IQ and intelligence

[DerDrache]

Originally Posted by Zay

also, stress makes you dumber:
http://health.usnews.com/articles/he...-thinking.html

I could go on and on.

Haha, yep. Exercise has been shown to grow (or regenerate, I can't remember which) brain cells, too.

[Dread_Lord]

I am a firm believer in IQ tests.
Can you train yourself to learn how to do the test better? Yes. Does that make you more intelligent? No. It means you have learned to cheat on the test and just like any other test learning to cheat doesn't make you know more.

The tests are meant to measures someone ability for complex problem solving and when you introduce someone to the test for the very first time some people simply score higher than others.

Is it true it can be affected by other things? Well, yes, but ask yourself how that is possible if IQ is not a measure of intellectual functions. What is it measuring that gets affected by things such as salt deficiency and being overstressed? It's obviously measuring some function in a humans thought process to be affected by such things.

I never got the whole "the average IQ is rising" argument. What's the point of even putting forward such an argument? Does it prove anything other than the average IQ is rising?

Does that even matter?
Everyone here has come in contact with people who they know are not as smart as them or as intelligent as them. Do you really need the IQ test to do what can be done within 5 minutes of speaking with a person? Some people are smarter than others. Get used to it.

[i poop in your cereal]

Originally Posted by Dread_Lord

Everyone here has come in contact with people who they know are not as smart as them or as intelligent as them. Do you really need the IQ test to do what can be done within 5 minutes of speaking with a person? Some people are smarter than others. Get used to it.

Everyone I've ever talked to in real life has found me to be pretty smart, for reasons I don't know, but in reality I'm a fucking moron. I also have a very pathetic IQ score.

[DerDrache]

Originally Posted by Dread_Lord

The tests are meant to measures someone ability for complex problem solving and when you introduce someone to the test for the very first time some people simply score higher than others.

You really should avoid talking out of your ass so much. The Wechsler test (the most common IQ test nowadays) tests the following categories:

1. a Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI)
2. a Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI)
3. a Working Memory Index (WMI)
4. a Processing Speed Index (PSI)
5. a composite, single full-scale IQ (FSIQ) score based on the combined scores
6. a General Ability Index (GAI) to identify general cognitive ability

A concise, correct description of the test would have been "It attempts to measure a subset of cognitive abilities."

Is it true it can be affected by other things? Well, yes, but ask yourself how that is possible if IQ is not a measure of intellectual functions. What is it measuring that gets affected by things such as salt deficiency and being overstressed? It's obviously measuring some function in a humans thought process to be affected by such things.

It is not measuring "some function". It attempts to quantify several cognitive functions.

I never got the whole "the average IQ is rising" argument. What's the point of even putting forward such an argument? Does it prove anything other than the average IQ is rising?

And this confirms that you don't know a thing about IQ or IQ tests. Simply put, it means that "average" people from past decades would have scored lower than average people of today, if they took our IQ tests. While you could qualify that as "lawl we're smarter", the reason we are "smarter" is because of the constantly progressing intellectual environment of our society. In other words, rising IQ scores is just yet another demonstration of the fact that IQ is not static or determined.

Does that even matter?
Everyone here has come in contact with people who they know are not as smart as them or as intelligent as them. Do you really need the IQ test to do what can be done within 5 minutes of speaking with a person? Some people are smarter than others. Get used to it.

In 5 minutes of speaking with someone you could determine whether they are more intelligent than you? Jesus...the nonsense just never stops with you, does it? As Sentinel put it "Is a violin virtuoso "intelligent" in the same way that a master architect is? Or a great sculptor? Or a mathematician? Clearly not."

You can't narrow down intelligence to one quality (or even two, three, or four), and you certainly can't thoroughly evaluate someone's intellectual abilities simply in a 5 minute chat. If, during one of your 5 minute judgement chats, someone showed that they did math at a 4th grade level, you would ignorantly think "He's dumb.". If you met this same person while he was engaged in an activity he was skilled at, you would think "He's really smart." Point being: If you think that "intelligence" is one thing, if you think it can be evaluated in a 5 minute conversation, or from an IQ test for that matter, then you should simply stop posting and let the knowledgeable people talk.

--

On that note, I'll finish with this: IQ only measures IQ. It is not equivalent to "intelligence", and although it definitely has predictive power of one's performance in our society, that correlation is not written in stone.

[Dread_Lord]

Originally Posted by DerDrache

You really should avoid talking out of your ass so much. The Wechsler test (the most common IQ test nowadays) tests the following categories:

1. a Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI)
2. a Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI)
3. a Working Memory Index (WMI)
4. a Processing Speed Index (PSI)
5. a composite, single full-scale IQ (FSIQ) score based on the combined scores
6. a General Ability Index (GAI) to identify general cognitive ability

A concise, correct description of the test would have been "It attempts to measure a subset of cognitive abilities."

Oh my, how little we understand from simply getting our answers from Wikipedia.
I specifically say complex problem solving for a reason. I kind of like that you don't have any clue what I was talking about. What are the virtues of intelligence itself according to tests? I'll give you a hint, complex problem solving is one of them.

It is not measuring "some function". It attempts to quantify several cognitive functions.

But it is.

And this confirms that you don't know a thing about IQ or IQ tests. Simply put, it means that "average" people from past decades would have scored lower than average people of today, if they took our IQ tests. While you could qualify that as "lawl we're smarter", the reason we are "smarter" is because of the constantly progressing intellectual environment of our society. In other words, rising IQ scores is just yet another demonstration of the fact that IQ is not static or determined.

So then there should be a larger than average raise to IQ levels since the internet came in to existence, according to you, correct?
Oh and I was going to wait to drop this hammer but I do know what the Flynn effect is and it doesn't state that IQ scores rise over time. It states that just as it can rise it can also drop over time.

In 5 minutes of speaking with someone you could determine whether they are more intelligent than you? Jesus...the nonsense just never stops with you, does it? As Sentinel put it "Is a violin virtuoso "intelligent" in the same way that a master architect is? Or a great sculptor? Or a mathematician? Clearly not."

A persons job placement does not represent their intellectual capabilities.

You can't narrow down intelligence to one quality (or even two, three, or four), and you certainly can't thoroughly evaluate someone's intellectual abilities simply in a 5 minute chat. If, during one of your 5 minute judgement chats, someone showed that they did math at a 4th grade level, you would ignorantly think "He's dumb.". If you met this same person while he was engaged in an activity he was skilled at, you would think "He's really smart." Point being: If you think that "intelligence" is one thing, if you think it can be evaluated in a 5 minute conversation, or from an IQ test for that matter, then you should simply stop posting and let the knowledgeable people talk.

You have the part about there being virtues to intelligence (4, by the way) but the rest is ridiculous. Again, job does not represent intellectual capability. Neither does skill. Intelligence is a hell of a lot different than educated. I agree with you to an extent, however. 5 minutes is not exactly how long it would take me, or anyone, to measure someone intellectually.

[Zay]

Originally Posted by Dread_Lord

A persons job placement does not represent their intellectual capabilities.

*wooooooooooooooosh*

[Dread_Lord]

Originally Posted by Zay

*wooooooooooooooosh*

I don't get it.
Is the wooosh the sound of what I said going right over your head?

[DerDrache]

As I tell your companions all the time: You don't know what you're talking about, you know you don't know what you're talking about, so stop trying to argue about it. Arguing isn't going to change the basic facts of what an IQ test is, what they measure, what they tend to be correlated with, and what intelligence is (or rather, what intelligence is not).

In any case, I've already written all of the important facts there are to know about IQ tests, that being: it is not equivalent to intelligence, it isn't a determined and unchanging number, and it has some predictive value, but nothing about its predictive power is written in stone. Period.

Protip: If you don't jump to ignorant conclusions, you won't get hit over the head by reality every time you're faced with actual scientific information.

EDIT: And as Zay pointed out...you really, really misinterpreted the comments about "mathematician, violin virtuoso, architect", given that you thought we were talking about job placement. Either way, I give up. These arguments go nowhere.

[Dread_Lord]

Originally Posted by DerDrache

As I tell your companions all the time: You don't know what you're talking about, you know you don't know what you're talking about, so stop trying to argue about it. Arguing isn't going to change the basic facts of what an IQ test is, what they measure, what they tend to be correlated with, and what intelligence is (or rather, what intelligence is not).

More like you don't know what I am talking about.

In any case, I've already written all of the important facts there are to know about IQ tests, that being: it is not equivalent to intelligence, it isn't a determined and unchanging number, and it has some predictive value, but nothing about its predictive power is written in stone. Period.

Nothing about it's predictive power is written in stone is a long way off off from "it is not equivalent to intelligence".
You have copy and pasted from wikipedia, btw. That does not mean you comprehend. What's more you have not described intelligence and by not doing so you cannot take what you have pasted and claim it is an indication of intelligence or not. I guess you didn't pick up on that did you.

EDIT: And as Zay pointed out...you really, really misinterpreted the comments about "mathematician, violin virtuoso, architect", given that you thought we were talking about job placement.

You were attempting to change the definition of intelligence to suit your needs rather than actually argue based on the actual meaning of the word. All those people have intelligence but what you describe is actually their title based on what they choose to do in life. Also known as a job. Intelligence is the precursor to gaining knowledge, not knowledge itself.
I answered correctly, your failed to comprehend.

Perhaps there is a meaning in what you wrote that I didn't grasp but that's what I have gathered from reading it.

[DerDrache]

1) I copied the 6 scoring indices of the WAIS exam, nothing else. Anything else I've written is based on what I've learned from paying attention in classes and reading science journals or textbooks.

2) I'll illustrate the point about "mathematicians, violinists, etc." another way: Although some would judge you as unintelligent, stupid, moronic, or borderline-retarded based on what you've written in this thread, you might have (just maybe) made a much better impression if you were judged in another setting. It was merely an illustration of how complicated and generally unreliable (social) judgements of intelligence are.

3)

Perhaps there is a meaning in what you wrote that I didn't grasp but that's what I have gathered from reading it.

Yeah, yeah...recurring theme.