IQ's

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
*Note, I start out talking about IQ's And End up all over the map with this, It's well written though. Meh...

IQ's are hard to talk about Because really smart people already know it's not the most important of things. What matters most in life is how you treat other people, That's as true today as It has always been.

Still to speak of IQ's it places a score on intellect and then makes it a competitive sport. So how do people In a kind and respectful way, Respect everyone and still talk about it? Because this is Casual. This isn't Oxford?

There are a lot of really smart people here, I know that's true because I'm drawn here, Like a lot of us are, let's face it, We aren't watching ESPN and talking about the last time we went Mudding.

Most of us here are Above Average and Probably went to the Gifted classes. It's Just No one ever talks about because it's not polite. Why is that? Why is it not okay to push our minds as hard as we can? And Be proud of it? I want to know why it's a Taboo Subject when we are all Fascinated with pushing the limits of our minds?

Ever Since I was a kid, I didn't have a choice, I never Fit in anywhere because I couldn't Relate To bass Fishing And Deer Hunting and Mudding. I guess Those are localized examples But that never mattered to me because People at large are all mostly assholes anyway. Sometimes We get softer when we age, And we realize maybe I was the asshole after all. That's Right, Some Day you too will Age and Realize SP was an Asshole, It happens to everyone.

I was put through a hard life, The first person Besides My mom and Dad I was ever exposed too was my brother, Who had Sibling rage so severe he legitimately attempted to kill me thee different times, This was my own brother, gee I wonder why Shadowprophet doesn't like people, All That Aside I guess that's where it comes from, Since Birth I've had to be able to recognize danger and find solutions that work. for very real reasons.

But where do other people get it from? Is it environment? Is it genetic? What kinds of things affect intellectual development?

I'm betting almost every highly intelligent person ever, Experienced some sort of trauma at an early age, But that's just the horse I'm betting on. What do you guys think is that very critical moment that took you off the normal path and allowed you to function on a higher level?

There I said it. But you can't talk about it unless you say it, So I'm not taking it back.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
Yeah Yeah, I know IQs aren't a popular Subject, But that's only because of Humility and social grooming, Every last one of us knows the mysteries of the human intellect are a fascinating subject. I stand My gound.
 

Kchoo

At Peace.
Dude, it is both, but not necessarily from trauma.
Trauma may stimulate, or deter what is already there, but IQ aptitude is either there or not. I am not a genious, but I am up there.

Environment is stimulating for sure, or deterring, but ultimately, education is up to the undividual... the willingness to work hard will produce results and may increase scores on tests, but the aptitude was already there...

Others are not so lucky, and the aptitude just isnt there... no matter what the stimulus.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
Dude, it is both, but not necessarily from trauma.
Trauma may stimulate, or deter what is already there, but IQ aptitude is either there or not. I am not a genious, but I am up there.

Environment is stimulating for sure, or deterring, but ultimately, education is up to the undividual... the willingness to work hard will produce results and may increase scores on tests, but the aptitude was already there...

Others are not so lucky, and the aptitude just isnt there... no matter what the stimulus.
I have to admit, My mom did make me work hard, It was brutal. Mom tried to push my mind places it shouldn't have been able to go, She even taught me how to understand and perform her college homework. The only problem I ever had with it was, It wasn't some lovey-dovey mom teaches son thing, She was Brutal about me understanding that stuff. SO you are right, Hard work is part if not the most of it.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
Mom tried to push my mind places it shouldn't have been able to go

And, upon reflection, maybe shouldn't have .....

Yeah, well there's that. Mine too. That's what mothers are there for. I will say though, that if it hadn't been for her 'creativity' in regard to the paranormal I wouldn't be here so I guess thanks for that.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
And, upon reflection, maybe shouldn't have .....

Yeah, well there's that. Mine too. That's what mothers are there for. I will say though, that if it hadn't been for her 'creativity' in regard to the paranormal I wouldn't be here so I guess thanks for that.
I grew up Distant from my mother, I always saw her as this cruel mean person, That may even be why I didn't pick her side of the religion tree. As she was a satanist and my father was not. But, Now that I'm older, I see what she did for me, Things That my father wasn't able to do, Because he wouldn't push me that hard. My mother isn't who I thought she was. She is a very loving person, I couldn't see that as a child. I've revisited so many things as I've gotten older. Tough love, It's Tough, But It's also love.

:)
 

Kchoo

At Peace.
I grew up Distant from my mother, I always saw her as this cruel mean person, That may even be why I didn't pick her side of the religion tree. As she was a satanist and my father was not. But, Now that I'm older, I see what she did for me, Things That my father wasn't able to do, Because he wouldn't push me that hard. My mother isn't who I thought she was. She is a very loving person, I couldn't see that as a child. I've revisited so many things as I've gotten older. Tough love, It's Tough, But It's also love.

:)
Yeah, the big one, she gave you life!
 
I’m generally very suspicious of the standardized “Intelligence Quotient” as a reliable metric of intelligence, for a wide range of reasons. For example, if IQ tests were reliable, then we could expect the same individual to produce similar scores with each test. But that’s often not the case – the same person might perform significantly better in the morning or in the evening; they might perform significantly better before a meal or after a meal; they might produce a dramatically different result on “a good day” than on “a bad day.” IQ test results are often all over the map – the more often you take these tests the wider the range of results becomes. So I’d rather talk about the heart of the matter: intelligence itself.

I think that as a global society we currently have a very poor understanding of the nature and the significance of intelligence.

In recent years I’ve noticed that some people with extraordinarily high levels of academic training and proficiency frequently fail to apply their intellect properly, and arrive at a lot of erroneous conclusions on a wide range of topics. Such people can be very adept at justifying their erroneous conclusions, but they can fall prey to the same kinds of emotional and subjective failings that everyone else falls prey to – so raw analytical prowess is only one feature of true intelligence.

Simultaneously I’ve noticed that some people with average-to-somewhat-above-average processing capabilities arrive at correct conclusions, with genuinely remarkable consistency. What makes them stand out among their peers, who exhibit far less reliable cognitive processing?

Surprisingly, it appears that key factors in the “intelligence equation” boil down to character, courage, integrity, psychological fortitude, and a rigorous internal demand for intellectual honesty. The process of reasoning may actually depend more upon those psychological factors, than on raw intelligence itself. Ultimately, the proper effective application of intelligence comes down a series of steps that can be easily corrupted by biases, ego, social conditioning, and emotional investments in arriving at desired conclusions - so the psychological factors that can preserve the integrity of each step in the reasoning process are absolutely pivotal.

Preserving the fidelity of the reasoning process requires a dogged and unwavering commitment to discovering the truth of a matter, regardless of its impact on one’s previous conclusions, or previous public statements, or even one’s own long-held worldview. Few people possess that level of dedication to finding and elucidating the truth. Brilliant and mediocre minds alike commonly fall prey to the temptation to distort the truth in order to serve their personal, political, and/or professional agendas. And once you’ve grown accustomed to playing that kind of shell-game with the truth, your conclusions become unreliable and often downright inaccurate, regardless of your level of raw intelligence. In fact in many ways it appears that PsyOps can often be more effective against highly educated people with an exceptional level of intellect, because the architecture of their reasoning process is more rigid and predictable, and therefore easier to manipulate with targeted attacks and deliberately corrupted data.

So the ultimate outcome of all this has been very unexpected and revealing. I’ve found that the people who possess the greatest levels of insight and clarity on a wide range of topics, but usually scientific and scholarly in nature, span the whole range of formal training and IQ testing results. I’ve enjoyed deep and inspiring conversations with PhD’s, and self-taught carpenters with nothing more formal than a high-school education, as well as bartenders, film makers, and bus drivers. I’m sure that their academic IQ tests covered a wide range from average to genius levels, and yet the clarity and vibrancy of their minds all attained the same extraordinary levels, because they have all demanded the most rigorous fidelity of their reasoning processes, and they all possessed the strength of character to recognize their personal biases and excise them from their application of logic.

Which is to say that it appears that we’ve made no progress with properly ranking or even properly understanding human intelligence. There may be a tendency for people with PhDs or professional licenses or high IQ scores to be more intelligent than the average person – but it’s by no means a direct or reliable gauge of true intellectual proficiency. And there are a great many people without any of the widely accepted badges of intellect who exhibit extraordinary levels of insight and understanding that we’ve been conditioned to expect only of the top tiers of academia and the professional classes.

In the end I find that each mind has to be evaluated on the merits of its reasoning and the qualities of its accomplishments, because none of the modern metrics consistently correlate with the reality of the individual intellect. That’s bad news for the lazy thinkers who want a simple yardstick to place everyone on a neatly ordered linear scale based on banal criteria like IQ test results or academic degrees. But it’s good news for the human species, because it means that any one of us can transcend the context of our bona fides to make breathtaking contributions to any field that we’re deeply passionate about.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
I’m generally very suspicious of the standardized “Intelligence Quotient” as a reliable metric of intelligence, for a wide range of reasons. For example, if IQ tests were reliable, then we could expect the same individual to produce similar scores with each test. But that’s often not the case – the same person might perform significantly better in the morning or in the evening; they might perform significantly better before a meal or after a meal; they might produce a dramatically different result on “a good day” than on “a bad day.” IQ test results are often all over the map – the more often you take these tests the wider the range of results becomes. So I’d rather talk about the heart of the matter: intelligence itself.

I think that as a global society we currently have a very poor understanding of the nature and the significance of intelligence.

In recent years I’ve noticed that some people with extraordinarily high levels of academic training and proficiency frequently fail to apply their intellect properly, and arrive at a lot of erroneous conclusions on a wide range of topics. Such people can be very adept at justifying their erroneous conclusions, but they can fall prey to the same kinds of emotional and subjective failings that everyone else falls prey to – so raw analytical prowess is only one feature of true intelligence.

Simultaneously I’ve noticed that some people with average-to-somewhat-above-average processing capabilities arrive at correct conclusions, with genuinely remarkable consistency. What makes them stand out among their peers, who exhibit far less reliable cognitive processing?

Surprisingly, it appears that key factors in the “intelligence equation” boil down to character, courage, integrity, psychological fortitude, and a rigorous internal demand for intellectual honesty. The process of reasoning may actually depend more upon those psychological factors, than on raw intelligence itself. Ultimately, the proper effective application of intelligence comes down a series of steps that can be easily corrupted by biases, ego, social conditioning, and emotional investments in arriving at desired conclusions - so the psychological factors that can preserve the integrity of each step in the reasoning process are absolutely pivotal.

Preserving the fidelity of the reasoning process requires a dogged and unwavering commitment to discovering the truth of a matter, regardless of its impact on one’s previous conclusions, or previous public statements, or even one’s own long-held worldview. Few people possess that level of dedication to finding and elucidating the truth. Brilliant and mediocre minds alike commonly fall prey to the temptation to distort the truth in order to serve their personal, political, and/or professional agendas. And once you’ve grown accustomed to playing that kind of shell-game with the truth, your conclusions become unreliable and often downright inaccurate, regardless of your level of raw intelligence. In fact in many ways it appears that PsyOps can often be more effective against highly educated people with an exceptional level of intellect, because the architecture of their reasoning process is more rigid and predictable, and therefore easier to manipulate with targeted attacks and deliberately corrupted data.

So the ultimate outcome of all this has been very unexpected and revealing. I’ve found that the people who possess the greatest levels of insight and clarity on a wide range of topics, but usually scientific and scholarly in nature, span the whole range of formal training and IQ testing results. I’ve enjoyed deep and inspiring conversations with PhD’s, and self-taught carpenters with nothing more formal than a high-school education, as well as bartenders, film makers, and bus drivers. I’m sure that their academic IQ tests covered a wide range from average to genius levels, and yet the clarity and vibrancy of their minds all attained the same extraordinary levels, because they have all demanded the most rigorous fidelity of their reasoning processes, and they all possessed the strength of character to recognize their personal biases and excise them from their application of logic.

Which is to say that it appears that we’ve made no progress with properly ranking or even properly understanding human intelligence. There may be a tendency for people with PhDs or professional licenses or high IQ scores to be more intelligent than the average person – but it’s by no means a direct or reliable gauge of true intellectual proficiency. And there are a great many people without any of the widely accepted badges of intellect who exhibit extraordinary levels of insight and understanding that we’ve been conditioned to expect only of the top tiers of academia and the professional classes.

In the end I find that each mind has to be evaluated on the merits of its reasoning and the qualities of its accomplishments, because none of the modern metrics consistently correlate with the reality of the individual intellect. That’s bad news for the lazy thinkers who want a simple yardstick to place everyone on a neatly ordered linear scale based on banal criteria like IQ test results or academic degrees. But it’s good news for the human species, because it means that any one of us can transcend the context of our bona fides to make breathtaking contributions to any field that we’re deeply passionate about.

Correct you are, An IQ test is little more than an estimation of a persons potential when you strip away all the mysticism, And There is no one test that can measure every point, Most IQ tests are timed to put undue stress on people to finish before the timer runs out, But if you give some people more time, They can be more proficient than others. Stress is something some really really smart people just can't process very well at all, While others can.

Yes, I ultimately do want to speak about intellect and the ways our minds process information, But I do Agree. The "IQ Test" Get's too much recognition, Because, A, It's inaccurate, Even those who pass with flying colors don't have a completely accurate estimate of their own intelligence. It's flawed from the ground up really.

My Question is, What do we do? How do we recognize that person A is worth funding a scholarship for? How do we help people in the areas they most need help in?
 
Last edited:

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
I’m generally very suspicious of the standardized “Intelligence Quotient” as a reliable metric of intelligence, for a wide range of reasons. For example, if IQ tests were reliable, then we could expect the same individual to produce similar scores with each test. But that’s often not the case – the same person might perform significantly better in the morning or in the evening; they might perform significantly better before a meal or after a meal; they might produce a dramatically different result on “a good day” than on “a bad day.” IQ test results are often all over the map – the more often you take these tests the wider the range of results becomes. So I’d rather talk about the heart of the matter: intelligence itself.

I think that as a global society we currently have a very poor understanding of the nature and the significance of intelligence.

In recent years I’ve noticed that some people with extraordinarily high levels of academic training and proficiency frequently fail to apply their intellect properly, and arrive at a lot of erroneous conclusions on a wide range of topics. Such people can be very adept at justifying their erroneous conclusions, but they can fall prey to the same kinds of emotional and subjective failings that everyone else falls prey to – so raw analytical prowess is only one feature of true intelligence.

Simultaneously I’ve noticed that some people with average-to-somewhat-above-average processing capabilities arrive at correct conclusions, with genuinely remarkable consistency. What makes them stand out among their peers, who exhibit far less reliable cognitive processing?

Surprisingly, it appears that key factors in the “intelligence equation” boil down to character, courage, integrity, psychological fortitude, and a rigorous internal demand for intellectual honesty. The process of reasoning may actually depend more upon those psychological factors, than on raw intelligence itself. Ultimately, the proper effective application of intelligence comes down a series of steps that can be easily corrupted by biases, ego, social conditioning, and emotional investments in arriving at desired conclusions - so the psychological factors that can preserve the integrity of each step in the reasoning process are absolutely pivotal.

Preserving the fidelity of the reasoning process requires a dogged and unwavering commitment to discovering the truth of a matter, regardless of its impact on one’s previous conclusions, or previous public statements, or even one’s own long-held worldview. Few people possess that level of dedication to finding and elucidating the truth. Brilliant and mediocre minds alike commonly fall prey to the temptation to distort the truth in order to serve their personal, political, and/or professional agendas. And once you’ve grown accustomed to playing that kind of shell-game with the truth, your conclusions become unreliable and often downright inaccurate, regardless of your level of raw intelligence. In fact in many ways it appears that PsyOps can often be more effective against highly educated people with an exceptional level of intellect, because the architecture of their reasoning process is more rigid and predictable, and therefore easier to manipulate with targeted attacks and deliberately corrupted data.

So the ultimate outcome of all this has been very unexpected and revealing. I’ve found that the people who possess the greatest levels of insight and clarity on a wide range of topics, but usually scientific and scholarly in nature, span the whole range of formal training and IQ testing results. I’ve enjoyed deep and inspiring conversations with PhD’s, and self-taught carpenters with nothing more formal than a high-school education, as well as bartenders, film makers, and bus drivers. I’m sure that their academic IQ tests covered a wide range from average to genius levels, and yet the clarity and vibrancy of their minds all attained the same extraordinary levels, because they have all demanded the most rigorous fidelity of their reasoning processes, and they all possessed the strength of character to recognize their personal biases and excise them from their application of logic.

Which is to say that it appears that we’ve made no progress with properly ranking or even properly understanding human intelligence. There may be a tendency for people with PhDs or professional licenses or high IQ scores to be more intelligent than the average person – but it’s by no means a direct or reliable gauge of true intellectual proficiency. And there are a great many people without any of the widely accepted badges of intellect who exhibit extraordinary levels of insight and understanding that we’ve been conditioned to expect only of the top tiers of academia and the professional classes.

In the end I find that each mind has to be evaluated on the merits of its reasoning and the qualities of its accomplishments, because none of the modern metrics consistently correlate with the reality of the individual intellect. That’s bad news for the lazy thinkers who want a simple yardstick to place everyone on a neatly ordered linear scale based on banal criteria like IQ test results or academic degrees. But it’s good news for the human species, because it means that any one of us can transcend the context of our bona fides to make breathtaking contributions to any field that we’re deeply passionate about.
My apologies, The Ultimate resolution of my first Question was answered in your first post. I apologize for this, At that time, My wife was leaving for work and there were the kissy kissy lovey dovey happenings. And I didn't fully Catch the entire post until now. Your post isn't just insightful. It's positive, There is a lot of optimism, in it, I am the Kind of person who Very much appreciates that ideology, I thank you. Yes, I do believe Almost any person could be conditioned and properly fitted with the exact requirements they need and become a genius, I believe even Mentally damaged people could achieve this, And I believe that because I've seen it happen.

You are Right, The problem isn't IQ's. I think you and I are thinking the Same thing, The Problem is the Educational system itself, It has it's own biases brother and it picks and chooses who succeeds while not giving those who need it the time or help they need to grasp the subjects.

This has been insightful And Revealing for me.

I have to say Thomas, And This is True, I am Quicky becoming a Fan of yours.
 
My apologies, The Ultimate resolution of my first Question was answered in your first post. I apologize for this, At that time, My wife was leaving for work and there were the kissy kissy lovey dovey happenings. And I didn't fully Catch the entire post until now. Your post isn't just insightful. It's positive, There is a lot of optimism, in it, I am the Kind of person who Very much appreciates that ideology, I thank you. Yes, I do believe Almost any person could be conditioned and properly fitted with the exact requirements they need and become a genius, I believe even Mentally damaged people could achieve this, And I believe that because I've seen it happen.

You are Right, The problem isn't IQ's. I think you and I are thinking the Same thing, The Problem is the Educational system itself, It has it's own biases brother and it picks and chooses who succeeds while not giving those who need it the time or help they need to grasp the subjects.

This has been insightful And Revealing for me.

I have to say Thomas, And This is True, I am Quicky becoming a Fan of yours.
Well thanks man - but if it's all the same to you I'd rather have a friend than a fan, so let's go that route :)

I guess I could add a few points since you raised some related issues:
  • One thing we could and should do, is stop robbing our children for the privilege of a quality higher education. We should be giving our best education to our best minds...not reserving the best education for the children of the wealthiest parents. Universal higher education is already a feature of most first-world nations - we're long overdue with adopting that kind of system. "Student debt" is a form of indentured servitude, and it should go the way of the Dark Ages.
  • Our educational system is crappy - we need smaller classes, more quality teachers, and a radical shift away from formulaic child programming....and instead toward sensible and adaptive learning that suits each child's interests and strengths. Jiddu Krishnmaurti created a system of schools like this and they worked brilliantly, so that should be the new standard.
  • Maximizing our intellectual potential isn't really as much about the external factors in our lives; it's more about the quality of our thought processes. We all need to abandon our attachments to our positions, and embrace the truth instead, whatever it may be. Right now we all tend to use our intellect to "win arguments," but that's a misapplication and corruption of intelligence. We need to use our intellect to find the truth to the best of our ability....that's an entirely different process. And a big part of that is learning to accept uncertainty: it's okay to not have a conclusion on something when the data is insufficient to form a rational and empirically driven conclusion - probably 90% of our cognitive errors occur because we feel obligated to form a position when we have insufficient data to form a firm and logically defensible position. And all real learning starts when we admit "I don't know," so we should welcome that as a starting point for all of our considerations.
  • As I pointed out in my first response, real intelligence is driven to an astonishing extent by applying rigorous internal standards to our own thought processes. Having the intellectual honesty to recognize the difference between assumptions and facts, for example. Having the courage to accept that our previous conclusions could be wrong - and actually try to disprove our own ideas, to test their validity. And cultivating a mentality that's driven to find the truth, through an indifference to the conclusions, so we don't subtly lead ourselves in wrong directions. We can't change our genetics, but we can certainly change our mentality - and by doing that we can maximize the potential of our intelligence.
We're not taught how to think. We're taught what to think - that's actually indoctrination, not education. But we all think so differently that ultimately it's our own responsibility to teach ourselves how to think clearly, impartially, and logically. Studying the formal logical fallacies is a good place to start so we can learn to recognize and abolish the bullshit in our own thought processes.

You have to be kind of a rebel in order to think clearly, because the first thing you have to throw out the window is any attachment to what other people think, so you can form your own unbiased conclusions. That means questioning every authority on every subject: check their work. No level of fame or recognition or an advanced degree makes a person "an authority" on anything - everyone makes errors, and understanding is always evolving. We have to stop trusting other people's views because of some perceived authority, and learn to examine the data for ourselves before we conclude whether or not they're correct.

Because ultimately the only understanding that matters to you personally, is your understanding. And that has to be won through hard work, rigorous analysis, and independent research conducted with a completely impartial and unbiased mind. And that's way harder than it sounds. But it's absolutely essential, because otherwise we're only left with parroting the views of others without any real comprehension of the foundations underlying those views - which renders them worthless to us and to others, and frequently results in spreading ignorance, rather than understanding.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
Well thanks man - but if it's all the same to you I'd rather have a friend than a fan, so let's go that route :)

I guess I could add a few points since you raised some related issues:
  • One thing we could and should do, is stop robbing our children for the privilege of a quality higher education. We should be giving our best education to our best minds...not reserving the best education for the children of the wealthiest parents. Universal higher education is already a feature of most first-world nations - we're long overdue with adopting that kind of system. "Student debt" is a form of indentured servitude, and it should go the way of the Dark Ages.
  • Our educational system is crappy - we need smaller classes, more quality teachers, and a radical shift away from formulaic child programming....and instead toward sensible and adaptive learning that suits each child's interests and strengths. Jiddu Krishnmaurti created a system of schools like this and they worked brilliantly, so that should be the new standard.
  • Maximizing our intellectual potential isn't really as much about the external factors in our lives; it's more about the quality of our thought processes. We all need to abandon our attachments to our positions, and embrace the truth instead, whatever it may be. Right now we all tend to use our intellect to "win arguments," but that's a misapplication and corruption of intelligence. We need to use our intellect to find the truth to the best of our ability....that's an entirely different process. And a big part of that is learning to accept uncertainty: it's okay to not have a conclusion on something when the data is insufficient to form a rational and empirically driven conclusion - probably 90% of our cognitive errors occur because we feel obligated to form a position when we have insufficient data to form a firm and logically defensible position. And all real learning starts when we admit "I don't know," so we should welcome that as a starting point for all of our considerations.
  • As I pointed out in my first response, real intelligence is driven to an astonishing extent by applying rigorous internal standards to our own thought processes. Having the intellectual honesty to recognize the difference between assumptions and facts, for example. Having the courage to accept that our previous conclusions could be wrong - and actually try to disprove our own ideas, to test their validity. And cultivating a mentality that's driven to find the truth, through an indifference to the conclusions, so we don't subtly lead ourselves in wrong directions. We can't change our genetics, but we can certainly change our mentality - and by doing that we can maximize the potential of our intelligence.
We're not taught how to think. We're taught what to think - that's actually indoctrination, not education. But we all think so differently that ultimately it's our own responsibility to teach ourselves how to think clearly, impartially, and logically. Studying the formal logical fallacies is a good place to start so we can learn to recognize and abolish the bullshit in our own thought processes.

You have to be kind of a rebel in order to think clearly, because the first thing you have to throw out the window is any attachment to what other people think, so you can form your own unbiased conclusions. That means questioning every authority on every subject: check their work. No level of fame or recognition or an advanced degree makes a person "an authority" on anything - everyone makes errors, and understanding is always evolving. We have to stop trusting other people's views because of some perceived authority, and learn to examine the data for ourselves before we conclude whether or not they're correct.

Because ultimately the only understanding that matters to you personally, is your understanding. And that has to be won through hard work, rigorous analysis, and independent research conducted with a completely impartial and unbiased mind. And that's way harder than it sounds. But it's absolutely essential, because otherwise we're only left with parroting the views of others without any real comprehension of the foundations underlying those views - which renders them worthless to us and to others, and frequently results in spreading ignorance, rather than understanding.
You Are a friend, Worry not of that brother :) You are right, Critical thinking is the Key, My question is, Twofold, Is Critical thinking something that can be taught to everyone? Of course, it would help, But Educationally Times are poor, We need more than one Teacher per student, One to Teach, and one To just Observe and see where students are struggling and personally go to the student to help them, grasp where they are struggling. I would like to see a system where Children who should advance can Advance and Children who have not advanced have time to advance. My thoughts are, Get Rid of Grade levels entirely, Is someone in the fifth grade or seventh Grade? It doesn't matter because classrooms wouldn't be focused around Grade level anymore, It would only Focus Skill advancements, This would be such a common practice, That no students would criticize one another because everyone is where they belong, The structure of formative Education I think Must change, These similar age group structures aren't working, They have never really worked., Socially it will teach Children at the levels they need to focus on because a child could be bad at Math and be taking Math for that skill level While excelling and taking advanced Language Classes.

Those are just My thoughts on one way the system suffers. Teachers are sometimes a problem as well, They often pack their personal biases and moods in on the children and subconsciously project their biases upon them. This is not a good thing. It needs to be addressed as well I think.
 
Last edited:

Dejan Corovic

As above, so bellow
I would say that intelligence is important only in abstract situations, like academia. For example mathematics or science in general. For solving regular life's problems one doesn't need more than average IQ. To be effective intelligence really needs some abstract space that is isolated from chaos of life. Like a chess or poker game or mathematical theorems.

Another thing is, of how much use is IQ if one receives crap information? Till one knows facts that matter, no amount of thinking can help. For example, I was a witness in a situation where four very intelligent, educated and experienced doctors, in their late thirties, spent a good time speculating about patient's symptoms. Than results of the medical test came in and they immediately solved the diagnosis. So, neither their IQ, nor their education, nor their experience helped them as much as did solid evidence.

And that is where power lies. Those who know right information can make correct decisions, even if they have low IQ.

While on a subject of information quality, we are constantly bombarded with information coming from groups with different agendas. Just follow CNN and Fox News in parallel for few days and you'll see that they filter information in completely different ways. For example, I was stunned that on the day when major US ally's, UK's prime minister Theresa May signed historic Brexit deal, than Fox News didn't even report about it, but they had lots of reports about brave policemen's deeds or despicable criminals being served with justice. Even when reporting about the same event it is completely routine that CNN and Fox present or hide different facts, which in turn creates different narative for the same story.

In other words, high IQ is useless if you have questionable information.
 

cosmic joke

Honorable
'till one knows facts that matter'. to whom? anyway. here's a fact. my IQ test result 132. thought it might be fun to get into MENSA. turned out i was 3 points short. their loss i figure. ya'll right though. IQ's mean nada in real life. mind you that's just my humble oponion. to some it means everything they are. oye eh.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
'till one knows facts that matter'. to whom? anyway. here's a fact. my IQ test result 132. thought it might be fun to get into MENSA. turned out i was 3 points short. their loss i figure. ya'll right though. IQ's mean nada in real life. mind you that's just my humble oponion. to some it means everything they are. oye eh.

I never quote my actual numbers. As we discussed The numbers don't matter anyway :) Besides the last time I quoted my Actual numbers Three people immediately came from nowhere to call bullshit lol It was hilarious actually And honestly, There is another reason. If my Iq is really as high as they say it is. Why is my Life the Life I have? something must be wrong with the tests ...
Kentucky wanted to pay to get me into Mensa, My mom stopped them because she was still hurting over all the stress she put me through with her college homework, She said If I was meant to be Smart I would be and I didn't need a club to affirm that.

I think it was a good move on her part, It would have stressed me out a lot.
 
Last edited:

Dejan Corovic

As above, so bellow
'till one knows facts that matter'. to whom? anyway. here's a fact. my IQ test result 132. thought it might be fun to get into MENSA. turned out i was 3 points short. their loss i figure. ya'll right though. IQ's mean nada in real life. mind you that's just my humble oponion. to some it means everything they are. oye eh.

:) :) :)

You made me lough now. I am a programmer, so I rate intelligence quite high. So, I paid for the test, it was a bit less than $30, and my IQ came out to be 134.5 or 0.5 lower than 135 that's needed to entr MENSA. Not trying to outdo you, true story. For the rest of my life I had gripe because I was 0.5 point short.

But than what is the point? MENSA is full of people who are over 160, we would be on the bottom of the ladder. Apparently Bill Gates was 160, Einstein 200 and so on.

And then against that you have billionaire Richard Branson who has difficulties with reading and writing, and billionaire Robert Bigelow with barely any formal education. The richest man in UK, second after the queen, is scrap metal dealer who left school when he was 16, he started doing scrap metal and commodities prices shot up to the sky. I can go on like that listing billionaires with no education or with low IQ whole day long.

There was this funny but true personal anecdote. My dentist is right next to London School of Economics. It was a September. I arrived early for appointment and was sitting in a park waiting for my time to come, when a young professor brought a bunch of students to a park to do opening lecture for their first semester. They were on the bench next to mine, so I listened a good part of the lecture. And to inspire them he said: "... and 2 of 1,000 world's billionaires graduated from London School of Economics".

Only good manners prevented me from falling on the floor and rolling in laughter. I have dosens of friends who are running all kinds of businesses and through them I met lots of successful businessman, not to mention watching many episodes of Shark Tank and Dragon's Den and if successfull people all have one thing in common, is that most of them have very little or no education or didn't appear exceptionally smart (lets not confuse well informed with smart).

IQ is only good for abstract problems, for life you just need the right attitude.
 
Last edited:

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
:) :) :)

You made me lough now. I am a programmer, so I rate intelligence quite high. So, I paid for the test, it was a bit less than $30, and my IQ came out to be 134.5 or 0.5 lower than 135 that's needed to entr MENSA. Not trying to outdo you, true story. For the rest of my life I had gripe because I was 0.5 point short.

But than what is the point? MENSA is full of people who are over 160, we would be on the bottom of the ladder. Apparently Bill Gates was 160, Einstein 200 and so on.

And then against that you have billionaire Richard Branson who has difficulties with reading and writing, and billionaire Robert Bigelow with barely any formal education. The richest man in UK, second after the queen, is scrap metal dealer who left school when he was 16, he started doing scrap metal and commodities prices shot up to the sky. I can go on like that listing billionaires with no education or with low IQ whole day long.

There was this funny but true personal anecdote. My dentist is right next to London School of Economics. It was a September. I arrived early for appointment and was sitting in a park waiting for my time to come, when a young professor brought a bunch of students to a park to do opening lecture for their first semester. They were on the bench next to mine, so I listened a good part of the lecture. And to inspire them he said: "... and 2 of 1,000 world's billionaires graduated from London School of Economics".

Only good manners prevented me from falling on the floor and rolling in laughter. I have dosens of friends who are running all kinds of businesses and through them I met lots of successful businessman, not to mention watching many episodes of Shark Tank and Dragon's Den and if successfull people all have one thing in common, is that most of them have very little or no education or didn't appear exceptionally smart (lets not confuse well informed with smart).

IQ is only good for abstract problems, for life you just need the right attitude.
What were the conditions of your test?, Mine was set to cost five hundred dollars and then it still cost annual fees afterward. I was going to have to actually go to Indiana and meet a representative in person and then take a test with the rest of the class. This was pre-internet times though.
 

Dejan Corovic

As above, so bellow
I don't remember, it was more than 10 years ago. I just googled and clickd on an ad, which I never do ;-). It was just time limitted, maybe 45 minuts, maybe 1 hour. Test was all about geometric patterns. They gave you 3 patterns and asked you to guess forth. I was always good with those patterns.

I did the lanquage test as well, but scored average, which I guess was very good, since English is only my second lanquage and the most nuancies of language can not be thought, one needs to be born into it.

Wow, $500!!! There must be a big market out there, lets set up businss to rip of narcisoid nerds :) and make some good coin. Why would one need to pay anual fees, when test is only once?

Yeah, later I read on BBC's website that IQ test can vary +/-30% depending on self-confidence level at that right moment. Article described an experimnt in which professors deliberately mocked some students, even racialy abused some, before the test and positively encouraged others. Outcome was that encouraged students group performed much better. So, one factor is mood and 30% is a huge variation for it to be rigorously scientific.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
I don't remember, it was more than 10 years ago. I just googled and clickd on ad, which I never do ;-). It was just time limitted, maybe 45 minuts, maybe 1 hour. Test was all about geometric patterns. They gave you 3 patterns and asked you to guess forth. I was always good with those patterns.

I did the lanquage test as well, but scored average, which I guess was very good, since English is only my second lanquage and the most nuancies of language can not be thought, one needs to be born into it.

Wow, $500!!! There must be a big market out there, lets set up businss to rip of narcisoid nerds :) and make some good coin. Why would one need to pay anual fees, when test is only once?

Yeah, later I read on BBC's website that IQ test can vary +/-30% depending on self-confidence level at that right moment. Article described an experimnt in which professors deliberately mocked some students, even racialy abused some, before the test and positively encouraged others. Outcome was that encouraged students group performed much better. So, one factor is mood and 30% is a huge variation for it to be rigorously scientific.
Yeah, It was kind of like a School paid thing for people who did well on some pretest they gave, But in the note, we had to take home to our parents it said the trip would normally cost 500 dollars per student but the school was paying for it. So, I don't really know the rest of the details on it. as my mom decided I was a pretty stressed out nervous kid and didn't need the pressure of it.
 

SOUL-DRIFTER

Life Long Researcher
Our brain capacities are all the same.

So, is the IQ of a well educated man with a faulty memory better than a much less educated man with a photographic memory?
xxxx2
 
Top