/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3071005]

I've heard many times that you can't really quantify intelligence, and that IQ tests and the like are almost worthless.

Bullshit?

[Anonymous No.3071010]

>Bullshit?
Nope.

[Anonymous No.3071020]

>>3071010
How then would you even draw a distinction between the capabilities of a human and a chimp? Or a human and a gila monster?

If you can't quantify intellgence.

[Anonymous No.3071023]

I like to judge peoples intelligence based on the things in life they find important. I saw a lady at wallmart that had strategized her checkout. If your walmart checkout is the most important thing you do, you stupid. If only I could quantify this system.

[Anonymous No.3071022]

Neuroscience isn't quite able to measure intelligence yet. IQ tests aren't a very good indicator. If you practice taking IQ tests you will be able to score higher even though your intelligence hasn't gone up. Likewise if you just don't give a shit and circle at random so you can go watch Dr Who you will appear to be retarded.

[Anonymous No.3071029]

>>3071005
No clue, not a psychologist. However, that picture is fucking hilarious and shockingly accurate.

[Anonymous No.3071041]

IQ tests are not worthless and in fact they measure something real and useful which is an important type or subset of intelligence.

The problem only comes in when people over-reach by declaring it a summary of every cognitive skill worthy of being called intelligence. It's not that all-encompassing.

[Anonymous No.3071046]

>>3071041
>subset of intelligence

unfortunately, it's the null set.

[Anonymous No.3071091]

Is this another case of "know it when you see it"?

I have met people who simply floored me with their brilliance. We've all met people who were unquestionably idiots.

My parents have a dog who is a lovable bumbling doofus, who will bark at his own reflection in his water dish. Has since he was a puppy, and he's getting old.
My cousin has a dog who learned how to open and close the pantry door, to steal treats/food without his owner immediately knowing he did it.

A wolf is unquestionably more intelligent than a deer.

There must be a way to quantify this.

[Anonymous No.3071106]

You cannot quantify and measure intelligence until you absolutely define what intelligence is.

[Anonymous No.3071121]

>>3071106
How does it not have a definition?

[Anonymous No.3071128]

>>3071121
The problem is it has more than one and it is impossible to objectively judge which is the correct definition.

[Anonymous No.3071135]

>>3071106
>can't tell the difference in intelligence between an insect and a human
confirmed for retard

[Anonymous No.3071136]

IQ test results (from the Binet or WAIS) are usually pretty good predictors of your general intelligence. On WAIS, the GAI (general abilities index) is a stronger predictor of g as it omits direct measures of executive function from the IQ reading. There are many disorders that can impair executive functions and not intelligence. Processing speed (in particular) and working memory indexes are both not correlated highly enough to g in populations of high intelligence (especially the gifted population) to be considered in general intelligence.

On to another point. The subtests of IQ tests are statistically correlated very well with one another (WAIS vocabulary is 78% correlated with full scale IQ, arithmetic 74%, matrix reasoning 61%, general knowledge 74%, etc). Because of this and neurological data, intelligence is often considered to be a single variable.

A test must correlate with WAIS or Binet at 80% (most strong tests correlates at 84%+)or higher to even be considered a proper test of general intelligence.

IQ is correlated relatively highly with various socioeconomic and academic factors. Such as GPA(30-50%), work performance (40-50%), income, personality, birth rate, age of birth, dropout rates, etc.

Any other questions?

[Anonymous No.3071148]

>>3071135
bad troll

[Anonymous No.3071151]

>>3071106
okay, i'll define it: problem solving ability, tool creation ability, and ability to survive in the real-world environment

[Anonymous No.3071167]

>>3071151
Were you dropped on your head as a child, or just naturally dumb? You know types of bird can create and use tools much better than dolphins and many types of primates; but they're not smarter?

>ability to survive in the real-world environment

In that case, cockroaches are much smarter than us.

[Anonymous No.3071173]

>>3071135
>>can't tell the difference in intelligence between an insect and a human

Apples and oranges, man.

You cant calculate how intelligent something is when the use of that intelligence is guided by desire.

[Anonymous No.3071179]

>>3071005
Wow, I never realized how attracted I am to girls of below-average intelligence before.

[Anonymous No.3071181]

>>3071136
>>3071136


>make the only reasonable post in this thread

>be ignored


Oh how I despise this board sometimes.

[Anonymous No.3071188]

>>3071181
you just copy-pastad a bunch of stupid shit from wikipedia that doesn't even attempt to explain or quantify intelligence

please, go away and die in a hole

[Anonymous No.3071194]

>>3071167
>unable to counter the argument
>resort to ad hominem

>You know types of bird can create and use tools much better than dolphins and many types of primates; but they're not smarter?
Irrelevant reasoning. All of the aforementioned attributes must be compared. In this case, there's nominal difference between birds and dolphins, and a huge difference between humans and these two groups.

>In that case, cockroaches are much smarter than us.
Nope. Our existence at an individual level is nominally affected by these critters. The human society as a whole has more effect on an individual.

[Anonymous No.3071200]

how can you measure the intelligence of all people by the same tests , when not everyone even uses the same parts of their brain take a left handed hook or someone who is ambidextrous for example

[Anonymous No.3071204]

>>3071188

No, I just know a relatively high amount about human intelligence.

Neurological factors are also correlates well with g, such as grey matter density, brain size (when adjusted for body size), qEEG z scores, etc.

I don't get why you guys get so damn antsy over this topic.

[Anonymous No.3071206]

>>3071173
by your line of reasoning, a robot is more intelligent than a human that controls it. doesn't make sense, dude.

what are you trying to justify? that everyone is smart in their own way? that everyone is a special, unique snowflake?

[Anonymous No.3071213]

>>3071194
About your first point, I did in fact counter your argument. Anyway, calling you a retard certainly isn't ad hominem. I think you need to reach third grade if you think it is.

>oh, and if it is, then technically implying that I have to resort to ad hominem is ad hominem

dumber_than_dumb.jpg

[Anonymous No.3071226]

>>3071213
that wasn't me, retard.

[Anonymous No.3071235]

>>3071226
Haha, it doesn't matter if it was you who wrote the original bit. I responded only to your post. I'm glad you're a little more settled, though. Big people are talking.

[Anonymous No.3071241]

Ha no. Just some of us ,psychology isn't exactly an exact science is it. Im not saying everyone but thier are exceptions , nice fight club quote though ; ) I'll write that down.

[Anonymous No.3071249]

>>3071206

The fact that something has desires does not add or subtract from its intelligence.

Nor does the fact that you could accurately quantify a robots intelligence take away from the fact that a human with desires still has intelligence (that you cant quantify).

[Anonymous No.3071260]

IQ tests are a good measure of intelligence. The problem is black people have lower IQ's and claim the tests are racist and since nobody wants to seem like a racist they just agree.

[Anonymous No.3071269]

>>3071260

Haha, it isn't quite that simple, but you're on the right track.

I think it revolves more around how much we value intelligence and are a bit perturbed by the possibility of it being quantified. People tend to hold too much value in the factor and believe it encompasses their self worth.

[Anonymous No.3071277]

>>3071260

I'm black, failed elementary algebra last semester, and my IQ is higher than Richard Feynmans.

Stanford-Binet 5.
130

[Anonymous No.3071285]

>>3071277
>>3071277

You aren't black if you're mixed and I don't believe Feynman's IQ was ever definitely known. 125 was a 20 or 30 year old memory from his sister.

[Anonymous No.3071286]

>>3071277
I'm white, failed algebra 3 times in high school, dropped out, became a truck driver, and the last IQ test I took (in school) told me 142.

[Anonymous No.3071292]

>>3071285

There is no such thing as a pure race.

[Anonymous No.3071299]

>>3071292
>>3071292

If you're 40% or higher white, you aren't black.

Deal with it, pseudo-honkey.

[Anonymous No.3071301]

>>3071269
I agree with people putting too much weight in it. If there was a "Tallness Test" Chinese people wouldn't freak out about it, they would accept the fact that relative to others they are short.

>>3071277
Congratulations. You are on the internet and can make whatever claim about your intelligence that you want. Or you are telling the truth in which case you are incredibly lazy. So, lazy or a liar, which stereotype do you want to be?

[Anonymous No.3071303]

why do we need a racial intelligence thread every

single

day

[Anonymous No.3071310]

>>3071301
I'm white dropout truckfag. I'm just incredibly lazy.

[Anonymous No.3071309]

>>3071299

Sorry, but i'm only 25% black (assuming my white grandma has no black in her).

And even that's iffy; I don't know the exact percentages of my blackness but bitch, I look black. If we are going to have a superficial conversation, IQ's and culturally ignorant statistics and graphs then that should qualify as 100%.

[Anonymous No.3071311]

>>3071309

oops i meant 25% white

[Anonymous No.3071318]

>>3071303
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.aspx
Because.

[Anonymous No.3071323]

>>3071286
Sound much like my friend andre.

Anyways, IQ tests are good for testing your IQ.
That doesn't mean that they are good for measuring how competent one is in using their mind, and also I know some truly dumb people who are nevertheless able to excel in their particular areas of interest.

's all moot.

[Anonymous No.3071328]

>>3071323
Also, I'm pretty sure my IQ is perfectly average, don't care. Most people can't do or think half of the things I do and think. And since those things are what interests me I'm gonna chill on the IQ point.

[Anonymous No.3071329]

>>3071323
That's because an IQ test measures intelligence and not work ethic.

[Anonymous No.3071333]

>>3071329
how very fucking true. I wish I had more motivation.

I just don't. Maybe they could make a drug for that...

[Anonymous No.3071337]

>>3071329
Not sure work ethic is really the major factor here, but I won't argue the point.

[Anonymous No.3071357]

>>3071333
haha, cocaine?

[Anonymous No.3071372]

>>3071309
You know what, you're right. You are blacker than the blackest night.

[Anonymous No.3071385]

yeah thats everyones answer to everything nowadays just take a pill , speed: do stupid shit even faster , just proving my point that intelligence has nothing to do with wisdom , but In case you live under a rock its called aderol

[Anonymous No.3071416]

>>3071385
Possible Doug Stanhope reference? Yes? No?

[Anonymous No.3071662]

ITT: Dumb white people telling black people they're not smart as it doesn't conform to their stupid ideas.

Oh, and I'm white and studying Maths at University right now. I fucking hate anyone middle-eastern, also Sudanese people and most Africans. I'm not some over-PC idiot. Black people, in my experience, are no dumber than white people. Asian people aren't any smarter, either, it's just that they're pushed extremely hard.