/sci/ - Science & Math

Please fuck off demented shitposting troll.

>>6250117
How much money you have made in your life.

>>6250117
>Given the fact that IQ is flawed
>fact
>flawed

The only thing that's flawed is your brain.

How all these retards are able to use Internet and then find 4chan and decide to post on here is beyond me. This place is like a flytrap for fools.

Does the girl claiming for the cat to be dead have a diploma from a reputable university?

>>6250759
she's about to get a diploma from my dick

>>6250132
Implying Arabs born into billions from oil money are intelligent

>>6250144
>confirmed for getting a 250 on an internet IQ test

>>6250132
But poor people are just as rich as wealthy people. Money shouldn't be the only measure of wealth.

>>6250117
<--- this is the same girl in OP's pic just few years after. pic from her flickr.

>>6250117
>because the notion of cognitive differences between individuals is socially unacceptable and therefore cannot be called "intelligence"

That's not why IQ is flawed, dipshit.

>>6251275
Jesus… she was mildly attractive in op's pic and completely unattractive in that pic. She lost like 5 points in no time whatsoever. Do all women lose their looks like this?????

>>6250117
>How can we scientifically measure intelligence?
If you want a useful measurement you must first precisely define intelligence. You could define intelligence as wealth. Or you could define it as the ability to pick up new skills. But then what new skills exactly? Whatever definition you choose, as long as it is precise, it should be easy to measure.

Without precisely defining it, there's no point. At best we would find a test that approximately matches our intuitive notion of intelligence. I'm not sure what to call shitty intuition + noise, but it certainly isn't science.

Intelligence is the ability someone has to acquire a skill.

If you want to measure their intelligence you must measure how quickly they can learn and perform said skill.

>What skill can we find where no human is less privileged than others?

No skill like this exists because everyone is different. Equality can not exist because we are all unique.

>>6251330
>That's not why IQ is flawed, dipshit.
> flawed

LMAO! Spoken like a true fool.

Poo statistics. Take your poo and throw it at another message board.

>>6251605
When I see this data I see room for improvement.

Intelligence tests should measure specific cognitive skills such as working memory, creativeness, reasoning ability, etc.

When he says it is flawed I'm sure he only means that there is room for improvement. While the current model is practical it is not entirely accurate.

I think a more precise way to measure intelligence would be neurologically based. A measurement of the connectivity in various brain regions to determine which skills someone is good at and which ones they are not as good at as decided by their biological predisposition.

Related link I found: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/iq-tests-are-fundamentally-flawed-and-using-them-alone-to-measure-intelligence-is-a-fallacy-study-finds-8425911.html

Im not sure we really know an accurate measure of IQ, since the tests are subjective and change with learning, so with regards to the predetermined capacity for intelligence, thats not what IQ is, therefore is loses impact to even refer to it as relevant for most things. Please, for interests sake, watch this program http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01kjmyz

>>6251605
The original question is how we should measure intelligence.

IQ is not the most accurate measure of intelligence available your data is irrelevant to the discussion.

>>6250117
>because the notion of cognitive differences between individuals is socially unacceptable and therefore cannot be called "intelligence"

i uhh..wat

>>6251636
>general intelligence factor is disproven by this nigger-tier study

>>6251531
You'll notice the face is pretty much the same.

I think it's the hair and expression. And a few years. She doesn't look bad.

A persons ability for form disperate memorable connections between regions of their brains with interneurones or found memory circuits through long term potentiation synaptic innovations does not mean they are inspired or interested to do so for anything useful. IQ is a lie of shit. Indeed people who have experienced severe hardship, may indeed have been subjected to circumstances where there has been strong selection against doing either of these things. Furthermore, muscle memory and neural cognitive coding, doesnt necessarily involve either of these processes but nevertheless represents a form of intelligence.

Common mistake is to think IQ is some all encompassing measurement of intelligence. IQ test only measure a certain type(s) of intellect.
In particular the ones that seem to have a correlation with solving math problems, pattern searching and general logical thinking.

It's really the same thing like an eye test saying nothing about how good your hearing is. You'd need another test for that.
So as to reply to the question "Does IQ tell you how intelligent someone is?". The correct answer would be to respond with another question, "In what field?".

It may be the abundance of a specific type of interneurone. Just like in strong people where they have a greate rproportion of fast twitch muscle fibres.

Actually it seems its also to do with glial cells.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/03/07/human-brain-cells-make-mice-smart/

And astrocytes.

Sensing extracellular milieu is a fundamental requirement of cells. To facilitate and specify sensory reception, mammalian cells develop an antenna-like structure denoted as the primary cilia. Nearly all interphase and nondividing cells in vertebrates have a single, nonmotile seemingly unspecialized cilium (called a primary cilium). In the central nervous system, astrocytes express primary cilia, but their function in astrocytes has not been examined. Recent studies have shown that primary cilia unite receptors and the machinery of signal-transduction components, such as Wnt and Hedgehog (Hh) signaling cascades. Although, Hh signaling cascades are known to be activated in various cells during development, their physiological functions in the adult nervous system, especially in glial cells, are still unknown. In this study, we reveal that glial primary cilia receive the Hh signal and regulate the survival of astrocytes under stressed conditions such as starvation. Interestingly, increased astrocyte survival was reversed by knockdown of Ift20, which is one of the main components for building primary cilia. These results collectively indicate that the activation of Hh signaling in the primary cilia plays an important role in the survival of astrocytes under stressed conditions.

>>6250132
>>6250132
"IQ correlates with success"
Apparently most people in this thread are expected to a low 100 range IQ

I have not got a low IQ, but i use my intelligence to obtain a high IQ.

This article is interesting. http://www.jneurosci.org/content/33/24/10143.full.pdf

>>6250144
I agree that IQ tests aren't as flawed as everyone here seems to think they are, but that was some blatant ad hominem.

>>6251531
>do all women lose their looks like this?

The answer is no, but I'm sure you'll try to reassure yourself that all women are bad or whatever it is you neck beards like to think. God damn I hate you stupid autists. Yes, you fucking imbecile, one sample is a great indication that every woman in the world ages badly.

I'm a guy, by the way. I'm not defending women. You fucking asocial autists just piss me the fuck off. You'd probably be pretty pissed if a woman generalized every man and used it to judge you based on a completely different man. So why do it to that cunt? God damn I hate you

>>6251531
You kidding me? She looks like a tranny in OP's pic

>>6251897
So… from a 6/10 to 1/10?

>>6251636
>Intelligence tests should measure specific cognitive skills such as working memory, creativeness, reasoning ability, etc.

They do, except for creativity.

>When he says it is flawed I'm sure he only means that there is room for improvement. While the current model is practical it is not entirely accurate.

Useless comment. All models are not entirely accurate.

>I think a more precise way to measure intelligence would be neurologically based. A measurement of the connectivity in various brain regions to determine which skills someone is good at and which ones they are not as good at as decided by their biological predisposition.

Mental abilities are not 100% heritable, so going with genotype will introduce error.

>Related link I found: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/iq-tests-are-fundamentally-flawed-and-using-them-alone-to-measure-intelligence-is-a-fallacy-study-finds-8425911.html

Picture related.

>It's really the same thing like an eye test saying nothing about how good your hearing is. You'd need another test for that.
So as to reply to the question "Does IQ tell you how intelligent someone is?". The correct answer would be to respond with another question, "In what field?".

No. You are attempting to broaden the definition of the word "intelligence" to mean "ability". The usual Gardner tactic. Don't do that.

>>6250117
to scientifically measure the intelligence of a person, wire the brain to a computer that test every possible (intellectual) question that could be asked and test how many the person can solve and how fast the ones that are solved are

then compare it to your other data and calculate where in the distrubution it is

>>6251897
Then that means that most women look like trannies and vice versa.

>>6251275
what an incredible improvement