; it remains constant throughout life, meaning one's mental age is always considered to be that much higher than their physical age. It is linked with intelligence, of course, and is generally assumed to be synonomous with intelligence, which is where the problems come from.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 6:37 am 
That's not exactly true, since your score on the test divided by age will always drop. So according to the tests, the older you get, the dumber. :)

Besides, it should be undisputed that your ability to learn changes drastically throughout your life, be the reasons natural or unnatural. Hell, it can change drastically from hour to hour.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:24 am 
On a humerous way of looking at things, I like what Scott Adams said once... we're all idiots. We're just idiots in completely different ways.

On a serious note, touching on what htg said... I have heard of this research done by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray in a book called The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, and the book discusses the differences in the average IQ's amongst different races.

Now, objectively I've heard their research doesn't hold up to scrutiny, and that neither author has a reputation of showing any interest in the subject matter before or after this book.

On the other hand, with as controversial of a subject matter as it is, I'm not sure if its possible to objectively critique it, or even voice agreement with it.

...Just thought I would toss that out there for discussion.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:04 pm 
Raif wrote:
That's not exactly true, since your score on the test divided by age will always drop. So according to the tests, the older you get, the dumber. :)

Besides, it should be undisputed that your ability to learn changes drastically throughout your life, be the reasons natural or unnatural. Hell, it can change drastically from hour to hour.


Not according to psychology, no.

And while, yes, the brain does decrease and increase in activity on a few-hours cycle, the ability of an individual to learn and retain information remains roughly constant throughout life.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:40 pm 
I love the questions that are on IQ tests.

E.G.

Which animal does not belong?
Horse
Cow
Mule
Kangaroo
Giraffe

The right answer is apparently 'kangaroo.' But an equally correct answer, if not MORE correct is also 'mule,' simply because mules are not a species. The tests are on crack, and made by a couple of monkeys who think they're really smart.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:05 pm 
The General wrote:
Raif wrote:
That's not exactly true, since your score on the test divided by age will always drop. So according to the tests, the older you get, the dumber. :)

Besides, it should be undisputed that your ability to learn changes drastically throughout your life, be the reasons natural or unnatural. Hell, it can change drastically from hour to hour.


Not according to psychology, no.

And while, yes, the brain does decrease and increase in activity on a few-hours cycle, the ability of an individual to learn and retain information remains roughly constant throughout life.


Well, it depends on what sort of information too. It's generally accepted that the ability to learn languages drops off somewhere around 10 years old. Not that you can't learn languages after that, of course, it's just much harder to achieve fluency.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:15 pm 
The General wrote:
And while, yes, the brain does decrease and increase in activity on a few-hours cycle, the ability of an individual to learn and retain information remains roughly constant throughout life.

Are you including alzheimer's and senility into that calculation?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:18 pm 
Skylancer wrote:
The tests are on crack, and made by a couple of monkeys who think they're really smart.

They beat one of my midterms. Perhaps in an attempt at humor:

Pointers are...
A) Easy
B) Hard
C) Incomprehensible
D) Not on this test

The obvious answer is D, but the existence of the question with such an answer makes that false. :)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 4:22 pm 
Skylancer wrote:
The right answer is apparently 'kangaroo.' But an equally correct answer, if not MORE correct is also 'mule,' simply because mules are not a species. The tests are on crack, and made by a couple of monkeys who think they're really smart.


...related to this... a sign of having a high IQ is not walking into a room of biologists and asking them what a species is.

I've seen it.

It is not pretty.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 6:52 pm 
Perhaps that was the intent. :twisted:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:05 pm 
Raif wrote:
The General wrote:
And while, yes, the brain does decrease and increase in activity on a few-hours cycle, the ability of an individual to learn and retain information remains roughly constant throughout life.

Are you including alzheimer's and senility into that calculation?


No, those are exceptions. Alzheimer's is a disease, and senility only occurs at the very end of life.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:41 am 
If it occurs at the end of life, then it is most certainly a part of "throughout." And don't forget gwalla's point about age. Only in childhood is your ability to learn languages at its height.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:03 am 
I also read somewhere that while our ability to memorize doesn't dramatically drop as we grow older, past a certain age we need more time to remember - instead of being able to call up a memory in seconds, we may need half an hour or more.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:54 pm 
It's true that fluid intelligence (the ability to reason and solve problems, etc.) is variable during the first and last five or so years of life, but my point was that they remain constant throughout the middle of it.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group