The Forum's IQ

[YourFavoriteNightmare]

What's your IQ? (I'm working on a poll, never done it before so let's see how it goes)
I also would like to open a discussion on IQ. The tests and concept behind it - right or wrong, logical or not. What is intelligence? What is it as defined by IQ tests/results? Is knowing your IQ important? Would you allow your child to find their IQ score? Where do you see type/preferences/functions at play? Or a biased toward certain ones? Why do you think INTPs are theoretically the best at these, but are surpassed by INTJs?
What about emotional IQ? I'd like to throw that in. What is that? What other "intelligences" are there, if any?

 

[Mary Shelley]

I got a very high score when I took an IQ test and decided not to risk it again after that. Quit while you're ahead, you know?

 

[sprinkles]

 

[barbad0s]

Since this is an open discussion I'll share a story. Back when I was on INTPcentral, one of the mods there decided to hold an IQ contest because most people on the forum had their heads up their brasses about their own IQs with claims that they were gifted, with near genius level IQs or above. So this member left it open for people to participate and he systematically tested them by making sure they all did the same two tests and submitted their scores to him in a timed setting, etc. Under 30 members participated, and what he found was that only 2 members would've been considered genius level. I was 13 years old at the time, and I was on the top ten list of members who participated, though I'm dumber and less ambitious now than I was back then.

 

[sprinkles]

[video=youtube;han3AfjH210]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=han3AfjH210[/video]

SO! T'all yer fine dandies so proud, so cocksure, prancin' aboot with your heads full of eyeballs, come and get me I say! I'll be waiting on ya with a whiff of the 'ol brimstone. I'm a grim bloody fable with an unhappy bloody end!



On a serious note. I do not like IQ. Also a lot of times being smart is a fricking migraine that annoying shits wish they had for some infernal reason.

 

[Hazard]

I have an IQ of 130. Emotional IQ is 125. Verbal IQ in the top 1%, my specialty. I like to tell people the ratio of my IQ to the average person's proves my IQ makes half the world legitimately retarded in comparison to me. haha I'm not cocky about my intelligence. I think I'm equal with everyone. It's just a funny way to show where I stand on the spectrum. I got my test taken from a Harvard graduate in Boston.

I'd want my child to know their IQ or more importantly I'd like to know my child's IQ. I think it is important because you get to know what areas of the mind you specialize in. People say IQ doesn't matter or is false and isn't an accurate measurement of intelligence. If that were true, why is it such a fundamental part of neuroscience? Yes, creativity is important and just because you have high IQ that doesn't mean you'll be successful. However, it IS one telling signs of success. Emotional IQ even more so because it helps with motivation, emotional management and ambition.

There are multiple forms of intelligence: Spatial/Visual, Linguistic, Mathematical, Kinesthetic, Intrapersonal/Interpersonal (emotional), Musical, Naturalistic, Existential, Moral, etc. and people usually are highly skilled in at least one of these.

 

[rawr]

don't know, don't really care.

I'm not that smart, but smart enough.

 

[sprinkles]

I have an IQ of 130. Emotional IQ is 125. Verbal IQ in the top 1%, my specialty. I like to tell people the ratio of my IQ to the average person's proves my IQ makes half the world legitimately retarded in comparison to me. haha I'm not cocky about my intelligence. I think I'm equal with everyone. It's just a funny way to show where I stand on the spectrum. I got my test taken from a Harvard graduate in Boston.

I'd want my child to know their IQ or more importantly I'd like to know my child's IQ. I think it is important because you get to know what areas of the mind you specialize in. People say IQ doesn't matter or is false and isn't an accurate measurement of intelligence. If that were true, why is it such a fundamental part of neuroscience? Yes, creativity is important and just because you have high IQ that doesn't mean you'll be successful. However, it IS one telling signs of success.

There are multiple forms of intelligence. Spatial/Visual, Linguistic, Mathematical, Kinesthetic, Intrapersonal/Interpersonal (emotional), Musical, Naturalistic, Existential, Moral, etc. and people usually are highly skilled in at least one of these.

The fact that IQ can be calculated makes it useless except for throwing away the relevant information which calculated it.

Prime example:
You take IQ test. You work on a bunch of problems, how you solve said problems gives relevant information to how successful you are at certain tasks. The results are right there to calculate the IQ in the first place! The researcher has already seen the evident intelligence in order to give it a number. By converting it to a number, they take readily discernible information, throw it away, and condense it down to a much less discernible number.

Tell me how this is logical. Just in case I've missed it.

 

[Hazard]

The fact that IQ can be calculated makes it useless except for throwing away the relevant information which calculated it.

Prime example:
You take IQ test. You work on a bunch of problems, how you solve said problems gives relevant information to how successful you are at certain tasks. The results are right there to calculate the IQ in the first place! The researcher has already seen the evident intelligence in order to give it a number. By converting it to a number, they take readily discernible information, throw it away, and condense it down to a much less discernible number.

Tell me how this is logical. Just in case I've missed it.

First off, I'd like to say I think you're a really smart lady, sprinkles. Your logical skills are second to none, even for Thinkers. However, I don't see the problem with watching how someone interprets and processes information and categorizing it into a number. I'm sure the professionals know what the number means. I don't see how that is illogical. Could you paraphrase your point of view?

 

[sprinkles]

First off, I'd like to say I think you're a really smart lady, sprinkles. Your logical skills are second to none, even for Thinkers. However, I don't see the problem with watching how someone interprets and processes information and categorizing it into a number. I'm sure the professionals know what the number means. I don't see how that is illogical. Could you paraphrase your point of view?

The IQ number is not revertible to what generated it. It can be an arbitrary gauge, yes, but only very loosely and generally.

They don't necessarily know what the number means, not with precision anyway. That's the main problem. When you take a test, you know exactly what your strong or weak points are. When you get back a number, say 130, this does not actually tell you what your strong or weak points are. It does not tell you what your answers on the test were. That information is lost forever, unrecoverable, unusable, unless you go back and look at the non-converted results.

This is like 'if' statements in programming. When you explicitly cause a condition to be true, such as setting a variable to 'blue', you don't need have the program check it, if there's a non-conditional way to handle it. There's no question of 'if' because you already know, because you set it or caused it to be set already.

When you're calculating IQ results, you already have the information that indicates intelligence. If you did not, then you'd also not be able to calculate it. It's like putting cheese, apples, and sandwiches in a box, then labeling the box '42' when you could have labeled it 'cheese, apples, sandwiches' or even 'lunch'.

 

[Gaze]

Whether or not someone especially a child has a high IQ, would for me be secondary to the value they place on having good character. In other words, how you use your intelligence is just as if not more important that what it is. I wouldn't want to raise a gifted child to think they're better than other people because of it, nor would want them to suppress who they are. However, I wouldn't want them to think that being intelligent means being arrogant cuz that's not going to fly with values such as humility and empathy. High IQ shouldn't be about having a high opinion of oneself. Emphasis would be on how gifts can be used for the greater good not just personal ambition.

Just for the record, I'm no genius although it's been my life long dream to be one. yeah, maybe I coulda been a contenda.

 

[hk427f3]

I like to tell people the ratio of my IQ to the average person's proves my IQ makes half the world legitimately retarded in comparison to me.

1.3?




Huh?

 

[Hazard]

The IQ number is not revertible to what generated it. It can be an arbitrary gauge, yes, but only very loosely and generally.

They don't necessarily know what the number means, not with precision anyway. That's the main problem. When you take a test, you know exactly what your strong or weak points are. When you get back a number, say 130, this does not actually tell you what your strong or weak points are. It does not tell you what your answers on the test were. That information is lost forever, unrecoverable, unusable, unless you go back and look at the non-converted results.

This is like 'if' statements in programming. When you explicitly cause a condition to be true, such as setting a variable to 'blue', you don't need have the program check it, if there's a non-conditional way to handle it. There's no question of 'if' because you already know, because you set it or caused it to be set already.

When you're calculating IQ results, you already have the information that indicates intelligence. If you did not, then you'd also not be able to calculate it. It's like putting cheese, apples, and sandwiches in a box, then labeling the box '42' when you could have labeled it 'cheese, apples, sandwiches' or even 'lunch'.

I don't know how they find the IQ of a person but I don't think it's as simple as giving it the number of "42." The number of the IQ is a scale. You have the information, then you put the information on a scale with multiple subjects and you find how you rank in your processing according to those multiple other subjects. It's a science. It may be a flawed idea to throw away the information of the processing so you can look back at it at a future date from the information to find out the strengths and weaknesses but that doesn't mean coming to the number itself was a bad idea, just that throwing out that information is. I don't think I have the proper knowledge to debate whether or not IQ is legitimate or not. I just trust that since it's a science and since a Harvard graduate with eight PHDs told me I have a certain ability after he trained for eight years to be able to do so, that I should take his word for it. I'm not saying I can't be wrong though.

I agree with [MENTION=1669]Maven[/MENTION]. That's emotional intelligence.

 

[Mary Shelley]

I just trust that since it's a science and since a Harvard graduate with eight PHDs told me I have a certain ability after he trained for eight years to be able to do so, that I should take his word for it.

appeal to authority

 

[Hazard]

appeal to authority

Not such a bad idea. Asking for advice from a person with knowledge in the matter is like asking a therapist for advice. If you know the person has experience in a certain subject you should definitely appeal to their knowledge and experience, not their authority. Respecting authority is important as well as maintaining and balancing a certain level of independence though.

 

[Mary Shelley]

Not such a bad idea. Asking for advice from a person with knowledge in the matter is like asking a therapist for advice. If you know the person has experience in a certain subject you should definitely appeal to their knowledge and experience, not their authority. Respecting authority is important as well as maintaining and balancing a certain level of independence though.

logical fallacy: Appeal to authority @ Wikipedia

 

[sprinkles]

I don't know how they find the IQ of a person but I don't think it's as simple as giving it the number of "42." The number of the IQ is a scale. You have the information, then you put the information on a scale with multiple subjects and you find how you rank in your processing according to those multiple other subjects. It's a science. It may be a flawed idea to throw away the information of the processing so you can look back at it at a future date from the information to find out the strengths and weaknesses but that doesn't mean coming to the number itself was a bad idea, just that throwing out that information is. I don't think I have the proper knowledge to debate whether or not IQ is legitimate or not. I just trust that since it's a science and since a Harvard graduate with eight PHDs told me I have a certain ability after he trained for eight years to be able to do so, that I should take his word for it. I'm not saying I can't be wrong though.

I agree with [MENTION=1669]Maven[/MENTION]. That's emotional intelligence though.

But they don't have the information and they don't put it on the scale, since it was lost.

Not to mention that IQ tests have to be renormed occasionally as the raw quotient increases. The median IQ of everybody can eventually rise so that most people end up ahead of the curve. 100 is meant to be the median, but it doesn't mean anything anymore if by an old test most people are 120+, which is a real possibility in that average IQ can go up by like 3 points per decade. this is called the Flynn effect.

Today a slightly 'impaired' person by current standards would be considered borderline genius by standards from say 100 years ago.

 

[Hazard]

logical fallacy: Appeal to authority @ Wikipedia

It's not the appeal itself that is a fallacy. It's appealing to an authority that has no knowledge of the subject at hand or where the knowledge is debated by other experts.

"Fallacious examples of using the appeal include:

1. cases where the authority is not a subject-matter expert
2. cases where there is no consensus among experts in the subject matter
3. any appeal to authority used in the context of deductive reasoning. "

You look to a plumber for plumbing advice, an electrician for electrical advice, an architect for construction advice, a pastor for spiritual advice, a therapist for emotional and daily life advice. Is this illogical?

 

[SealHammer]

Not such a bad idea. Asking for advice from a person with knowledge in the matter is like asking a therapist for advice. If you know the person has experience in a certain subject you should definitely appeal to their knowledge and experience, not their authority. Respecting authority is important as well as maintaining and balancing a certain level of independence though.

You're supposed to be a genius and yet you don't even know what an ethical appeal is

 

[Hazard]

But they don't have the information and they don't put it on the scale, since it was lost.

Not to mention that IQ tests have to be renormed occasionally as the raw quotient increases. The median IQ of everybody can eventually rise so that most people end up ahead of the curve. 100 is meant to be the median, but it doesn't mean anything anymore if by an old test most people are 120+, which is a real possibility in that average IQ can go up by like 3 points per decade. this is called the Flynn effect.

Today a slightly 'impaired' person by current standards would be considered borderline genius by standards from say 100 years ago.

So you're telling me that people lose the information of how the individual processes the problem and comes to its conclusion, THEN they give the person a number? If this is true then you're right. The entire science is flawed. Then it really is like just looking at an orange, banana and sandwich and giving it the number "42" because there isn't any science or mental processing of the patient's information at all. Like I said though, I'm not a plumber. I'm not an electrician. I'm not a doctor. IDK about any of those fields and I don't claim to.