is intelligence really fixed?

[dpopiz]

I always get annoyed when I hear about how "the IQ test is designed to mesasure your intelligence for your entire life - you can never become more intelligent".

I didn't get a particularly high IQ score when I took the test in 3rd grade (I only barely got into GATE), and I'm aware all the time that I'm not particularly intelligent and it would sure be useful to me if I were.

It seems to me though that it has got to be possible to become more intelligent during your lifetime....I wish I knew how

 

[rh71]

Uncanny... I was thinking about this today also. Intelligence is hereditary ? Not exactly... but it's not exactly acquired over time either.

 

[bradruth]

I can't remember what it's called...something like the "G factor" or something, but it's a theory that you're born with a certain hereditary range of intelligence and your environment determines where you fall within that range. Of course it's all just theory, but it sounds fairly reasonable.

 

[Alchemist99]

Well maybe then it might help to realize that to be happy successful or a good parent or husband a high intelligence isn't a requirement in fact to be successful I would say intelligence is not the determining factor, "Life is like a box of chocolates!

 

[Crazymofo]

I wish someone would have given me an IQ test at that age... I wouldn't be sitting here right now thats for sure.

 

[vi edit]

Intelligence is largely laid in place between 2 and 12 IMHO. You create pathways in your brain that allow you to learn abstract things later in your life in those ages. Without stimulating the young mind to create those pathways at an early age you make it harder to learn things later on in life.

Intelligence isn't fixed...but you can seriously handicap a person later in life by not nurishing a growing mind when they are young.

 

[Willoughbyva]

There are also theories about different types of intelligence like emotional etc.

I got a decent score on online IQ tests, but to be honest I really don't feel that smart. I think the thing with me is I am unmotivated. So perhaps a person who is motivated can do more than those that are not. Some abstract things like language I can do pretty good at, but when it comes to math I really suck.

 

[Cerb]

You are born with a fixed potential. Then you learn as you develop, tapering off to near nothing during puberty (IE, we should really have algebra early in life), then basically stops. You can learn to use what you have in different ways, but make very few new connections.

IQ tests test abstract reasoning abilities. However, while the ability for this drops sharply as you age, if you keep yourself mentally working (playing chess, strategy games, designing things, etc.), you gain conrete experience that offsets the loss of actual abstract reasoning.
Overall, IQ scores don't change. The things that affect it are largely set in stone by the time such a test can be reliable. OTOH, it seems that the higher the score is, the more a person realizes how much BS they are.

 

[Chiropteran]

Your intelligence can and will change as you get older, unfortunately it won't be increasing.

 

[CubicZirconia]

Related Note:

I just read The Mismeasure of Man, by Stephen Jay Gould. In the book, he explains how IQ tests have really become "modern" tools to support the old biological determinism argument. Reading the book will make you question whether or not IQ tests have any value at all.

 

[Willoughbyva]

I have heard different theories about intelligence and the aging process. I think they don't know enough to be 100% certain about it. I guess if you learn new things / new experiences all the time your IQ would increase. Sort of how your schama (sorry forgot how to spell it) changes over time with new information/reinforcement. I think it can be different for different people though. Some might do better than others.

 

[DrPizza]

However, some people test much higher on IQ tests early in childhood than they actually are. My psych prof used to call the kids IQ's "sugarpopped" or something like that. He claimed that some parents go way overboard on the early childhood education stuff. Not that it's bad, in fact, it's good to have support from parents. But, some parents way overdo it and think that since they taught Johnny how to count to 200 and say the alphabet when he was 2 years old, that he's going to be some sort of Einstein. He claimed that by the time they were 8 or 10 years old, the effects had pretty much worn off and the kids IQ's were a little more normal. That's not to say that working with children doesn't improve their intelligence as their brain matures, but that there's a limit to how much can be achieved, and that early tests aren't as accurate of an indicator of long term iq.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I have heard different theories about intelligence and the aging process. I think they don't know enough to be 100% certain about it. I guess if you learn new things / new experiences all the time your IQ would increase. Sort of how your schama (sorry forgot how to spell it) changes over time with new information/reinforcement. I think it can be different for different people though. Some might do better than others.

The problem is that IQ is a very specific measurement, as is any measure of intelligence, besides dealing with a person day to day. Many PhDs are very good examples of how IQ and any useful intelligence measure are different.

 

[Willoughbyva]

Originally posted by: Cerb


The problem is that IQ is a very specific measurement, as is any measure of intelligence, besides dealing with a person day to day. Many PhDs are very good examples of how IQ and any useful intelligence measure are different.

I didn't quite follow you. How are PhD's and usefull intelligence compared? Or am I not in the right ball park?

 

[vi edit]

My take on the matter is that intelligence is a lot like power in cars for a lack of better analogies.

A mind has two different types of intelligence - the ability to learn, and the ability to react.

A car on the other hand has two forces affecting power - horsepower and torque.

In a car, horsepower is ultimately how fast a car can go. In that way, a mind with the high ability to learn would be able to comprehend a vast array of ideals and concepts.

On the other hand, a car also has torque which is the ability to get things done, and done quickly. A car with a top speed of 300MPH but takes 2 hours to get there really isn't that functional. Likewise, a mind that has a high capacity to learn, but really can't apply that intelligence in a functionally quick manner is essentially useless. In my view, the "torque" of a persons intelligence is the ability to quickly process what it already knows and make an intelligent decision to the best of its ability.

Neither is more important than the other because all weight in one area makes for an unbalanced decision ultimately. A very "wise" person is adept in both areas.

 

[Willoughbyva]

vi_edit that is a pretty cool theory/anology.

 

[TitanDiddly]

Where can one take a real, official, no guessing about the result IQ test? I took a couple online (I scored 125-135 over the spread of a couple years) but I'd like to know that it might not just be a random number generator.

 

[Imdmn04]

Intelligence is like a person's height, genetics contributes a big part to it, but other factors later in life also contributes it.

If your daddy is Yao Ming, you are bound to be pretty damn tall no matter what you do, but the exact height is determined by sleeping habits during puberty, diets, and etc.

Intelligence is the same thing, if your parents are pretty smart, you will have the potential to be just as smart or smarter, or not as smart.

In my opinion, genetics defines the probable range of intelligence, and social experience determines the acutal intelligence within that potential range.