User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 32

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I see this conjunction as false. If what they measure isn't defined then it doesn't follow that what is being measured is being shifted. It is no different than personality tests... did you separate the different forms of MBTI? Short forms? What is being tested is very difficult to describe... and for the most part both have some physical biology that has been tested.
    This was not an implication, but a simple conjunction. It is clear they are changing the tests. It is also clear that they haven't defined what they are testing. A situation ripe for ad-hoc hypothesis.

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I think nothing I say will change your mind... but IQ is considered the most meaningful predictor of quite a bit... and it sure seems to get shown over and over again.
    A predictor yes (it essentially predicts how well you will do on IQ tests and tests/situations similar to IQ tests), but meaningful predictor no. The debate on IQ is real, and it goes on in the scientific community itself. Unfortunately, every time a critic levels an absurdity at the model of IQ, the absurdity is accepted in order to keep IQ as a construct alive. If most companies actually hired based on IQ (they did some of that in the 60s, with poor results), we would be in a sad state of affairs.

    Still more food for thought.

    The main pragmatic reason I'm so anti-IQ (I gave the logical ones above) is that it detracts from research on intelligence that could (I think, will) bear a lot more fruit.

    Including...

    • Job specific skills assessments.
    • Proper ways to train for skills acquisition ("Deliberate Practice", etc.)
    • Mind Set (particularly satisficing vs. Mental Toughness )



    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    As far as getting the publications - I'm assuming you have access via a student card or similar... I'm not trying to argue IQ all that much and the effort is gigantic and so convoluted... In the end, I'm just generally avoiding the whole topic as much as possible. If you have time to read several hundred papers... well, you might not walk away with a better understanding of it, heh. It's just an ugly topic.
    I understand. I am sure you are a very busy man these days. I was hoping you knew the authors or something, since libraries are big places to search and not always indexed well.

    I was simultaneously trying to be convincing while being open to being convinced. Sometimes, I think that people are more willing to make things clear to me that they actually are. Sorry.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Generally the split between intellectualism and anti intellectualism is not centered on the level of intelligence required to complete a task. Doing so would be a tautology, don't you think?
    True. But that's not what I was intending to do.

    There is a lot of area between intellectualism and anti-intellectualism (I don't believe the color is gray either ).

    What those words mean to me:

    Intellectualism is a fondness for developing the mind, improving mental skills, attempting to use mental skills to solve problems, and developing the community of intellectuals.

    Anti-intellectualism is thinking negatively (or finding no value in), intellectualism, intellectuals, or the community of intellectuals.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  3. #13
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    True. But that's not what I was intending to do.

    There is a lot of area between intellectualism and anti-intellectualism (I don't believe the color is gray either ).

    What those words mean to me:

    Intellectualism is a fondness for developing the mind, improving mental skills, attempting to use mental skills to solve problems, and developing the community of intellectuals.

    Anti-intellectualism is thinking negatively (or finding no value in), intellectualism, intellectuals, or the community of intellectuals.
    I think there is some gray area. (Of course you may be trying to define it in a way so that there is no gray area.) At times I can be something of a "self-hating intellectual", mostly because of the community of intellectuals. The intellectual community has its own methods of indoctrination, and I don't particularly appreciate the slightest bit of brainwashing regardless of the context or method in which it is presented.

    The original post of this thread is a prime example of why. IQ can often be interpreted as something more than it should be, and this mindset can seep into the intellectual community for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being the ability to create a sort of intellectual elitism. I would not be surprised to find the original creators of IQ tests had more of a mindset like, "well this is simply a theoretical construct, but it can be a good predictor of a person's success in society", and it somehow got reinterpreted into "if you are born with a high IQ then you will definitely be successful and if you are not then you won't". People can be mislead into believing incorrect ideas because they are placed into an "intellectual" or "scientific" context, even if the common intellectual idea is not what the original creator meant.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  4. #14
    The elder Holmes Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sp
    Posts
    1,080

    Default

    PT, out of curiosity, are you of the mind that IQ can be improved through training and education?
    Dost thou love Life? Then do not squander Time; for that's the Stuff Life is made of.

    -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, June 1746 --

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    I think there is some gray area.
    I think so too. I was just trying to comment on the variety of combinations is very "colorful". I guess I made things confusing.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  6. #16
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    True. But that's not what I was intending to do.

    There is a lot of area between intellectualism and anti-intellectualism (I don't believe the color is gray either ).

    What those words mean to me:

    Intellectualism is a fondness for developing the mind, improving mental skills, attempting to use mental skills to solve problems, and developing the community of intellectuals.

    Anti-intellectualism is thinking negatively (or finding no value in), intellectualism, intellectuals, or the community of intellectuals.
    Basically, intellect is a convex set. In any case, I'm in agreement with your classification, except the last property "developing the community of intellectuals".

    Different topic. With the objective in mind of stripping down intelligence from MBTI, wouldn't the functional-prefrences based tests be less likely to incur in the N=high IQ bias? After all, questions commonly associated with Ni/ Ne in such tests are just as associable to IQ as those associated with Ti/Te and Si/Se (with the exception of Fi/Fe, even if it might be argued that their development does share an underlying factor variable with the others).

  7. #17
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    PT, out of curiosity, are you of the mind that IQ can be improved through training and education?
    I think there is some educational variance. Given a fresh g loaded test, however, it should be fairly stable... meaning that you can train certain tests over and over for a small edge but it is very difficult to move that knowledge to any other form of test.

  8. #18
    The elder Holmes Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sp
    Posts
    1,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I think there is some educational variance. Given a fresh g loaded test, however, it should be fairly stable... meaning that you can train certain tests over and over for a small edge but it is very difficult to move that knowledge to any other form of test.
    I'm not going to argue; I realize that you are much more knowledgeable on this subject than I could possibly claim to be and, further, I think that you're probably right.

    In line with the post Ygolo started the thread with, though, I don't like how the notion of IQ-as-mental-height implies limitations and consequently thwarts potential effort. A (ridiculously) basic example: love math and physics? Worship Einstein and want to make a valuable contribution to the field of quantum physics? Well though shit, Mister IQ of 125! Get back to the paper company!
    Dost thou love Life? Then do not squander Time; for that's the Stuff Life is made of.

    -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, June 1746 --

  9. #19
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    In line with the post Ygolo started the thread with, though, I don't like how the notion of IQ-as-mental-height implies limitations and consequently thwarts potential effort. A (ridiculously) basic example: love math and physics? Worship Einstein and want to make a valuable contribution to the field of quantum physics? Well though shit, Mister IQ of 125! Get back to the paper company!
    The use of IQ tests is an entirely seperate issue than how accurate they are. One reason I'm not arguing this, besides time, is that I don't agree with how IQ tests are used. That, and there are quite a few problems IQ tests even for research purposes.

    I'm of the same opinion on personality tests, however. I think every flaw with IQ tests can be reflected with personality tests... often to a worse degree. That puts it in perspective to me... These tests are good for research, for understanding people... but life is complex and tests simple.

    (Again, though, I'd say the same for the ACT or SAT tests... there has to be some level of testing, however unfair... I'm just not able to draw the line.)

  10. #20
    Senior Member Veneti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    XNTX
    Posts
    264

    Default

    IQ and intelligence

    Its all in the definition. You're only as smart as your ability to achieve whatever makes you happy.

    I've seen unemployed people being "bums" at the beach and surfing. I've seen highly educated people busting their "ar*es" to replicate the life that the "bums" have already achieved.

Similar Threads

  1. Radio and IQ
    By Mole in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 01-14-2013, 10:13 PM
  2. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 09-14-2012, 01:33 PM
  3. Web Browsers and IQ correlation.
    By Critical Hit in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-04-2011, 04:32 PM
  4. INxx's, Intelligence, and Internet Use
    By cdal233 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-25-2008, 05:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO