a reply to: Profusion
a reply to: Profusion
IQ Test's are mainly flawed as an analysis tool, there result's are of course not as objective as they are intended to be for a number of reason's,
how many highly talented artist's and other artisan's for instance would fail to gain a high score in spite of what may be regarded as genius level
Then there are people with Dyslexia whom may also be unable to complete some of these test's due to the fact that though on average they have a far
higher social interaction skill when it come's to verbal communication while they simply struggle to read and write in what used to be called word
blindness, a condition which of course can also affect there visual skill set when trying to solve the visual test's.
Other's are simply not mathematical by there very nature and so this rule's out many whom would otherwise ace these test's.
They are also a very poor measure of common sense ability and day to day skill set's.
But many company's and agency's these day's use them as a catagorizing tool, this is in error I personally believe but of course when an idea
become's entrenched in the general human psyche as a valid system then it is regarded as such by those whom choose to use this type of testing which I
would actually argue would be more at home in a modern scriptorium than the real world.
These day's you will find IQ based psychometric testing in many profession's when you go for an interview or apply to move up in the rank's of such
organisation's and for the above reason's this is often unfair to those with niche and general talent's while it favour's the crossword junky's whom
though they often score very highly are often litterally as thick as two short plank's as we say over here in northern Britain.
Here is a flavour of one online IQ test's,
There are many more but as you can see many of the question's do not apply to real world scenario's, they may be structured to analyse thought
capacity and problem solving as well as visual accuity in there somewhat limited scope but to draw a coarse analogy, take a lady whom works in visual
inspection and quality control on a factory conveyor belt, she studies objects for visual defect's constantly and becomes exceptionally good and fast
so fo course this would skew the result's for the visual part of the test as she is much more able through practice to perform this section with no
difficulty but to what degree has her mind been acclimatised in this way to be able to perform just this very function, is this a fair test of
intellectual capability or has this test fallen foul of it's own criteria (to be fair the lady performing the quality testing is probably highly
skilled so would be regarded as intelligent anyway).
Constructing a more generalised real world test would not of course work on a computer screen and so of course there are men regarded as expert in
there field's whom have been paid to construct these test's but are they really any good as a measure of general aptitude and is the IQ score really
worth the paper it is written on.
In the old day's craftsmen would train up in there skilled trades for many years before becoming time served, there skill set was of course tailored
to there particular profession but they excelled in there field and while this may have caused resistance to new innovations in some field's they
remained masters of there trade's.
Is a time served master cobbler for example less valuable than a clerk whom has his ego bouyed up by his IQ score or when you need that new pair of
custom shoes is the illiterate but highly skilled 85 year old cobbler whom is still plying his now sadly dying profession the better choice of valued
person for your quality society.
I have seen a triple doctorate chemist boil a litre of mercury he had spilled with nothing but a cloth face mask in a closed laboratory in a run down
teaching establishment and faulty air conditioning, very clever guy and a nice guy too boot but is that acting intelligently, the mercury was of
course expensive and with a limited budget to factor in, well? but still.
I have seen an Electonic's lecturer make mistake's that a first year student would not and nearly get himself seriously injured, in the event it took
him a while to get the feeling back in his hand after getting shocked by an open power source.
Day to day I see drivers, business men and many other's with cell phone's glued to there ear's driving on the roads over here in britain, it is
illegal and damn stupid but they still do it.
And I guess a lot of these people would ace those tests.
Your point is perfectly correct, politic's aside is Valid and though I am not from the US trump in my opinion is a loon, a dangerous loon though and
though he does not stand a chance in hell Bernie Sanders would serve the US people far better than Donald or Hillary.
Now someome mentioned monosodium glutomate, nasty stuff but so is sodium benzoate and especially aspartame (liberate the benzine in the bio-chemical
reactor that is your stomach and also phenylalinine from the aspartame - e coli feces - and you have a potentially lethal cancer causing/triggering
combination, the phenylalinine acts as an intra cellular solvent which is why it is used in microscopy to carry dye's into cells (phenyl red and
phenyl blue etc) and highlight the nucleus as well as the other cytoblasts, mitochondria etc, and so when mixed with liberated benzine ring's a known
carcinagen then of course it is presumably possible the phenylalinine will facilitate the introduction of the benzine to the cell's interior were it
can cause the most harm).
Mercury in your tooth filling's (mercury amalgum) though stable in the amalgum will still leak out over time into your body and mercury being bio
accumulative (it stays in your system) will disrupt your body, nervous system over time, not noticibly perhaps but it is still there).
Your body is a bio electrochemcial organism and so exposure to electrical field's or more precisely alternating electromagnetic fields must cause
interferrance and even if that is negligable it is still potentially harmful as well as potentially neurplogically disruptive.
Psychological implications must also be taken into account.