Do you believe in IQ tests?

I believe that IQ tests are an accurate reflection of social realities.


  • Total voters
    18
In the end, you have to ask yourself, why do these results even matter? Do they change who any of us are?

I think so. There was a time when black men were kept in a zoo so people could come see them along with other animals. There is a time when a black man can be elected President of the most powerful country in the "free" world. I think thats a significant change. Don't you?
 
Interesting. So basically that means that who ever designs the IQ test can change it/modify it to give him the results that he wants. Hmm, let me think about that a bit, okay? :D

Sounds quite similar to how polls are designed to give the "proper" responses of the questioned.

Baron Max


It could be. When you are asked a question like this:
1. Which one of the five is least like the other four?

Dog Mouse Lion Snake Elephant​

which one will you choose? There could be unlimited point of view on which one are least similar to the others. One can argue much, but only if you choose snake (I guess) you'll get a score. If one choose different options, it does not mean they are less intelligent, but perhaps they are more unusual. :p
 
What is your opinion of studies that compare IQ test results between men and women, blacks and whites, theists and athiests? Are those results valid?

I had no idea such studies took place.....how highly ridiculous if they do. how can you compare 'blacks and whites'......that is merely race, i would of thought 'IQ' depended on education and upbringing.
 
Hmm lets see dog, mouse, snake and elephant can be black [or grey], so I choose lion! :p

Or except for the elephant, they are all carnivores!;)
 
In the end, you have to ask yourself, why do these results even matter? Do they change who any of us are?

From my experiences, IQ test are often given in job recruitment test. In my university in my country, that is. Every October, all graduates have chances to follow many job recruitment tests held by the University. The first common step is psychotest, and then IQ test. After that team building test, and then interview. If you pass all the test, you can be employed by oil companies, banks, other big corporations, etc. It's one way of doing screening.
 
Hmm lets see dog, mouse, snake and elephant can be black [or grey], so I choose lion! :p

Or except for the elephant, they are all carnivores!;)

But snake is the only one that doesn't have legs :p There is no right or wrong, and hence, I don't think it matters.
 
The average Stone Age man had a life-expectancy of 18, yet archaeologists consistently age bodies from this period as being in their late twenties and over at the time of their death. Scratch the surface and you'll find that infant mortalities were extremely high - averages can be deceiving.
Indeed. A Mesolithic Era adult human who managed to survive the perils of childhood had a life expectancy in the low 50s. The grain-intensive diet ushered in by the Agricultural Revolution, with its unbalanced amino acids and its vitamin and mineral deficiencies, put a stop to that. By the Roman Era it had fallen to the low 20s.
 
Originally Posted by inzomnia:
From my experiences, IQ test are often given in job recruitment test. In my university in my country, that is. Every October, all graduates have chances to follow many job recruitment tests held by the University. The first common step is psychotest, and then IQ test. After that team building test, and then interview. If you pass all the test, you can be employed by oil companies, banks, other big corporations, etc. It's one way of doing screening.

That's an example to prove my point - IQ tests only measure a person on their individual merit.

Originally Posted by S.A.M:
I think so. There was a time when black men were kept in a zoo so people could come see them along with other animals. There is a time when a black man can be elected President of the most powerful country in the "free" world. I think thats a significant change. Don't you?

IQ tests have nothing to do with previous prejudices - in the end the only IQ score that you should give a damn about is your own (and then only if you choose to give it any weight).
We need to get out of this mentality, I find it everyday with men and women too: if a woman makes a stupid statement it's because she's a woman, if a man does the same it's because he's an idiot.
 
inzomnia will you stop citing that crappy internet test that someone made a thread about? It's not a good example to use in your argument - a sample question from Mensa, a more respected test, would make a much better case.
 
inzomnia will you stop citing that crappy internet test that someone made a thread about? It's not a good example to use in your argument - a sample question from Mensa, a more respected test, would make a much better case.


Feel free to cite sample question from Mensa. I don't have one. ;)
 
SAM said:
I derived that conclusion from your own posts that stated:

Yes, I think they reflect social realities, the results that is.

What is the difference between your assertion and my conclusion?
Better, what is the similarity? They are almost opposite in implication - - .

We have someone with a measured IQ of 150 and a Western university education consistently making elementary errors of logic in any argument involving their religious belief.

We have Polynesian islanders, who have established a cultural norm of memorizing thousands of names and attributes belonging to one's lineage, and can on average navigate small open boats to tiny islands their ancestors discovered across hundreds of miles of bluewater ocean, using some twine with a shell and knot code woven in and some stories of their grandfather's, scoring in the mid to upper double digits on IQ tests.

We have the observation that young black men in the US will score ten or more points better on IQ tests if they don't know they are taking them.

We have the observation that within most professions or fields - once a minimum level of IQ has been surpassed - there is little correlation between IQ and performance.

We have that Richard Feynman, the physicist who's biography is titled "Genius", had a measured IQ (according to that biography) of 125. That was probably lower than the measured IQ of 80% of his graduate students.

We have the Flynn Effect.

So IQ scores - or, as Scientific American's review of the "Bell Curve" taught us to pronounce things, "quot scores" - are of limited value and that only in certain circumstances.

AFAIK IQ has been demonstrated to indicate only one "intrinsic" thing besides itself, and that is teaching ability. Apparently IQ correlates better with "teaching ability" - as rated by students and fellow teachers - than the age, education level, prior training, current compensation level, or experience, of the teacher.

As a hiring criterion, it will probably never fly.
 
I think IQ test is only intented to measure the prospect of academic success, because that is what is measured/asked in IQ test.
 
Not at all, if I am an English major and do poorly/well in an IQ test, what exactly does the test measure?
 
Not at all, if I am an English major and do poorly/well in an IQ test, what exactly does the test measure?

I guess I have to agree with you (your post in previous page). It only measures very limited academic sphere. Perhaps it is a measure of academic success in math major :p

To be perfectly honest, I have no idea what is like is the 'real' IQ test. The one that were given in Uni (by companies who recruit graduates) incorporate a lot of engineering aspects.

Btw, bye for now.
 
I derived that conclusion from your own posts that stated:

Yes, I think they reflect social realities, the results that is.


What is the difference between your assertion and my conclusion?
You said certain groups were less intelligent.

As to what I meant by indicating social realities, the test might reveal who is encouraged to learn and what, how certain groups are taught to think of themselves, etc. In addition to measuring a very narrow range of skills.
 
Are IQ tests valid? You tell me:

feynman.jpg

Nobel laureate Richard Feynman's IQ = 124



George%20W%20Bush.jpg

IQ = 125
 
IQ tests show that:

Blacks are dumber than whites who are dumber than Asians [or yellows, no idea where brown and red fit in this prism]

Thiests are dumber than atheists.

Women are dumber than men.


Do you believe these are social realities? Please explain your reasoning.

Blacks are often stronger than whites. Smart Asians are genius type, but "dumb" Asians really know how to party.

Theists and Atheists are both weird.

Women will always be super hot........

Sorry, none of this has anything to do with IQ tests.

That's because IQ tests are retarded.
 
You said certain groups were less intelligent.

As to what I meant by indicating social realities, the test might reveal who is encouraged to learn and what, how certain groups are taught to think of themselves, etc. In addition to measuring a very narrow range of skills.

Exactly
 
IQ tests are also a short cut. That can be OK in some contexts. But when they start getting confused with things like 'accurate measurements of poeple's intelligence' the short cut is doing damage. And IQ tests are doing damage.

In fact they are reinforcing poor social, interviewing and intuitive skills.

Another small step towards mechanism instead of relations between subjects'
 
IQ tests show that:

Blacks are dumber than whites who are dumber than Asians [or yellows, no idea where brown and red fit in this prism]

Thiests are dumber than atheists.

Women are dumber than men.


Do you believe these are social realities? Please explain your reasoning.

And Ashkenazim top them all. :p
 
Back
Top