/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10646442

Yes, all people have exactly the same level of intellectual ability and it's not possible to measure intellect anyway.

>another IQ thread

>>10646442
No. It is useful and was designed for a large population for statistical purposes. Eg. military recruitment cutoffs. Using it for determining geniuses is stupid though, since there isn't even a clear definition of genius, considering that you can't easily tell how smart someone potentially is if they don't try their hardest/have the best possible circumstances/training.

>>10646442
Its a model like all models. But some people process information faster, have greater capacity and breadth and are just smarter than others. Iq is an attempt to quantify this.

Yes.

Intelligence is first about genetics and second, mental agility.

You have to think logically about what you know, and can think creatively. Mental agility in a logical sense is what is tested by IQ tests. It's not better than review of mind state in living conditions like big brother (recording of time in house is a good experiment). It should matter about those feels more than what's socially accepted.

Is it possible to get a decent iq test online or does it need to be a proper written test?

>>10646664
Impossible online. No one that wants to sell ad space has any interest in scoring you a 90

Maybe mensa is legit

One of the conversations I had in jail recently was about lobotomy. They guy was telling me that you don't really need your whole brain, and that especially if you special training you can do fine without most of your brain. I think the context of what we were talking about was getting lobotomized as a defense against mind reading. The other guy was quite sure of himself when he was telling me that you can do without most of your brain.

>>10646676
Really, now I wonder if the every instance of the word "brainlet" on the whole internet is not there to mock the person who Helene forcibly lobotomized.

Back when I was doing Occupy Atlanta in Woodruff Park, there were a lot of GSU classroom buildings surrounding the park. One of the classrooms was a media building with a windowed studio looking out on the park. Someone put up a screen and a projector and put this video on loop, like 10 feet by 10 feet, where everyone in the park could see it. This video was on loop for weeks iirc.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rx4jEIZyTZU
No sound in the park, just a giant white face in the window looking out on the park. That was in 2011. In 2017, I learned that one of the most prominent "ISIS experts" is USA academia is a female professor at GSU. How would she be an expert in ISIS if she wasn't an ISIS agent?

>>10646442
It's fitting the results of measurements to a curve and then gradually refining the curve as better measurements and data become available, how much more scientific can it get?

>>10646442
Yep we're equal. You're a nazi if you think otherwise.

>>10646442
It measures something which correlates to a common shared understanding of intelligence. That measurement is real, but it's not the best it could be. But, even worse the common shared understanding of "intelligence" is shaky. Which is why measuring it is hard.

Instead we should measure predictive abilities in domains we find important. There is really no difference between prediction and intelligence. The g factor would be the ability to predict given any domain. However, I'm sure we would see that it is really a composite variable which when decomposed correlates strongly with domains which have evolutionary selection factors.