It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens
I think the term is "pegged". Like when the tachometer hits the peg that keeps it from going any higher.
But who the hell really cares? Beyond a certain (and not really high) level any "intelligence testing" really doesn't indicate much of anything. There are those who go far beyond their tested "potential" and those who get nowhere near it in terms of performance. That's a matter of... disposition?...more than "intelligence".
edit on 2/12/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by IEtherianSoul9
reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens
I strongly dislike IQ tests because they 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.
Originally posted by ADVISOR
Precisely.
Those who have taken IQ tests, and scored just under Mensa levels are still quite intelligent.
In my case, I'm on the border line of the accepted level, how ever being perhaps considered an idiot savant when it comes to common sense.
.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by muzzleflash
"IQ" is really an obsolete term that isn't used much in the field. There have been a lot of changes in testing techniques but the concept of defining intelligence is slippery.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by chr0naut
It's a round table.
Everyone who sits at it is equally special.
Originally posted by Phage
Anyone notice a bit of...um...bitterness...in these posts.
Come on...fess up...who applied and didn't make it?
Or, possibly worse, who is a member?