Is intellegence fixed? (1 Viewer)

[Simpletruther]

Interesting discussion with Richard Haier, an intellegence researcher, ( now editing a scientific journal on the topic).

It seems intellegence boils down to what scientists call a "g factor" which correlates to basically any aspect of intellegence.

They discussed the old head start program and how it simply did not work. Itellegence seems somewhat fixed over a person's life.

And they are finding genetic components to intellegence.
Another point they brought up was how better teachers, schools, funding etc, only had a low correlation to success, while the g factor was highly correlated.

We have 40 million people with 85 IQ or lower, that makes it near impossible for them to keep a decent paying g job, and even struggle to perform in the least skill jobs in our economy. That is a huge problem.

 

[Lursa]

Interesting. So is this but I havent looked further so I'm not endorsing it at this point:

What does an IQ 85 mean - Two Jobs fit your 85 IQ score

Anyone with an IQ 85 can operate independently and be trained to work in a profession that does not demand decision making. What’s else?

www.sociosite.net

 

[Simpletruther]

Interesting. So is this but I havent looked further so I'm not endorsing it at this point:

What does an IQ 85 mean - Two Jobs fit your 85 IQ score

Anyone with an IQ 85 can operate independently and be trained to work in a profession that does not demand decision making. What’s else?

www.sociosite.net

Yes it highly limits you, And that is at 85, millions are below that number.

 

[bongsaway]

Interesting discussion with Richard Haier, an intellegence researcher, ( now editing a scientific journal on the topic).

It seems intellegence boils down to what scientists call a "g factor" which correlates to basically any aspect of intellegence.

They discussed the old head start program and how it simply did not work. Itellegence seems somewhat fixed over a person's life.

And they are finding genetic components to intellegence.
Another point they brought up was how better teachers, schools, funding etc, only had a low correlation to success, while the g factor was highly correlated.

We have 40 million people with 85 IQ or lower, that makes it near impossible for them to keep a decent paying g job, and even struggle to perform in the least skill jobs in our economy. That is a huge problem.

If intelligence is fixed, stupid has no limits.

 

[samiam5211]

I think someone with an IQ of 80 would have an easier time holding a job than someone with an IQ of 130 but was also bipolar.

It's not just intelligence that determines outcomes, mental health is just as if not more important.

 

[jnug]

If intelligence is fixed, stupid has no limits.

Well played! Logical even.

 

[Simpletruther]

I think someone with an IQ of 80 would have an easier time holding a job than someone with an IQ of 130 but was also bipolar.

It's not just intelligence that determines outcomes, mental health is just as if not more important.

Not sure about that. It's hard to follow basic instructions at 80, according to these experts.

 

[Simpletruther]

If intelligence is fixed, stupid has no limits.

It seems like it sometimes.

 

[Michael Cole]

Yes it highly limits you, And that is at 85, millions are below that number.

Lots of things limit people.

IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. Ted Kaczynski has an IQ of 167. On the positive side, Temple Grandin has an IQ of 150, but her mind works in ways you and I don't understand.

"Lookie here, IQ" is a vague argument. What are you proposing we do about this dilemma?

 

[less right]

I didn't watch the video to find the Head Start discussion, but I never thought that program was trying to raise IQs.

 

[reflechissez]

Interesting discussion with Richard Haier, an intellegence researcher, ( now editing a scientific journal on the topic).

It seems intellegence boils down to what scientists call a "g factor" which correlates to basically any aspect of intellegence.

They discussed the old head start program and how it simply did not work. Itellegence seems somewhat fixed over a person's life.

And they are finding genetic components to intellegence.
Another point they brought up was how better teachers, schools, funding etc, only had a low correlation to success, while the g factor was highly correlated.

We have 40 million people with 85 IQ or lower, that makes it near impossible for them to keep a decent paying g job, and even struggle to perform in the least skill jobs in our economy. That is a huge problem.

Ok. You misspelled the word intelligence 5 times. That is a huge problem.

 

[Exquisitor]

Lots of things limit people.

IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. Ted Kaczynski has an IQ of 167. On the positive side, Temple Grandin has an IQ of 150, but her mind works in ways you and I don't understand.

"Lookie here, IQ" is a vague argument. What are you proposing we do about this dilemma?

I never took an IQ test.

 

[Lursa]

Lots of things limit people.

IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. Ted Kaczynski has an IQ of 167. On the positive side, Temple Grandin has an IQ of 150, but her mind works in ways you and I don't understand.

"Lookie here, IQ" is a vague argument. What are you proposing we do about this dilemma?

Has anyone said that TZ or Temple Grandin are unintelligent? Temple has another disorder that affects her behavior. Not sure what TK's behavioral dysfunction was, but likely there was something. Those things dont have to be linked to intelligence.

 

[Lursa]

Ok. You misspelled the word intelligence 5 times. That is a huge problem.

LOL

 

[reflechissez]

Lots of things limit people.

IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. Ted Kaczynski has an IQ of 167. On the positive side, Temple Grandin has an IQ of 150, but her mind works in ways you and I don't understand.

"Lookie here, IQ" is a vague argument. What are you proposing we do about this dilemma?

The OP really wanted to post the video,. That's all.

 

[Simpletruther]

Lots of things limit people.

IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. Ted Kaczynski has an IQ of 167. On the positive side, Temple Grandin has an IQ of 150, but her mind works in ways you and I don't understand.

"Lookie here, IQ" is a vague argument. What are you proposing we do about this dilemma?

According to these experts, IQ is a pretty close approximation of the g factor, overall intellegence.

Well, understanding the problem is important I would think to any ideas on what to do.

One thing that was brought up was researching showing interrvention between 2-4 years old does have results as far as !nti social violence behavior, but not intellegence. But it's hard for public policy to address at that age.

If everyone comes to accept the actual science, we at least adjust our expectations, and realize throwing money at it will not do much beyond a minimal point.

Conservatives need to adjust their thinking because "if those lazy bums would just get a job" is inaccurate. Many of them simply are unemployable through no fault of their own.

And liberal need to think in less terms of "everyone's equal, so the problem must be solvable with money".

 

[Simpletruther]

Ok. You misspelled the word intelligence 5 times. That is a huge problem.

Well you knew what the word was, so I would not call it huge.

 

[Michael Cole]

Who has said that TZ or Temple Grandin are unintelligent? Temple has another disorder that affects her behavior. Not sure what TK's behavioral dysfunction was, but likely there was something. Those things dont have to be linked to intelligence.

Depends how you define intelligent. If you define it as an IQ score, then Kaczynski is highly intelligent. If you define intelligence as making life decisions which aren't harmful, then Kaczynski is an idiot.

For example, getting drunk and behind the wheel of a car is not an intelligent life choice. Those with high IQ's make this choice all the time.

I included Temple Grandin because of her autism. It seems relevant because of the differences in the autistic mind. We're using one metric that measures something which can be applied to people whose minds bear no resemblance to each other, so it would seem to be a vague measure.

I'm not sure what the OP's point is, basically.

 

[reflechissez]

Well you knew what the word was, so I would not call it huge.

The fact that I could Identify the incorrectly-spelled word (5x) in a thread about intelligence does not make it less of a problem. Did you really think it was spelled that way? (Don't you have spellcheck?) The only reason I'm ragging on you about this is because of the disdain that you frequently show for people you believe are lesser than you.

 

[Michael Cole]

According to these experts, IQ is a pretty close approximation of the g factor, overall intellegence.

So what? The Unibomber was a genius. How'd that turn out?

These are statistical studies based on narrowly defined tests. They don't predict someone's behavior.

Well, understanding the problem is important I would think to any ideas on what to do.

One thing that was brought up was researching showing interrvention between 2-4 years old does have results as far as !nti social violence behavior, but not intellegence. But it's hard for public policy to address at that age.

There is no pill for intelligence. I have no problem teaching students to the best of their abilities. And no government should be educating toddlers, so I'm not sure what your point is.

If everyone comes to accept the actual science, we at least adjust our expectations, and realize throwing money at it will not do much beyond a minimal point.

I accept all the actual science. Lots of low IQ people out there. Thinking they are incapable of learning, thus should be forgotten, would not be any actual science I'm aware of.

Conservatives need to adjust their thinking because "if those lazy bums would just get a job" is inaccurate. Many of them simply are unemployable through no fault of their own.

And liberal need to think in less terms of "everyone's equal, so the problem must be solvable with money".

This is where you lose me. What help do these people need? Who are the 40 million you claim? Surely, they're not all on welfare.

Conservatives do this, and you liberals do that. Lol.

 

[Simpletruther]

The fact that I could Identify the incorrectly-spelled word (5x) in a thread about intelligence does not make it less of a problem. Did you really think it was spelled that way? (Don't you have spellcheck?) The only reason I'm ragging on you about this is because of the disdain that you frequently show for people you believe are lesser than you.

Can you find your best quote from me saying something that remotely implies such a thing? And post it.

 

[Buckeyes85]

So what? The Unibomber was a genius. How'd that turn out?

These are statistical studies based on narrowly defined tests. They don't predict someone's behavior.

There is no pill for intelligence. I have no problem teaching students to the best of their abilities. And no government should be educating toddlers, so I'm not sure what your point is.

I accept all the actual science. Lots of low IQ people out there. Thinking they are incapable of learning, thus should be forgotten, would not be any actual science I'm aware of.

This is where you lose me. What help do these people need? Who are the 40 million you claim? Surely, they're not all on welfare.

Conservatives do this, and you liberals do that. Lol.

You seem to be conflating raw intelligence with a myriad of other things. I don't think anyone suggests that a high IQ guarantees you success or that you make good life choices, or are a good person. But IQ is, by definition the measure of raw intelligence. The ability to acquire knowledge and skills.

 

[Michael Cole]

You seem to be conflating raw intelligence with a myriad of other things. I don't think anyone suggests that a high IQ guarantees you success or that you make good life choices, or are a good person. But IQ is, by definition the measure of raw intelligence. The ability to acquire knowledge and skills.

Yes, I get that. My problem is how it's being applied here, not what it measures. I don't put a whole lot of faith in IQ tests as broadly predictive instruments.

I disagree with the OP's thesis that people with IQ's under 85 are incapable of work, if that is indeed his argument. I've worked with "slow" people and brilliant people. They each work to their abilities, and there were some slow guys who I helped much more than the brilliant guys. The point is, regardless of one's ability to do complex mathematical calculations, being an a**hole is not an intelligent strategy. One's social "IQ" is a measure, as well. As is mental health, touched on by others.

And again I'm not sure what the point of the OP is.

 

[Henry79]

Interesting discussion with Richard Haier, an intellegence researcher, ( now editing a scientific journal on the topic).

It seems intellegence boils down to what scientists call a "g factor" which correlates to basically any aspect of intellegence.

They discussed the old head start program and how it simply did not work. Itellegence seems somewhat fixed over a person's life.

And they are finding genetic components to intellegence.
Another point they brought up was how better teachers, schools, funding etc, only had a low correlation to success, while the g factor was highly correlated.

We have 40 million people with 85 IQ or lower, that makes it near impossible for them to keep a decent paying g job, and even struggle to perform in the least skill jobs in our economy. That is a huge problem.

And yet they voted for trump. Twice.

 

[Lursa]

Depends how you define intelligent. If you define it as an IQ score, then Kaczynski is highly intelligent. If you define intelligence as making life decisions which aren't harmful, then Kaczynski is an idiot.

Where is it defined that way?

For example, getting drunk and behind the wheel of a car is not an intelligent life choice. Those with high IQ's make this choice all the time.

I included Temple Grandin because of her autism. It seems relevant because of the differences in the autistic mind. We're using one metric that measures something which can be applied to people whose minds bear no resemblance to each other, so it would seem to be a vague measure.

I'm not sure what the OP's point is, basically.

Does autism affect intelligence level or just eliminate 'background noise' and make more of that intelligence available for
application?