IQ: What's it good for? What's it not good for? Is it legit?

[Slartibartfast]

In my opinion, social and environmental factors do play a part in IQ scores and your point substantiates that, otherwise there would have been no change over the years.

Another example of this is that black sub-Saharan Africans score significantly lower on IQ tests than black people of African decent everywhere else in the world.

.

Malaria in pregnancy linked to brain damage in babies

Babies suffer later complications such as learning difficulties, finds study in mice.

www.scidev.net

 

[ataraxia]

In my opinion, social and environmental factors do play a part in IQ scores and your point substantiates that, otherwise there would have been no change over the years.

Another example of this is that black sub-Saharan Africans score significantly lower on IQ tests than black people of African decent everywhere else in the world.

.

So as long as such large social/cultural/environmental factors are at play , IQ cannot "explain some of the overall disparities in certain professions, such as why there are proportionately more Jewish lawyers than with any other ethnic group in the US. IQ can also be used in tandem with personality traits to disprove claims of racial or gender discrimination."

 

[Rexedgar]

In my opinion, social and environmental factors do play a part in IQ scores and your point substantiates that, otherwise there would have been no change over the years.

Another example of this is that black sub-Saharan Africans score significantly lower on IQ tests than black people of African decent everywhere else in the world.

.

It would be interesting to “trade places” with some of those people and see how it works out.

“Sub-Saharan” is a dog whistle, imo!


Edit: the OP is just another of the “black people are dumber than white people” trope, thinly veiled.

Double edit: Jews in a #23 and blacks in at #25. BIngo!

 

[reflechissez]

It would be interesting to “trade places” with some of those people and see how it works out.

“Sub-Saharan” is a dog whistle, imo!


Edit: the OP is just another of the “black people are dumber than white people” trope, thinly veiled.

Yep. And the OP pretends to add "commentary" by saying that judging people by IQ pisses him off. Deep thread.

 

[Grim17]

So as long as such large social/cultural/environmental factors are at play , IQ cannot "explain some of the overall disparities in certain professions, such as why there are proportionately more Jewish lawyers than with any other ethnic group in the US. IQ can also be used in tandem with personality traits to disprove claims of racial or gender discrimination."

Sure it can... Just because there are factors that can effect a person or group of people's IQ, doesn't change the empirical data.

.

 

[Grim17]

It would be interesting to “trade places” with some of those people and see how it works out.

“Sub-Saharan” is a dog whistle, imo!

Can we have one rational conversation without playing the GD race card?

Edit: the OP is just another of the “black people are dumber than white people” trope, thinly veiled.

Double edit: Jews in a #23 and blacks in at #25. BIngo!

JFC, You leftists are a bunch of one trick ponies.

I'm trying to have a civil, intellectual conversation and all you want to do is turn it into a political pissing war.

Do us all a favor and take it somewhere else.

 

[Rexedgar]

Can we have one rational conversation without playing the GD race card?



JFC, You leftists are a bunch of one trick ponies.

I'm trying to have a civil, intellectual conversation and all you want to do is turn it into a political pissing war.

Do us all a favor and take it somewhere else.

It’s not possible that you don’t know what you're doing.

Don’t get all pissy when you get called on it.



”It is concluded that more psychometric studies are needed to address the issue of measurement bias of western IQ tests for Africans.”

Loading…

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[Michael Cole]

Can we have one rational conversation without playing the GD race card?



JFC, You leftists are a bunch of one trick ponies.

I'm trying to have a civil, intellectual conversation and all you want to do is turn it into a political pissing war.

Do us all a favor and take it somewhere else.

Gotta agree with you here. Don't usually, but here I agree.

 

[reflechissez]

Can we have one rational conversation without playing the GD race card?



JFC, You leftists are a bunch of one trick ponies.

I'm trying to have a civil, intellectual conversation and all you want to do is turn it into a political pissing war.

Do us all a favor and take it somewhere else.

Meh. You're the one who put this in "general political discussion." You're just parroting Peterson's garbage. We get it; you worship the guy. Other people don't.

 

[Grim17]

Meh. You're the one who put this in "general political discussion." You're just parroting Peterson's garbage. We get it; you worship the guy. Other people don't.

Have you ever thought about contributing to the topic of discussion, or is your only purpose here to engage in political attacks and petty personal insults?

If you disagree with my actual posts, or with anything Peterson said in that short video clip, then by all means let's hear it.

.

 

[Rexedgar]

Didn't watch the video, but I'll pick up on your post. Looks like you're saying we shouldn't disparage groups of people based on IQ. I couldn't agree more, if that's what you mean.

How would people disparage people based on IQ?


No one wears their IQ printed on their forehead.

What is the first thing you notice about a stranger as you get closer?

 

[Grim17]

You're the one who put this in "general political discussion."

FYI, this discussion does tie in with politics in several significant ways, whether you want to admit it or not. Just because something can relate to politics, doesn't mean it requires that everyone take political sides.

.

 

[Michael Cole]

How would people disparage people based on IQ?


No one wears their IQ printed on their forehead.

What is the first thing you notice about a stranger as you get closer?

Groups of people, not individuals.

 

[vanceen]

I'd be interested to hear a specific criticism of anything Peterson said in that video, based on any error he made in fact or in logic.

The very narrow genetic diversity of human beings makes it extremely hard to believe that there are real difference between human ethnicities or "races" in the capacity to learn and reason. IQ testing, as Peterson points out, doesn't necessarily measure that, and the fact that it seems to depend on cultural background seems to show that it's at least partly measuring cultural background.

The more interesting point he made is that even if it were true that some groups of people have lower "IQ" than others, it would make no difference to their moral value or in how they ought to be treated. Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neanderthalis co-existed for a long time. There are reasons to suspect that neanderthalis really did have lower cognitive capacity than modern humans. Would that have justified killing them or otherwise mistreating them?

 

[Rexedgar]

Groups of people, not individuals.

The OP is reinforcing stereotypes, imo. Categorizing ”groups” is broad-brushing, no matter what the metric is.

 

[j brown's body]

Jordan Peterson answers all 3 of those questions and points out the thing that bothers me the most when it comes to IQ data:



I have no doubt that the IQ data that's been collected for a century now by scientists and psychologists is legitimate. While it shows that there's no difference between men and women when it comes to IQ, it has shown that there are differences between racial and ethnic groups, and that leads to the one problem I have when it comes to IQ data. Far too often people use IQ data as a means to determine the value of a person or group, and I find that reprehensible. As Peterson pointed out, there is no correlation between IQ and virtue, yet there are some who believe people or groups with higher IQs are better than people or group that score lower, and that's the kind of bullshit I can't stand.

.

I honestly never thought much about IQs and don't feel any poorer for it.

 

[Michael Cole]

The OP is reinforcing stereotypes, imo. Categorizing ”groups” is broad-brushing, no matter what the metric is.

That's not how I read it. Just the opposite, actually. Vanceen gave a pretty good explanation

 

[Rexedgar]

That's not how I read it. Just the opposite, actually. Vanceen gave a pretty good explanation

Is it your understanding that the IQ test in question is standardized?

I don’t believe that a “standard test” could be administered across all environments and come up with a reliable result anymore than I believe a test “tweaked” or graded on a curve will get reliable results.

I have encountered people with high IQs that needed help tying shoes.

 

[Grim17]

The OP is reinforcing stereotypes, imo. Categorizing ”groups” is broad-brushing, no matter what the metric is.

I'm doing no such thing.

I'm simply acknowledging the fact that different groups of people inherently possess different traits and skill sets, and that can explain many of the racial and ethnic disparities in certain professions that some like to attribute to discrimination or tyrannical power. It's like the argument surrounding the gender pay gap. Many like to claim that the reason there are more men in high paying STEM field jobs is because of discrimination and social engineering, but the data has proven that neither of those play any significant factor in that disparity at all.

.

 

[Michael Cole]

Is it your understanding that the IQ test in question is standardized?

I don’t believe that a “standard test” could be administered across all environments and come up with a reliable result anymore than I believe a test “tweaked” or graded on a curve will get reliable results.

I have encountered people with high IQs that needed help tying shoes.

I don't pay much attention to IQ. I look for character and intelligence. Test scores don't interest me.

 

[Rexedgar]

I'd be interested to hear a specific criticism of anything Peterson said in that video, based on any error he made in fact or in logic.

The very narrow genetic diversity of human beings makes it extremely hard to believe that there are real difference between human ethnicities or "races" in the capacity to learn and reason. IQ testing, as Peterson points out, doesn't necessarily measure that, and the fact that it seems to depend on cultural background seems to show that it's at least partly measuring cultural background.

The more interesting point he made is that even if it were true that some groups of people have lower "IQ" than others, it would make no difference to their moral value or in how they ought to be treated. Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neanderthalis co-existed for a long time. There are reasons to suspect that neanderthalis really did have lower cognitive capacity than modern humans. Would that have justified killing them or otherwise mistreating them?

“Society” has been separating itself from those of the species that have been seen as different since peoples grouped together for protection from dangers real and imagined. Asylums used to dot the world landscape, for example.

 

[Rexedgar]

I don't pay much attention to IQ. I look for character and intelligence. Test scores don't interest me.

As I posted earlier, IQ numbers aren’t displayed on people. We all make our assessments based on interaction. Here, the only thing to judge another poster on is how well they can compose and comprehend the written word. I am sure I have sat for an IQ test at some point, but I have no idea where or what the results were. There have been more than one poster here, who have trumpeted an above average IQ only to fail to impress in the medium we use here.

 

[ataraxia]

Sure it can... Just because there are factors that can effect a person or group of people's IQ, doesn't change the empirical data.

.

The empirical data does not suggest that IQ is fixed and unchangeable- in individuals or demographic groups. In fact, there seems to be no obvious limit yet as to how malleable these traits can be with environmental factors.

 

[Deuce]

IQ is not some objective measurement of intelligence. It's testing a set of arbitrary skills, skills chosen by the people who designed the test.

You can practice IQ tests and get a higher score, that pretty much invalidates the premise.

 

[ataraxia]

I'm doing no such thing.

I'm simply acknowledging the fact that different groups of people inherently possess different traits and skill sets, and that can explain many of the racial and ethnic disparities in certain professions that some like to attribute to discrimination or tyrannical power. It's like the argument surrounding the gender pay gap. Many like to claim that the reason there are more men in high paying STEM field jobs is because of discrimination and social engineering, but the data has proven that neither of those play any significant factor in that disparity at all.

.

Richard Feynman, as you may know, was one of the most influential and revolutionary theoretical physicists of the second half of the 20th century. He was universally regarded as one of the fastest-thinking and most creative theorists in his generation. In the 1960s, he won the Nobel prize in physics for his work of quantum electrodynamics and field theory, and taught for most of his life at Cal Tech. After the Challenger shuttle disaster in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan tapped him to be part of the team which investigated what had gone wrong, and he was the one who figured out that the problem was with the frozen O-rings on the shuttle.

Back in high school he had taken an IQ test and only scored a 125. He never took the test again. This, in a field where the average IQ is 180+. He was the professor of all those IQ 180+ kids, and could run circles around all of them and stump them at will.

A Polymath Physicist on Richard Feynman's "Low" IQ and Finding Another Einstein

A conversation with Steve Hsu.

www.psychologytoday.com