• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

"Super Genius" comes up with revolutionary new theory for the universe?

If you take an IQ test repeatedly then your score gets better. It's not because you've gotten more intelligent.

Aren't you describing learning? If I take multiple English tests (where the questions vary although within the same category, so there must be overlap) and score better, haven't I just learned English better? I would not say that intelligence is fixed.

Or, do you mean the tests can be 'gamed' in the sense of learning some type of problem in a rote fashion? For the second condition, then, yes, I would have to agree -- a test can be manipulated and the results can be invalidated by such manipulation. But how would this be any different from other test situations? Even those tests that measure frank physical abilities (how far can you throw a javelin test) can be gamed to some degree with training.
 
I claimed that an IQ test was a valid tool to measure problem solving ability and you asked, among other things (I cut a couple of questions):

Oh really? Then where are the correlations to show that is true?

Oh really, then what other meaningful behaviors is it associated with?
Which things does it correlate to more than 68%?

Not really, you obviously have not researched it and are pulling the data out of thin error. -- (this is true, I didn't research it)

So what measure of performance does it correlate with, besides your imaginary ones?

Two studies that relate brain volume to IQ: http://www.bri.ucla.edu/bri_weekly/news_060330.asp
http://www.bri.ucla.edu/bri_weekly/news_060330.asp

A study relating decreased hospital admissions in adulthood for children tested with high IQs: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/AJPH.2005.080168v1

A study showing longer lifespan related to higher IQ: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/322/7290/819?view=long&pmid=11290633

The American Psychological Association: "The relationship between test scores and school performance seems to be ubiquitous. Wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. There may be styles of teaching and methods of instruction that will decrease or increase this correlation, but none that consistently eliminates it has yet been found"
Link = http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/apa_01.html
Also from that report: " Scores on intelligence tests predict various measures of job performance: supervisor ratings, work samples, etc. Such correlations, which typically lie between r=.30 and r=.50, are partly restricted by the limited reliability of those measures themselves. They become higher when ris statistically corrected for this unreliability: in one survey of relevant studies (Hunter, 1983), the mean of the corrected correlations was .54. This implies that, across a wide range of occupations, intelligence test performance accounts for some 29% of the variance in job performance. "

So, your criticism is well founded. However, this is social science we are talking about. Correlations at 68% would be remarkably high in this field. Would you even admit that there was such a thing as intelligence to be measured, whether or not an IQ test were the proper instrument?

I don't think anyone is claiming that IQ alone predicts much other than scores on other general intelligence testing (a sort of recursive non-justification) but it appears to be a factor that influences other areas. Where this would come up is in questions when, "all else being equal, or nearly so, an IQ difference may be a significant difference."
 
I claimed that an IQ test was a valid tool to measure problem solving ability and you asked, among other things (I cut a couple of questions):
Those are some very limited problems to solve.

It is surface area not volume that matters!
:)

I will read the others later.
A study relating decreased hospital admissions in adulthood for children tested with high IQs: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/AJPH.2005.080168v1

A study showing longer lifespan related to higher IQ: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/322/7290/819?view=long&pmid=11290633

The American Psychological Association: "The relationship between test scores and school performance seems to be ubiquitous. Wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. There may be styles of teaching and methods of instruction that will decrease or increase this correlation, but none that consistently eliminates it has yet been found"
Link = http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/apa_01.html
Also from that report: " Scores on intelligence tests predict various measures of job performance: supervisor ratings, work samples, etc. Such correlations, which typically lie between r=.30 and r=.50, are partly restricted by the limited reliability of those measures themselves. They become higher when ris statistically corrected for this unreliability: in one survey of relevant studies (Hunter, 1983), the mean of the corrected correlations was .54. This implies that, across a wide range of occupations, intelligence test performance accounts for some 29% of the variance in job performance. "

So, your criticism is well founded. However, this is social science we are talking about.
And that is where the 68% correlation was taught to me, in college in psychology. That and taht correlation does not equal causation.
Correlations at 68% would be remarkably high in this field.
Not if they are meaningful, :)
Would you even admit that there was such a thing as intelligence to be measured, whether or not an IQ test were the proper instrument?
Sure, and that is the whole point , an IQ test is based upon an arbitrary set of skills, and not designed to really test for the variates of 'intelligence'.
I don't think anyone is claiming that IQ alone predicts much other than scores on other general intelligence testing (a sort of recursive non-justification) but it appears to be a factor that influences other areas.
That is sort of unproven and my whole point. It can be a usefull predictor of someones ability to function in the current school environment and that is about it. It is useful for that and part of how a 'learning disability' is assesed. It id related in a general way to 'cognitive functioning' and one of the ways of determining a developmental disability.
Where this would come up is in questions when, "all else being equal, or nearly so, an IQ difference may be a significant difference."

Maybe, maybe not, as Mensa proves adequately. :)
 
OK DD, I'll consider myself schooled. I'm disappointed though. The world would be more convenient for me if the amount of money you accumulated (Billy Gates) or the power of your prose (Christopher Hitchens) or the fact that you were a polyglot (Emil Krebs) meant I could assume you were a better person or admirable or some damn thing...

Ah, if the world were less nuanced, it would be a fair thing.
 
Yeah, about 10 minutes for me too. I think I got the gist. Watching any more is just cringe. And I got the sense that "Professor Dave" was starting to lay on the derision pretty thick. He's just a blue collar guy with a bad case of Dunning-Kreuger. The world is full of guys like him. You probably even know one or two of them personally.
 
2000 IQ wins!

This is probably the funniest video I've ever seen. If you don't die laughing at 9:30 the sense of humor has been extracted from your brain :D
 
Excruciating. I only lasted about ten minutes and thus sadly I presumably missed his breakthrough insights.
They were, the christian god is the only true god, demons exist, anybody to the left of T****y is controlled by Satan and pure evil and the trans are going to force your boys to cut off their penises because reasons.

Basicly he's either become a grifter MAGAt or become more of a one.
 
When I first enterado the military there was another young guy in my group that apparently had tested to a high iq. He told us about it frequently.

He was from metro Chicago and knew the major highways and byways also. So he took it upon himself to redesign every interchange of them on paper to make it easy to get where you wanted to go without slowing down or congestión at all. That was his genius.

It looked like a bowl of spaghetti in a still life painting. Another minor issue was it would require four acres of land to build any of them.

I have been wary of high iq genius' since.
 
Back
Top Bottom