Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

A New Study Shows IQ to be a Myth

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Yep...Definitely a Troll!!!




posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 




I still believe in IQ, in terms of some have it, some ain't. The ability to discern new pathways is an evolutionary necessity, as are most of the attributes of someone considered to have a high IQ. Spatial skills, putting one foot in front of the other. Pattern recognition and what it means to survival or comfort (i.e. Where the best restrooms are).


Haha. I would like to know what determines which restrooms are the best and how that relates to intelligence! When I have to use the bathroom any one will do!

Since IQ tests are timed can I argue that it is just a measurement of the rate of comprehension, or will I get attacked for such a remark?



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Am not being funny but anyone with a reasonable level of common sense already knew the IQ test was a pretty arbitrary measure of intelligence that didn't really have a great deal of significance in the real world.

It's good to know the academic world has finally realised that too



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by fastbob72
 



Am not being funny but anyone with a reasonable level of common sense already knew the IQ test was a pretty arbitrary measure of intelligence that didn't really have a great deal of significance in the real world.


Am not being funny but anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence already knows that intelligence varies from person to person, and can be measured by having test subjects try to answer a series of increasingly difficult problems to gauge how smart they are in relation to others that also took the test.

Duh.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by VekTorVik
 



Since IQ tests are timed can I argue that it is just a measurement of the rate of comprehension, or will I get attacked for such a remark?


If it takes you 5 minutes to figure out 2+2, you are dumber than someone who can do it in mere seconds.

Duh.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 


I can't argue with you there. But what if I can get 2+2 in one second and my friend can get it in five seconds. That adds up to I don't give a sh^t.
edit on 22-12-2012 by VekTorVik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by VekTorVik
 



I can't argue with you there. But what if I can get 2+2 in one second and my friend can get it in five seconds. That adds up to I don't give a sh^t.


Was there a point relevant to the topic for saying that?



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 

Perhaps, but you only have five seconds to determine it...



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by VekTorVik
 



Perhaps, but you only have five seconds to determine it...


You are stating that your motivation was rational, and deducible from information that you have posted in this thread?

As opposed to personal, and subjective?



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
By what they're saying, I know that what this comes down to is simply..... misunderstanding of definition of 'IQ'.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by fastbob72
 



Am not being funny but anyone with a reasonable level of common sense already knew the IQ test was a pretty arbitrary measure of intelligence that didn't really have a great deal of significance in the real world.


Am not being funny but anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence already knows that intelligence varies from person to person, and can be measured by having test subjects try to answer a series of increasingly difficult problems to gauge how smart they are in relation to others that also took the test.

Duh.


So how are you defining intelligence exactly.Obviously levels of intelligence vary from person to person but what if two people take the test.One person who is used to taking test of this and a similar nature and someone who hasn't taken any kind of test in years.

Obvioiusly one person has a definite advantage over the other and the results will probably reflect that to one degree or another.

In that case is it a test of intelligence or experience.

Someone who has a good,formal education is normally going to have an advantage over someone who isn't similarly educated.

What exactly constitutes intelligence in the real world ??



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 


Actually, my only reason for posting was that I thought it was silly to equate intelligence with finding the "best" bathroom, as stated by a previous poster. You responded so I couldn't resist playing along. What I really wanted to say was...

"Some day a doctor will tell me I have an IQ of 48 and are what some people call mentally retarded."
"LOUD NOISES!"

But such pointless posts are often frowned upon as they offer no added value to the discussion.

I read an article similar to the one in the OP in which readers were encouraged to take a free online survey of some type of informal IQ test. During this test (which I did pretty poorly on), it occurred to me that two people with vastly different IQ scores could reach the same conclusion in a real life problem, just at different times. When you consider this in a real world setting that doesn't require split second decision making, it is OK to be the dumb guy. You will still end up in about the same place as the smart guy (as long as it isn't a life or death decision either).

My point being we are all relatively equal. Relative to what, I know you are asking. To the group. We are all generally pretty dumb. My stupidity drags down you smarta@@...I mean intelligence. Your brains boost my buffoon.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by fastbob72
 



What exactly constitutes intelligence in the real world ??



a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by VekTorVik
 



Actually, my only reason for posting was that I thought it was silly to equate intelligence with finding the "best" bathroom, as stated by a previous poster.


Wha?

Okay... nevermind then.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Glad to see there is a study that has caught up to one of the things I have been saying for years. First and foremost, IQ tests only test current knowledge and the speed to which it is recalled. The better a person's recall (or photographic memory) the higher their IQ, provided they have been taught the material covered. For example, a 5 year old may have a grasp of addition and subtraction, but multiplication and division would be unusual concepts...algebra, geometry's theorems and proofs as well as trigonometry functions would be alien for a 5 year old and would not be tested by any sane IQ test for the age level.

Can a 5 year old do multiplication and division? Yes, of course they can. They can understand the rational behind it if properly explain to them as well. But doing so is not an indication of intelligence unless they can quickly figure out basic concepts such as multiplication is commutative just as addition is.

So basically knowledge is the sum of information that you know, IQ is how quickly you can access that knowledge and intelligence is how you adapt that information outside the original data. For example 1 x 3 = 3 is knowledge. Answering without calculating or counting on fingers is a degree of IQ, figuring out on your own that any number multiplied by 1 is always that original number is a level of intelligence...if you were told that fact, then it is knowledge and remembering that you were told it is IQ.

Hope I explained that well enough.




I'm not sure where you had your IQ tested, but most IQ tests contain very few, if any questions like what you describe. They mainly test the areas that are mentioned in the OP, and different facets of them. Memory, ability to reason, verbal ability, spatial reasoning, etc. Almost none of it, if any, is based on recall of previously learned information.

IQ is a real thing, and measurable (with proper tests). However, it is not static, and may change throughout a person's lifetime. Furthermore, I believe (and research indicates) that you have, within your power, the ability to increase the skills and abilities which would result in a higher "IQ."



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I never believed in IQ tests... I am always really bad in them, but I consider myself pretty smart
I can speak 4 languages fluently and can repair any car you give me. I am about to finish my studies in automobile technology and everytime when I see the "smart" people in university who have better grades than I do, I ask myself why. There are so many people which are considered intelligent, but they don't understand the easiest things in real life...They can just write down what is written in the books, but if you ask them why it is like that, they can't answer. And still they will probably get a better job than I will. Sad but true


/btw. I learned basic Japanese and arround 200Kanji in less than 6 months... and without even really stuying
edit on 23-12-2012 by aLLeKs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 



You don't have to give up so quickly. I do agree with your statements on the subject, I just think your approach was a little confrontational.

If you want to point out a flaw in the OP, perhaps you could take this example...




The two fallacies that are present concerning the principles of IQ testing are: reification and hereditarianism. The hereditarianism fallacy claims that intellect can be passed on, through genes, to the progeny of a person.


I am not an expert, but I don't know how an IQ tests are flawed due to hereditarianism. In what portion of an IQ test do they consider heredity? Isn't it really the interpretation of the results that factor in heredity? That would mean that the methods of extrapolating data obtained from the tests are flawed.

I mean, this statement in the OP doesn't even show a relation between the first and second statements. Statement 1 - Hereditarianism is a fallacy inherent in IQ testing
Statement 2 - Hereditarianism fallacy claims that intelligence is genetic

I could be wrong since my average IQ won't let me fully process all of this information. I believe a better arguement for the OP would not have been that IQ tests are flawed, but I don't care what my score is cause I can play the Jazz flute really good.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 

My IQ is in the 90's and I'm aware enough to know how stupid I am. I have been schooled by too many (much) smarter people to ever be cocky enough to think that IQ is a meaningless measure.

Until you really see what high IQ can do you're speaking out of your ***.

But whatever. Everybody wins. Everybody is equal.

No, not everything is equal. Survival of the fittest still reigns. People say it doesn't, but I think it does. The wealthy tend to be the smartest. They're the ones that have access. Sure, poor people reproduce a lot and can exist in great numbers, but they'll never have access. It's the access that gives the power and with the power they rule the world. It's just the way it works.

I'm not mad at smart people anymore than I'm mad at anything else. There're people that're dumber than me and there're beings in the universe smarter than the smartest people. And there're creatures on this planet much dumber than we're. The universe is big. We're small. Diversity is everywhere.

Life is about doing the best you can with the resources available to you.
edit on 23-12-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by fastbob72
 



What exactly constitutes intelligence in the real world ??



a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)


Yes I'd agree with that but I've known many people who would exhibit the above strongly yet who would not necessarily do as well at formal tests.

Whereas some very well educated people who can certainly pass tests allday long like falling off a log yet are somehow clueless in the real world.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   

I believe a better arguement for the OP would not have been that IQ tests are flawed, but I don't care what my score is cause I can play the Jazz flute really good.


Haha that's the best remark I've heard on the subject yet.I can relate to that as I play a mean blues guitar.lol






top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join