Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 138
Thanks Tree33Thanks

Thread: IQ tests and race versus OTHER

  1. #41
    Veteran Member Eve1's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18,821
    Thanks
    12851

    From
    My own world
    Quote Originally Posted by Slartibartfast View Post
    EIQ is more important. It doesn't matter how intelligent they are, can they work and get along with others.
    EIQ= is that emotional IQ?
    Hardly required at all, you just need to fake that one. Some of the most successful people are actually sociopaths. A sociopath typically has a conscience, but it’s weak. He may know that taking your money is wrong, and he might feel some guilt or remorse, but that won’t stop his behavior.

  2. #42
    Veteran Member Eve1's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18,821
    Thanks
    12851

    From
    My own world
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Knuckles View Post
    If you proved beyond all shadow of a doubt, scientifically and with immaculate methodology, that white chubby French-Scottish Canadians in my neighbourhood we’re the least intelligent group of people on earth - I would STILL demand every right and privilege to be judged on my personal actions, behaviour and abilities ... not lumped in together somehow as a living proxy for the sum average of people who look like me.
    How is an IQ test going to do that? My premise is that IQ or intelligence is equal along races,

    I think the likelihood that the child has been exposed to the information needed to do well on intelligence tests can be figured out if they have attended formal schooling accredited to achieve a certain degree=elementary, secondary, post secondary education (FE).The tools needed to get that information to stick in their minds relies more on Family and common social and environmental factors (FSEC).…=go back and read post #1 for details.
    Last edited by Eve1; 11th February 2018 at 10:42 PM.

  3. #43
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,456
    Thanks
    11937

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by Eve1 View Post
    @KnotaFrayed
    Interesting P#33 but this is intelligence as measured by IQ tests the topic of the OP is not the literacy of the general population.
    Your statement is interesting also. Where was the word "literacy" used in my response to an OP on intelligence and how would anyone believe they are unrelated and not interconnected in some way? Not only that, your OP makes the connection between taught (in the home OR school) literacy and its affect on intelligence. That is what my initial post in response was about. The more literate one's parents are, the more likely it is their children are going to be more "intelligent" because their parents are more informed and exercising their brains more. The children of such parents are likely to have a portion of the literacy (intelligence required for it) of their parents passed on via evolved genes and a portion via their own increased literacy.

    IQ tests are a human invention and have no basis for assessing any absoluteness to what they actually measure and how it is measured, which INCLUDES a level of knowledge.

    As some have mentioned, if one is able to improve their IQ score, then that defeats the argument that it could be some absolute or close to absolute measure (meaning your IQ is your forever level of "intelligence") that cannot be changed, but perhaps by some miracle that might improve it (being struck by lightening), but via physical brain damage, may reasonably be said to decrease. IQ's are standardized tests......Good in one sense in that all people get the same basic test, bad in that no two people, unless clones, are identical, thus there are factors which appear to NOT be considered in the variations in IQ based on standardized tests.

    Raw IQ scores improved over the 20th century and a part of that may be due to increased knowledge and increased literacy in society, causing more families to be literate and pass on evolved heredity (more thinking power) to their offspring.

    Evolution includes the mind, so as humans evolve and where they exist in places where there is a higher incidence of literacy and different sets of survival skills, those traits, it would seem evolve to become part of any genetic portion that could be attributed to "intelligence".

    I don't believe IQ tests are needed to identify innate capacity to grasp concepts and connect dots very early on in life, perhaps before much of any, "learning" takes place. Give a child a set of blocks and it is quite amazing to see what some do with them. The other side of that is genius is not always uncovered in standardized ways because genius at times (which is what I was trying to explain earlier) is found outside most of the boxes used to try to measure it. Some children with Down Syndrome or Autism are prime examples of this in that they may seem challenged by most things others take for granted, they may be exposed to something that totally brings out absolute genius, in a narrower spectrum than other geniuses, but within that narrower spectrum, genius.

    Basically, what I was trying to say earlier was that human intelligence would be served, by the increased of human intelligence, but, as history has shown, there is a segment of humanity that wants to stifle, rather than encourage human intelligence, by limiting human literacy, the very thing your OP discusses (via parenting and educational opportunities) helps increase IQ scores. It is also known that raw IQ scores have improved over the last century, thus causing some suggestion that this is due to increased literacy in the general populations of many nations, developed ones, in particular and more specifically within any society or nation where there are pockets of encouraged literacy, via educational opportunities and increased parental participation.

    IQ tests, like pretty much all tests are like polls and the weather report. Their accuracy can be off and can be debated, but they remain the best way to measure something, even if what they measure may not be definitive or conclusive in nature.

    Just as you discuss in your OP, literacy, knowledge, informs us, making us more intelligent. Increasing the general literacy of the public would seem to also help increase the average IQ scores.

    We know now, that nutrition affects brain development and that poverty affects nutrition. We know in the history of this nation there were states where teaching some people to read and write, was against the law and we know that it hasn't yet been 60 years since Jim Crow laws were using law to discriminate against at least one race of people, the same people that would have gotten someone arrested for teaching them how to read and write. Not that poverty strikes only one race or gender or religion, etc. but there was a specific reason laws were made to make teaching some people reading and writing, illegal and it had to do with improving their intelligence and what that would mean to their wanting to remain slaves, beyond any desire they already harbored to be free and emancipated people. Hard to suggest a suddenly freed slave, whose owners obeyed the law to NOT teach them to read and write, was going to suddenly become their owner's equal in a matter of decades, much less many decades, if not more. That does not mean there were no exceptions, it just means that generally people that cannot read and write are at a disadvantage to those that can and not knowing how to read and write is NOT one's fault, IF it was illegal for someone to teach them how to. They might innately be very bright and intelligent people, but they are still at a disadvantage to those who can read and write, through no fault of their own.

    As I understand it, that appears to be what your OP was also saying, in another way.

    I'm not sure how you seem to believe public education or general literacy is a different topic than IQ, increased intelligence and how parents and communities value education. They are all related and interrelated.

    In this nation, schools were built by the communities and teachers hired by communities. In most places, it is the same, but with school boards. So people want to send their children to private schools because the education is better and their children will become more intelligent. The problem is, even with all members of a community pitching in (including people that NEVER send a single child to them or only send one, to someone else's 5 children) many public schools have trouble funding their schools and in some places the education at a public school is lousy because of disruptive kids and the fact that public schools cannot reject students that are troublesome, they have to take them all. The trouble is, humanity cannot keep having children, all of whom that need education to survive in this world, then suggest if they do not measure up, they just get turned out to some "pasture" of some sort and be considered out of sight, out of mind. The effect of their lack of education is not simply going to go away because we grab on the "intelligent" children by the hand and nurture them, while trying to forget or ignore the existence of all the others.

    Instead of paying lots of money to live in gated communities, people might put a little more effort into raising the overall intelligence level of their communities and nation so that some people are not ignored and forgotten when it comes to education and the only skills they pick up, are how to steal for a living.

    As you have discussed, there are a number of ways to increase raw IQ and one of them is to consider every child a part of the solution and figure out how to increase the intelligence of all (by the methods you discuss) rather than only nurture those that look to be "intelligent" and turning all others, out to pasture or into the jungle, thinking they'll never be seen or heard from again.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 11th February 2018 at 10:56 PM.

  4. #44
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,587
    Thanks
    213

    From
    Germany
    I win every IQ test which my dog wins too. But my dog has more elegant solutions.

    Thanks from BigBob

  5. #45
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,587
    Thanks
    213

    From
    Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Eve1 View Post
    Genetics (based on race) I would argue has nothing to do with intelligence. Intelligence tests assumes everybody has been exposed to the same information and everybody has been given the same tools to properly memorize and apply the concepts under the same circumstances. ...
    After world war 2 we had here in Germany also children of black US-American soldiers with German women. This children visited the same schools as all others. The results of intelligence tests showed no dependence of a colored skin with human intelligence. The very little differences had not to do with genetics but with social factors.



    "Good evening" (voice of a brownie - German: Stimme eines Heinzelmännchens, Mainzelmännchens)

    Longer Text: "98% of all jesters are on the wrong costume ball."

    The actor is Roberto Blanco, a honorary citizen of Bavaria. Political orientation "Black Bavarian" (=conservative)
    Last edited by zaangalewa; 12th February 2018 at 02:03 AM.
    Thanks from BigBob

  6. #46
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,587
    Thanks
    213

    From
    Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    ... How should the world change in response to having learned that one particular group of people is statistically better or worse at taking IQ tests?
    The intelligence of a person is besides the money and beauty a factor of the current social Darwinian self-evolution of mankind: "Smart, rich, beautiful".

    Last edited by zaangalewa; 12th February 2018 at 02:28 AM.

  7. #47
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    31,166
    Thanks
    19295

    From
    between Moon and NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Knuckles View Post
    If you proved beyond all shadow of a doubt, scientifically and with immaculate methodology, that white chubby French-Scottish Canadians in my neighbourhood we’re the least intelligent group of people on earth - I would STILL demand every right and privilege to be judged on my personal actions, behaviour and abilities ... not lumped in together somehow as a living proxy for the sum average of people who look like me.



    (Uh oh. Sounds like somebody here got a really low score...)


  8. #48
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    61,030
    Thanks
    30269

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    I didn't think so, although, even with LSAT, that even with training the boost a person can get isn't changed that drastically.
    "Law School Admission Test."

    The military test while being recruited is (or at least used to be) the ASVAB ("Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery"). After entry but before Basic actually started, we all took the DLAB ("Defense Language Aptitude Battery"). I scored unexpectedly high and was offered the opportunity to attend the language school. Maintaining the belief that I was no good at languages (one I still hold), I declined, though of course in retrospect it would have been a great way to go.

  9. #49
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    40,809
    Thanks
    42846

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Mensa accepts high school transcripts test score for the Merit Scholarship, ACT, SAT and others I assume to determine eligibility, scoring in the 98th percentile on those tests qualifies you as being in the top 2% of IQ, their prime requisite for membership(approx. IQ 140) This was true back in the 1960's, I don't know if they still do it that way.

  10. #50
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    40,809
    Thanks
    42846

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    "Law School Admission Test."

    The military test while being recruited is (or at least used to be) the ASVAB ("Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery"). After entry but before Basic actually started, we all took the DLAB ("Defense Language Aptitude Battery"). I scored unexpectedly high and was offered the opportunity to attend the language school. Maintaining the belief that I was no good at languages (one I still hold), I declined, though of course in retrospect it would have been a great way to go.
    In 1964 my military exam was the AFQT, Armed forces qualification test. And like you, a high score opened up an array of schools and options.

Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 2nd August 2017, 05:28 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 24th November 2014, 12:22 PM
  3. Massachusetts Senate race tests feelings about Wall Street
    By Cicero in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 26th December 2011, 11:02 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 3rd November 2010, 07:54 AM
  5. The race!! Race!! Christ on a stick...
    By Robster Craw in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27th January 2008, 06:16 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed