A New Study Shows IQ to be a Myth

Is it me, or did ErtaiNaGia hi-jack any against the grain thought?

But I'm sure she'll dissect anyone's reply line by line and toss in her 'na na a boo boo' and 'I know you are, but what am I' response...

Thank you OP for opening up a wonderful topic.

I am actually FOR IQ tests - as long as they meet the persons taking the test 'scope of reality'. The off-the-shelf IQ test is OK, but sure if flawed. Like I mentioned before - I'm at 140. What does that mean - not a damn thing. It is all how one uses their 'IQ' which will make or break them.

As for ErtaiNaGia - they use theirs line-by-line....with a dash of Geez.

-CN

reply to post by ChuckNasty

Is it me, or did ErtaiNaGia hi-jack any against the grain thought?

Well, thank you for acknowledging my glorious contribution to this thread, and against the dark arts of ignorance.

For amusing me, I shall grace your post with the glory of my response!

And by "Against the Grain" do you mean the grain of the people in this thread?

Yes... I go against people who state that intelligence doesn't exist, despite the fact that it does.

Some people are REALLY stupid, meaning lacking intelligence, meaning lacking the ability to reason.

But I'm sure she'll dissect anyone's reply line by line and toss in her 'na na a boo boo' and 'I know you are, but what am I' response...

I'm a she now, eh?

The off-the-shelf IQ test is OK, but sure if flawed.

Would you like to back up your assertion that IQ tests are flawed?

By providing an explanation, or perhaps some evidence?

Or are we supposed to just go on your WORD that they are "Flawed"?

As for ErtaiNaGia - they use theirs line-by-line....with a dash of Geez.

I have to parse your incoherent madness before I can properly refute it.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia

the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason

Would you like to explain how there could be MULTIPLE types of this extremely specific definition?

Some people might be good at using reason to solve spatial tasks, others might be good at mathematical/logical tasks, interprersonal tasks or creative tasks (an average/poor at the rest). It only makes sense that intelligence is not a one dimensional phenomenon. But that of course does not mean it doesnt exist, and it also does not mean you cannot consider some types of intelligence more valuable than others. And some people still might be good at most of the intelligence types, and some people might be below average at most types.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


This is the biggest train wreck of a thread I have ever read.

I feel like I am watching kipp and napoleon going at it. ErtaiNaGia= napoleon and kip everyone else

reply to post by Maslo

Some people might be good at using reason

Yes.... some people are good at using reason, others are not.

WHAT they use reason ON, does not make it a "Different kind" of intelligence, it's just a different application of it.

It's like saying that using a claw hammer on a watermelon makes it a "Watermelon Hammer"... it's stupid.

This site attracts the wrong half of the bell curve as far as intellect is concerned.

There are a group of people in this thread that know very little about IQ Tests and have never taken one nor do they understand what is tested in terms of scope or subject.

There are many IQ Tests that have been developed over the years just so that differences in Education, language and a whole plethora of other elements can be taken into account.

Primary, Middle and High Schools along with Universities offer a form of education that is based on Factual Learning. Any one with the will to study and an average memory can do well at all of these levels. Getting that Shiny piece of paper is not that hard and has little to do with intelligence. Using that knowledge in the work place is another thing entirely.

We have all come across the Teacher, Lawyer or candlestick maker that can have as many degrees as they want and still be a useless piece of crap in their chosen profession. This is as a result of an Education System that is based on facts. I may add, a declining Education System since we can't 'label' the student as a failure. Even at the University level, high failure rates are not conducive to high enrollments and therefore affects the mighty $$$$.

There was a time when the highly intelligent were lauded for their thinking skills, highly sought after and well compensated by a decent salary. Things have changed. Now they are labelled Geeks and such like.

If you ask most people who invented the Compact disk or the DVD most will respond with 'Phillips Corporation.' A Corporation can not invent a single thing. It is the Intelligent human being that are inventive, but sadly, they are now a throw away commodity.

Many views expressed in this thread seem to me to be either, "We are all equally Intelligent," or the "No one has a right to claim they are more anything than I am." This is a direct result of the 'no one fails' education system, a belief system that has evolved into the adult life of many.

It is sad, and the West will pay the price as other countries that still appreciate the gifted will take leaps and bounds ahead in many, many fields of endeavor.

P

reply to post by pheonix358

Many views expressed in this thread seem to me to be either, "We are all equally Intelligent," or the "No one has a right to claim they are more anything than I am." This is a direct result of the 'no one fails' education system, a belief system that has evolved into the adult life of many.

Thanks.

The title of the thread has nothing to do with the findings of this study...

IQ is not a myth. I took an IQ test, literally. Therefore the idea of IQ exists beyond mythology.

As far as the study, I never equated IQ with a general 'intelligence' parameter - just people good at solving certain types of problems/knowing certain things.

Using the word 'intelligent' in general is a terrible idea.. of course people are only intelligent in certain areas/activities. granted, there are some who are just not intelligent in any way (thats right.. some people are just dumb!), but you can't compare a mathematical genius capable of visualising complex functions with someone who has a photographic memory and the innate ability to speed-read

...to the great relief of everyone with a low IQ.


An IQ test is one way to measure mental efficiency. Of course it doesn't take in to account how "street smart" and "emotionally intelligent" you are. Because no one cares about that.

Originally posted by cartesia
The title of the thread has nothing to do with the findings of this study...

IQ is not a myth. I took an IQ test, literally. Therefore the idea of IQ exists beyond mythology.

As far as the study, I never equated IQ with a general 'intelligence' parameter - just people good at solving certain types of problems/knowing certain things.

Using the word 'intelligent' in general is a terrible idea.. of course people are only intelligent in certain areas/activities. granted, there are some who are just not intelligent in any way (thats right.. some people are just dumb!), but you can't compare a mathematical genius capable of visualising complex functions with someone who has a photographic memory and the innate ability to speed-read

edit on 23-12-2012 by cartesia because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2012 by cartesia because: (no reason given)

If I may offer the following insight.

An IQ test involves many skill set areas. Visual thinking, Empathy, Patterning and photographic memory are gifts in addition to IQ. Yes, certainly, each gift will add points to the overall IQ, but I would suggest that you consider the overall IQ to be separate entities from the specialized gifts.

Even in psychology, many professionals shy away from IQ because they see it as 'not important' most likely because 'I don't have it, therefore it can't be important.' The gifts are held by some in the same derogatory manner.

I can not stress enough that a person who is not a Visual Thinker (as an example) will never get even close to comprehending what the gift is capable of. That is why, if you have these skills and need to see a psychologist you have to be picky in your choice of a practitioner.

I am a little surprised no one has stated the inverse general rule of IQ vs EQ. Perhaps we should leave that for anther thread.

P

reply to post by Hawking


I do, it is a very important area to note. The IQ / EQ has long been known to generally have an inverse relationship. That is why in general terms people that have low to middling IQ scores are some of the easiest people to like and to get along with.

Having a high IQ is certainly not the be all and end all of life. To survive we need everyone. I like to put it this way.

If there were no gifted people we would all, still, be swinging from tree branches making grunting noises.

On the other hand, if we were all in the highest of IQ levels, the human race would have died out. We would all be so busy sitting around the camp fire discussing how to get a man on the moon we would have neglected putting in food supplies for the winter and all starve to death. Would have been a great conversation though.

It takes all of us to make the world go round.

P

reply to post by pheonix358


So if we all had very high IQs we would forget to feed ourselves?


Honestly we don't "need" everyone, that's just something we say to make everyone feel good about themselves. Everyone gets a trophy!

reply to post by Hawking


No, not the feeding, it is the putting in stores for the winter. High IQs tend in the main to make people lousy at boring tasks like picking nuts for winter. They also tend not to take chances when hunting so as a group are not as efficient at these tasks.

I'm sorry, one extra bad winter could have wiped us all out!

P

last time i was tested for IQ was when i was applying for a job with the federal government, at the time it was rated at 120.

however i completely agree with the article, and it is something that ive been telling my friends for a long time, human intelligence cant be measured with a simple sit down written test.

i would suggest in order to test ones intellect, a series of physical tests should be administered, by that i mean placing the person inside some sort of maze and giving them a set of challenges in order to navigate and successfully exit the maze.

every human being has a given set of skills and talents in very vast amount of subjects.

and even the most intelligent people lack the most important skill of all, LOGIC

reply to post by ghoulardi

This will be a great read for people with low IQ's I was tested with an above average IQ but I got really lost after reading the first couple sentences.

Basically, the OP is saying that liberties were taken and assumptions made, that are now shown to be erroneous. The IQ scale is no longer as reliable as we had believed it to be.

Well, that's just wonderful. Oh well. I'd rather have fun with it than put a number on that troublesome quality.

Although a high IQ may not guarantee success, a low IQ will most assuredly guarantee mediocrity or less.

I have a small collection of OMNI magazines. I still have the one with The World's Hardest IQ Test in
it. I scored 148. I think I was about 22 at the time. Later I applied to Mensa and missed
by two points.

I loved that magazine.

If anyone wants I could dig it out and post a few questions from the test....I recall some of those darn
questions were doozies...

Originally posted by IEtherianSoul9
LINK - IQ a Myth, Study Says

In conclusion the study determined that three factors - reasoning, short-term memory and verbal ability - form one's "cognitive profile" and that unlike a trait like height which can be measured almost precisely, intellect is not a single, scalable, immutable number, so easily defined by IQ tests.

edit on 12/22/2012 by IEtherianSoul9 because: (no reason given)

I always find it amusing that people with no concept of what "IQ" is often try to debunk it, then suggest it actually measure what it really does measure, it's just that since they have no concept of it, they imagine it to be something else.

What exactly do you think IQ tests measure? They measure various factors of reasoning, short-term memory and verbal ability, not "general knowledge".

All these stupid "internet IQ tests" measure little factoids instead of actual intelligence, then people go off on tangents about what their IQ is (according to the inaccurate internet tests) and they'll rant and rave, brag or strike out, all based on what they have been led to believe IQ is. Well, you're wrong, that's not what it is.

I would hazard to guess that 90% of society has never had an actual IQ test, yet they go on and on and on about them, claim they have just because they clicked an internet popup, or they outright lie about it. Until you've had an actual test given by a licensced psychologist, you have no idea where you fall nor do you have any idea what your IQ is.

Actual, scientific tests are accurate in measuring intellectual ability, it's just that most of the people that prattle on and on have never had one. Oh, they think they have or they lie that they have, but they haven't. I know it's true, I've participated in actual research, not "thought experiments" where people just "think about it" and look for matching opinion articles on the internet, then write their own and attribute actual studies incorrectly without ever having actually read the study, let alone processed it.

People are against IQ because 95% of the people don't fall in the "high IQ" group. They are offended by that, they are threatened by that and they feel they have to fight back. 68% of the population falls in the middle. That's between 85 and 115, that's "average" whether you like it or not. Going up the scale, 14% fall between 115 and 130, that's where 90% of the population CLAIMS to be, but where they are not. another 2.1% are higher than 130. Only 2.1%. It's the same for the other end of the scale. About 14% fall between 70 and 85, and 2.1% are below 70.

Stop clicking on the internet tests, see a professional and have your actual score calculated if you are interested in knowing what it is. Also, stop trying to "debunk" something without actually knowing what it really is. The people who DO know what it is can see through the feeble attempts and it looks ridiculous.

Originally posted by john_bmth
This site attracts the wrong half of the bell curve as far as intellect is concerned.

AMEN!

And it's very, very frustrating. I expected much, much more than I have seen on it.