VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:40:04 09/01/00 Fri
Author: Mariah
Subject: IQ
In reply to: Brain 's message, "Re: typical, you should all read this.." on 11:00:53 08/31/00 Thu

IQ stands for 'Intelligence QUOTIENT'. That means that the IQ number means "The age that you're brain works like divided by the age that you are".

When you're five years old, and you can think like a typical ten year old, then that would mean you have an IQ of 200. But, that also means that IQ is highly definable merely because of the person's age.

For, a five year old has only lived five years. The five year old is 50% the age of the ten year old. However, as one gets older, IQ tests mean less and less until they mean nothing at all. For, does anybody think that the amount of difference between a 5 year old and a ten year old is not greater than the difference between a 20 year old and a fourty year old?

For example, what does it mean that a person who is twenty thinks like a fourty year old? Does that mean they are thinking better than a fourty year old, or worse than a fourty year old?

The difference between a fourty year old and an eighty year old? Certainly the fourty year old is thinking BETTER than the eighty year old by a great degree.

A 20 year old would be fifty percent of a forty year old, but everybody knows that the difference between a 5 year old's mind and a ten year old's mind is vastly different as far as their ability to do cognitive things. This is particularly true the earlier you go (and, certainly the greatest leap is the leap from what you can do the instant you're born, to what you can do when you're five years old).

So, what exactly does an IQ test show once a person gets to age twenty, then? It certainly doesn't hold up to the actual meaning of IQ, so the question has to be asked whether it means anything at all after you reach age 20.

IQ tests are decided upon by judgement. The judgement that those who design the tests with is particular to their culture, what they determine to be 'intelligent behavior', and there is absolutely no reason why two different types of IQ tests should correlate in the slightest way with any other IQ test made in a different way (The Densa test, the Tchechia, the Mensa test...) So, it is a test of social status. It is a test of comparison between belief structures. It is a test of what some 'norm' has decided is 'normal'.

If people use IQ numbers to prove some sort of higher status in much the same way that Christianity proves 'Going to Heaven' status by association, then they are doing it because they feel less in that realm than another, not that they feel more. So, it would seem that if someone touts IQ, somewhere deep down they must really feel like an idiot, just as the more someone says they're going to Heaven, they have much more serious doubts than the typical person has. Someone who touts an affinity to God has more fear that they have no affinity to God. Someone who fights and defends that there certainly is a God is the most scared that there is none.

If anybody uses the concept of IQ to make themselves feel better than another, then that isn't an intelligent thing to do, just as it isn't a holy thing to do to state supremacy or justification through association with 'God'.

When someone needs tell another they are intelligent, they are very far from it. When someone needs to tell someone they are holy, they are also very far from it.



> >
> > >
> > > I've an IQ of 130, 147, or 162. Which is why I
> don't
> > > trust IQ tests. I took 3 different ones and got
> three
> > > different answers.
> >
> > that's because A), different tests breed different
> > results
> > and B), the IQ is not static, but dynamic, your IQ
> > depends greatly on your mood amongst other things.
> >
> > do i even NEED to say duh? they are not meant to be
> > THAT accurate, they're meant to be an INDICATION of
> > your intelligence, seeing as all 3 results of you put
> > you in the above average -> high above average
> > department, that's where you are.
> >
> > >
> > > Although all 3 of them said I was in the top 1% of
> > > some population.
> >
> > that's not true. the top 1% of the population (in
> > your country or the world) would require you to have
> a
> > much higher IQ score than that, unless these were
> some
> > weird non-standard tests. these results would've put
> > you in the top 10-15% or so.
>
>
>
> 100 The average IQ Score.
> 120 Smart enough to finish most college undergraduate
> level courses.
> 130 Entry level "genius" score.
> 140 Definitely genius level.
> 150 Less than 1/2 of 1% of all IQ test takers achieve
> this score or higher.
>

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.