It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by IEtherianSoul9
LINK - IQ a Myth, Study Says
Can a moderator PLEASE move this to the 'Science and Technology' section...no clue how it ended up in the Fragile Earth section.
“When we looked at the data, the bottom line is the whole concept of IQ — or of you having a higher IQ than me — is a myth,” said Dr. Adrian Owen
“If there is something in the brain that is IQ, we should be able to find it by scanning. But it turns out there is no one area in the brain that accounts for people’s so-called IQ. In fact, there are three completely different networks that respond — verbal abilities, reasoning abilities and short-term memory abilities — that are in quite different parts of the brain,” Owen said.
IQ tests do not properly determine an individual's level of intelligence. The reification of intellectual acuity into a scalable number so easily defined by IQ tests is inaccurate; it's much more complex than that.
These recent results are in line with late pundit Stephen Jay Gould's views on biological determinism and intelligence testing. In his book the The Mismeasure of Man he provided a critical review of the reasoning behind the Bell Curve and IQ testing (notably the g factor).
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. The degree to which it is heritable is clearly been exaggerated by the most avid hereditarians (Gould, 1996). The first fallacy doesn’t take into account environmental effects, which can greatly outweigh any genetic effects passed on from parent to child. It doesn’t allow for opportunities for improvement of intellectual capabilities through proper education. The second fallacy is the misassumption that if hereditary explains a certain percentage of variation among individuals within a group; it must also explain a similar percentage of the difference in average IQ between groups (Gould, 1996).
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)
Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Originally posted by crackerjack
Try telling the Chinese that.
They think IQ is EVERYTHING!
Maybe that's why they're ahead of us in everything
It is a false assumption that any one person is worth more or contributes more to society than any other.
Originally posted by defrost
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
IQ isn't intelligence. IQ is a (man-made) construct, an operationalisation (like everything else, even these words). A high IQ isn't an instant-win in life, it can also be (perceived as) a burden. There are much more other factors who have greater impact. Openness to new experiences, emotional regulation, impulse control etc.
So IQ neither is nor was a myth. It's just a (more or usefull) model for certain circumstances. Nothing more and nothing less.