It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I.Q. Tests: And You Thought You Were So Smart...

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:52 AM
reply to post by kosmicjack

I couldn't have stated it any better. At least I've been able to acquire a thicker skin over the last decade or so when dealing with people who I feel just cannot think for themselves or outside the box.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:12 AM

Originally posted by migliavacca

I've noticed here on ATS that there's a few posters who claim advanced degrees.

Well, that's the thing about the internet, you can claim anything. I am an astro-physicist, I'm not but you don't know that.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by SpeakerofTruth

Indeed. Plus it seems they are the ones that demand proof of people's posts the loudest. Why don't they supply proof of their PhD's? Yes we can be anything we want to be on the internet it seems.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by migliavacca]

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:00 PM
To enhance your I.Q. just listen to Mozart.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:30 PM
Two people, for the first time, watch someone jump off a cliff. The first person pictures what will happen in their mind, and knows this is a bad idea beforehand. The second person watches said individual plunge to their death and decides that this act, was indeed a very bad idea.

If you ask both people if it is a good idea to jump off a cliff, (IQ test), they will both give you the right answer, but who is more intelligent?

IQ tests only reveal the level at which someone was prepared to take the test, not their level of intelligence IMHO.


posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:36 PM
So all of this conjecture got me wondering even more. I found this interesting tidbit:

Intelligence varies with at least 21 factors
Some of the other circumstances and attributes that have been found to vary to a greater or lesser (but always significant) extent in relation with IQ (Bouchard & Segal, 1985; Liungman, 1975) - note that not all of these relationships support an environmental view. Intelligence varies with:

• Infant malnutrition
• Birth weight
• Birth order
• Height
• Number of siblings
• Number of years in school
• Social group of parental home
• Father's profession
• Father's economic status
• Degree of parental rigidity
• Parental ambition
• Mother's education
• Average TV viewing
• Average book-reading
• Self-confidence according to attitude scale measurement
• Age (applies only in adulthood)
• Degree of authority in parental home
• Criminality
• Alcoholism
• Mental disease
• Emotional adaptation

"No single environmental factor seems to have a large influence on IQ. Variables widely believed to be important are usually weak....Even though many studies fail to find strong environmental effects....most of the factors studied do influence IQ in the direction predicted by the investigator....environmental effects are multifactorial and largely unrelated to each other."

So, it would appear that there are many psychological and biological factors each contributing a small a small fraction to the variance in IQ scores.

I understand some of the indicators but I would like more of an explanation of others. For instance, 'height' and 'birth weight'. And, occasionally, one hears of a really ingenius criminal, though mostly you hear of the 'really stupid' variety.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:01 PM
I have often wondered if intelligence may be linked to environmental conditions. However, when I examine my life and realize that I am FAIRLY intelligent, I have to wonder how that can be.

1. I grew up in a small town and really haven't traveled too terribly much.

2. My father had a high school education but my mother only had a junior high education.

3. My father, God bless him, was an alcoholic

4. My second home was in an American Legion... Bingo parlor/bar

5. My IQ has been measured to be about 120...

Given just the little bit of information I provided here, I have to question any kind of environmental impact on intelligence...

One thing my mother used to do with me is a child, though, is read to me. I suspect that may have contributed to my intelligence, but I'm not sure.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:44 PM

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
"the ability to learn,"

That is supposedly what IQ tests are designed to measure... Whether they actually do that is anyone's guess.

Weird discussion. An IQ test measures problem solving capabilities. Your on the edge of it but ability to learn is not exactly correct. There are versions that use symbols rather than words that can test illiterates with fairly accurate results.

The topic of IQ tests is far more complex than what was presented in that article. There are ways to test anyone. Skills is another story all together. I have a Challenged Cousin who is a brilliant Carpenter. His mental age is around that of a 12 year old and they were unable to teach him to read much more than a bit of basic vocabulary. So is this brilliant Craftsman inferior? On the other hand my best friend has an estimated IQ of 185. He has spent his entire adult life in and out of mental facilities and jail. So is he superior? If my friend reads this I'm smiling while I'm typing and I said best Friend

My definition of really smart would be someone who passed the MENSA Test and then did not send in the money or attend the get togethers.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:59 PM

Originally posted by Skyfloating
I never gave much credence to IQ tests in the first place, because they did not figure in emotional intelligence...

Emotional intelligence? Could it be that some may have more intelligent emotions? How does one measure the difference from the really smart sad to the dumb sad?

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:08 PM
Since I have a psychological background I will add my 2 cents to this thread.

There are many different intelligence tests, including a separate emotional intelligence test for those who had brought up that issue.

Intelligence is a topic that is still hotly debated today much like the Nature/Nurture topic.

Tests that have been made to measure intelligence in our day and age are just that. For example can an individual enter mainstream school? Can an individual enter a job as a bank clerk?

These tests are just tools of the professional. It is not a be all and end all. An I.Q number is just not given at the end of the test but rather a complex analysis of the different aspects of intelligence.

Also if you read the report on each of the tests it will state how it came to the conclusion of such test as well as its limitations and future study into how to improve said test.

So they are not perfect but still a valuable tool. Like all science new things are found and adapted to our knowledge on such topics every day.

As previously posted adaptation is an important aspect of intelligence. Let’s think of someone who is thought to be highly intelligent such as a propulsion scientist and another individual such as a once native Australian (Aborigine). Some people may think that the scientists intelligence is much higher though if you place the scientist in the middle of the Australian desert all of his knowledge would not mean much in advent of survival where as the Aborigine would be at home because of the knowledge that he/she has.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:11 PM
reply to post by Conspiriology

It is not about being sad or happy but rather about cope-ability in a certain situation. For example loss of job or relationship etc and how you react to this specific situation

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:15 PM
I can tell you 100% that IQ test are BS. Every one which I have ever taken graded me out as a genius. I rest my case.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:21 PM
How many have you taken and which ones.

Was it an internet pop psychology quiz?

Was it undertaken by a professional?

Have you ever contemplated that maybe you do have great emotional intelligence?

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:23 PM
reply to post by kosmicjack

if you look into the origin of the IQ, it was actually created to identify those who have problems learning, not those who are smart.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by scientist

I find that fact hilariously ironic!

This is not a trivial issue. I.Q. tests are used to diagnose people as mentally retarded, with a score of 70 generally taken to be the cutoff. You can imagine how the Flynn effect plays havoc with that system. In the nineteen-seventies and eighties, most states used the WISC-R to make their mental-retardation diagnoses. But since kids—even kids with disabilities—score a little higher every year, the number of children whose scores fell below 70 declined steadily through the end of the eighties. Then, in 1991, the WISC III was introduced, and suddenly the percentage of kids labelled retarded went up. The psychologists Tomoe Kanaya, Matthew Scullin, and Stephen Ceci estimated that, if every state had switched to the WISC III right away, the number of Americans labelled mentally retarded should have doubled.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:38 PM

Originally posted by MuLongQun
How many have you taken and which ones.

Was it an internet pop psychology quiz?

Was it undertaken by a professional?

Have you ever contemplated that maybe you do have great emotional intelligence?

No, never had one administered by a professional. I've done them at Mensa (didn't join), in school (both college and HS), and various places on the internet. All come back at top of the charts. Maybe it is just a reflection of my reasoning skills. I sure do not feel that emotional intelligence is my strong suit. I always felt that IQ tests were actually more like brain teasers, thus I tend not to give them any creedence.

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 12:07 AM
Just to make you aware that any proper psychometric test can only be administered by a mental health professional. Tests done at school were probably not the "high end" psychometric tests and yes I would have to agree with you, that tests that are not well researched and scrutinized by the scientific community are B.S. and should be taken as a grain of salt.

I just did a quick search on Mensa and it doesn’t seem like they could be registered to administer a proper psychometric test so it was probably just a pop psychology quiz

Specific training in these tests takes a lot of supervised training and study and then experience after before you can become proficient at administering these tests to individuals.

Usually reports are given after the test by the professional that may be pages long. If you have received a test by a professional only with a score I would be asking for certification, my money back and I would make a complaint to that specific government registered society…

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:05 AM
reply to post by Conspiriology

By "emotional intelligence" I mean specifically: Social intelligence, intuition, the STATE you are in (which has a huge impact on your ability to think and act).

I know a guy who scored over 150 on his IQ test. He´s supposed to be a genius, but he can hardly take care of himself since he´s afraid of going outside.

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 06:29 AM
some more facts on the IQ test: It was also used to deem blacks and other minorities as incompetent, to restrict their rights. It was also used as a form of population control via sterilization administered to families with low scores.

The original point you make in the first post is exactly how the IQ tests have been abused since they were created. Specifically, testing on relative cultural knowledge and using that as a way to deem someone stupid. For example, older tests would show pictures of victorian furniture, tennis rackets, a women's bonnet, etc. Obviously, a black or asian family does not have the same cultural IQ (i guess this gets lumped into emotional/social iq?), but they remained valid questions anyways. There are plenty of similar questions on the current tests as well.

On top of this, a real test isn't just a quick multiple choice survey. It's done with a tester, and they usually take notes on how you solve the problems, or the types of questions you ask in relation to a problem and etc. It's an observation of how you problem-solve, and your potential for adapting to new ways of thinking in a dynamic environment. I'm not sure if that's an IQ test, but that's the only type of "intelligence" test I know of. Also not sure if it ends up with a definitive number... in my opinion, anything that would assign a static number to how smart you are... well, only someone with a huge ego, low self esteem, or misinformation would accept that.

A great book to read on tis topic is called "The Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Jay Gould.

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 06:57 AM
IQ is overrated. I'd take high wisdom over high IQ any day. What is the point of a high IQ if you can't apply it, or figure out how to interact with people? The world isn't compartmentalised -- you are part of it and you interact with every thing that is part of the world.

To reference the snippet in the OP, I'd put higher stock on those Liberian tribespeople who know of the interactions in the world. The fool is the person who simply puts things into categories or 'boxes' without looking at the bigger picture i.e. thinking outside the box.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in