What is intelligence and how do you measure it?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

bobdole369

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2004
4,504
2
0
The measurement is called "Intelligence quotient" or IQ. There are a large number of standardized tests for this. 100 is about average +- 20 points. Genius is about 140+ Doogie was something like 200.
 
P

PhineasJWhoopee

Banned
Aug 8, 2010
1,311
0
0
Plus, I've worked with people that are "intelligent" (Ivy Leaue degrees) that are completely useless in a work environment.

So even if you are "intelligent" by commonly used metrics ie. IQ Test, SAT, etc., what does it really mean?
 
P

PhineasJWhoopee

Banned
Aug 8, 2010
1,311
0
0
bobdole369 said:
The measurement is called "Intelligence quotient" or IQ. There are a large number of standardized tests for this. 100 is about average +- 20 points. Genius is about 140+ Doogie was something like 200.
Click to expand...

Okay, so the answer is IQ testing is a complete and comprehensive way of assessing human intelligence.

If everyone agrees I guess this thread is over.
 
Malak

Malak

Lifer
Dec 4, 2004
14,696
2
0
Well there is the theory of multiple intelligence which has merit, especially given your example. Gardner suggested that traditional IQ tests actually only test one kind of intelligence. The theory includes 8 kinds of intelligence, but he also suggested a couple of others. Creating a standardized test for some of the intelligences might be impossible, however.
 
schneiderguy

schneiderguy

Lifer
Jun 26, 2006
10,801
91
91
What I want to know is how the hell did PhineasJWhoopee manage to get over 1000 posts in barely over a month :hmm:
 
C

Cookie

Golden Member
Jul 3, 2001
1,759
2
81
PhineasJWhoopee said:
Plus, I've worked with people that are "intelligent" (Ivy Leaue degrees) that are completely useless in a work environment.

So even if you are "intelligent" by commonly used metrics ie. IQ Test, SAT, etc., what does it really mean?
Click to expand...

Intelligence does not equal usefulness.
 
zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,697
31,048
146
paramecium.......PhineasJWhoopee....tunicates.....................jawed fish............................lower mammals ......birds................................Kansans....chimps................... ave humans.....................Einstein.....Tom Jones.

This is my scale of intelligence :)
 
Malak

Malak

Lifer
Dec 4, 2004
14,696
2
0
zinfamous said:
the number of threads opened by PJW disagrees.
Click to expand...

Most of the threads I've seen started by him had nothing to do with religion. And as someone else pointed out, the other discussions weren't started by him. There is nothing wrong with pointing out flaws in obvious insults against his beliefs. PJW, naively, wants discussion. He unfortunately came to the wrong forum. Even the purpose of this thread is wasted on the majority who post here. You've proven that quite successfully.
 
yllus

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
The intelligence–religiosity nexus: A representative study of white adolescent Americans

Abstract

The present study examined whether IQ relates systematically to denomination and income within the framework of the g nexus, using representative data from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY97).

Atheists score 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. Denominations differ significantly in IQ and income. Religiosity declines between ages 12 to 17. It is suggested that IQ makes an individual likely to gravitate toward a denomination and level of achievement that best fit his or hers particular level of cognitive complexity.

Ontogenetically speaking this means that contemporary denominations are rank ordered by largely hereditary variations in brain efficiency (i.e. IQ). In terms of evolution, modern Atheists are reacting rationally to cognitive and emotional challenges, whereas Liberals and, in particular Dogmatics, still rely on ancient, pre-rational, supernatural and wishful thinking.
Click to expand...

Atheists are smarter than religious people

Professor Nyborg: "I'm not saying that believing in God makes you dumber. My hypothesis is that people with a low intelligence is more easily drawn towards religions, which give answers that are certain, while people with a high intelligence are more sceptical."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,697
31,048
146
Malak said:
Most of the threads I've seen started by him had nothing to do with religion. And as someone else pointed out, the other discussions weren't started by him. There is nothing wrong with pointing out flaws in obvious insults against his beliefs. PJW, naively, wants discussion. He unfortunately came to the wrong forum. Even the purpose of this thread is wasted on the majority who post here. You've proven that quite successfully.
Click to expand...

The ones that don't explicitly present religion in the thread title are obvious bait threads. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. Sure, it's up to others to take that bait, but it's quite clear that he has only one purpose behind every single one of his posts.

And he doesn't want discussion. Not an OUNCE of it. Early, when such was offered, he would ignore every argument in front of him with "this has been dissproven, next! Please, someone try to discuss this with me!"

He's simply a troll, likely a multi or former banned member. but discussing his antics simply lends credence to his participation, and validates his participation. It's like holding the evolution v creation debates--there is nothing valid about debating the two, and the confusion arises when someone actually engages in these debates. In the minds of many, simply holding such a debate validates that there is controversy when no controversy exists. Such is the case with PJW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom