Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ

[Mister Wilde]

Redem

Mister Wilde

Redem

But IQ is better than nothing.

I disagree. Most people view it as a test of general intelligence but blacks score lower than whites and low-income people lower than well-off ones. Obviously it's a test of education more than anything inherent. I'd say it's worse than nothing if the message is being sent that people with lower IQ scores are actually less intelligent than others if these are the results.

Intelligence tests that weakly correlate to education are imperfect, but not useless. We have nothing better for measuring such things, so this is what we use. If you have something better please let us know, but without that, we have IQ.

I'm not saying it's useless -- I don't know enough about it to know if it does a good job at identifying people who are developmentally disabled or whatever -- I'm saying it does more harm than good, given that most people think that IQ scores correlate with intelligence in any meaningful way.

[lostathome]

The funny thing about IQ tests

Being that they are normalized if you killed off everyone who fell outside 2 standard deviations (For IQ it's m=100, SD = 15) below the mean (70 IQ or mentally retarded) and then did it again in 2 weeks and then another 2 weeks... you would end up with no change in the scale yet what used to be considered genius is now normal and what was normal is now retarded.

So yeah, it's not a good test since it is subjective in that if you begin chopping off groups and then compare it you no longer have someone who was a 130 IQ who isn't considered normal intelligence, or if you did it the other way (killing off the top from 2 SD out) you would have people who are mentally retarded as normal intelligence.

[Cory Shallow]

This is why there is no real employment for people who study sociology.

[The God Hunter]

lostathome

The funny thing about IQ tests

Being that they are normalized if you killed off everyone who fell outside 2 standard deviations (For IQ it's m=100, SD = 15) below the mean (70 IQ or mentally retarded) and then did it again in 2 weeks and then another 2 weeks... you would end up with no change in the scale yet what used to be considered genius is now normal and what was normal is now retarded.

So yeah, it's not a good test since it is subjective in that if you begin chopping off groups and then compare it you no longer have someone who was a 130 IQ who isn't considered normal intelligence, or if you did it the other way (killing off the top from 2 SD out) you would have people who are mentally retarded as normal intelligence.

You are right I am taking a special needs education class at my school and I had to learn about the referral process. Well our teacher showed us a few examples of those IQ tests. One of the test we looked at asked the student to organize a group of pictures into a story and these are not descriptive pictures they are random and some had an obvious sequence but most you could arrange them in different ways and it would make sense. However if you didn't guess the exact sequence the test wanted it was considered wrong and you would get no points. If a student had an active imagination they would get screwed on that section of the test.

[dl1371]

The God Hunter

lostathome

The funny thing about IQ tests

Being that they are normalized if you killed off everyone who fell outside 2 standard deviations (For IQ it's m=100, SD = 15) below the mean (70 IQ or mentally retarded) and then did it again in 2 weeks and then another 2 weeks... you would end up with no change in the scale yet what used to be considered genius is now normal and what was normal is now retarded.

So yeah, it's not a good test since it is subjective in that if you begin chopping off groups and then compare it you no longer have someone who was a 130 IQ who isn't considered normal intelligence, or if you did it the other way (killing off the top from 2 SD out) you would have people who are mentally retarded as normal intelligence.

You are right I am taking a special needs education class at my school and I had to learn about the referral process. Well our teacher showed us a few examples of those IQ tests. One of the test we looked at asked the student to organize a group of pictures into a story and these are not descriptive pictures they are random and some had an obvious sequence but most you could arrange them in different ways and it would make sense. However if you didn't guess the exact sequence the test wanted it was considered wrong and you would get no points. If a student had an active imagination they would get screwed on that section of the test.

Yeah, also most tests, like said before, value more of memorization of facts and education than actual problem solving ability. I don't mean memorization of facts like "London is the capital of England" but more like facts on how to make problem solving easier. Especially math problems.

[Less Than Liz]

http://volokh.com/2010/02/27/are-more-intelligent-people-more-likely-to-be-liberal/

[AnarchoPhiliac]

Less Than Liz

http://volokh.com/2010/02/27/are-more-intelligent-people-more-likely-to-be-liberal/

Read through it. The criticisms brought up are very hard-hitting.

[agrab0ekim]

three self-selected variables yield higher IQs?
I sense a statistical flaw

[agrab0ekim]

Mister Wilde

I thought everyone knew IQ was bullshit? wow.

why is IQ bad

[agrab0ekim]

Mister Wilde

Redem

But IQ is better than nothing.

I disagree. Most people view it as a test of general intelligence but blacks score lower than whites and low-income people lower than well-off ones. Obviously it's a test of education more than anything inherent. I'd say it's worse than nothing if the message is being sent that people with lower IQ scores are actually less intelligent than others if these are the results.

your post assumes that on average blacks and poor are the same or higher as whites or rich
in theory, it might actually reflect the truth

[Less Than Liz]

AnarchoPhiliac

Less Than Liz

http://volokh.com/2010/02/27/are-more-intelligent-people-more-likely-to-be-liberal/

Read through it. The criticisms brought up are very hard-hitting.

Yeah, I would love to think there is a strong causal link between intelligence, liberalism, and atheism - let alone that intelligent is interchangeable with being correct - but I think the criticism in that blog post is fair and worth considering (especially the first point!)

[The God Hunter]

agrab0ekim

Mister Wilde

I thought everyone knew IQ was bullshit? wow.

why is IQ bad

Its a bland score that does not show creativity.

[dl1371]

agrab0ekim

Mister Wilde

Redem

But IQ is better than nothing.

I disagree. Most people view it as a test of general intelligence but blacks score lower than whites and low-income people lower than well-off ones. Obviously it's a test of education more than anything inherent. I'd say it's worse than nothing if the message is being sent that people with lower IQ scores are actually less intelligent than others if these are the results.

your post assumes that on average blacks and poor are the same or higher as whites or rich
in theory, it might actually reflect the truth

Unless the genes that make someone black are somehow linked with the genes that make you intelligent, I don't see how that could be the truth.

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

dl1371

agrab0ekim

Mister Wilde

Redem

But IQ is better than nothing.

I disagree. Most people view it as a test of general intelligence but blacks score lower than whites and low-income people lower than well-off ones. Obviously it's a test of education more than anything inherent. I'd say it's worse than nothing if the message is being sent that people with lower IQ scores are actually less intelligent than others if these are the results.

your post assumes that on average blacks and poor are the same or higher as whites or rich
in theory, it might actually reflect the truth

Unless the genes that make someone black are somehow linked with the genes that make you intelligent, I don't see how that could be the truth.

Wait a minute...you want to disregard the black/white IQ variance as 'bullshit' but are giving credence to the 6-11 point variance in IQ (typical variance depending on times they take the test and which one, so within error margins as to be non-existent)?
How do you justify that?

[dl1371]

AngelSlayer The Elder

dl1371

agrab0ekim

Mister Wilde

Redem

But IQ is better than nothing.

I disagree. Most people view it as a test of general intelligence but blacks score lower than whites and low-income people lower than well-off ones. Obviously it's a test of education more than anything inherent. I'd say it's worse than nothing if the message is being sent that people with lower IQ scores are actually less intelligent than others if these are the results.

your post assumes that on average blacks and poor are the same or higher as whites or rich
in theory, it might actually reflect the truth

Unless the genes that make someone black are somehow linked with the genes that make you intelligent, I don't see how that could be the truth.

Wait a minute...you want to disregard the black/white IQ variance as 'bullshit' but are giving credence to the 6-11 point variance in IQ (typical variance depending on times they take the test and which one, so within error margins as to be non-existent)?
How do you justify that?

I disregard the black/white variance because whites get better schooling than blacks, which means the test values knowledge, not intelligence
I disregard that because:
a) some people work better at different time, I can't do anything until about 10:00 in the morning (at least not well)
b) people have different skill sets, if I'm really good at math and I take a test that has more reading in it then I'll do worse then if I took a test with more math