Meaning of IQ [split from Personality thread]

godix · Post by **godix** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:50 am

Savia wrote:This thread is starting to remind me of an old thread I made on the oooooold OT forum about whether IQ was meaningful or not. Good times, I think I'm going to go dig that out...

Meaningful for what?

Copycat_Revolver · Post by **Copycat_Revolver** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:54 am

godix wrote:
Savia wrote:This thread is starting to remind me of an old thread I made on the oooooold OT forum about whether IQ was meaningful or not. Good times, I think I'm going to go dig that out...
Meaningful for what?

Flaunting it in front of others, naturally.

Savia · Post by **Savia** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:55 am

For pretty much any reason- it was basically asking whether or not IQ tests measure more than, well, your "IQ". So whether they approached a measure of 'intelligence' (the G of old, or Gardner's multiple intelligences, or whatever), or your ability to take tests, or how white middle class you were, or whatever.

godix · Post by **godix** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:18 pm

Savia wrote:For pretty much any reason- it was basically asking whether or not IQ tests measure more than, well, your "IQ". So whether they approached a measure of 'intelligence' (the G of old, or Gardner's multiple intelligences, or whatever), or your ability to take tests, or how white middle class you were, or whatever.

No see, IQ test is one of those things you gotta ask 'meaningful in relation to what'. Is it meaningful for predicting the outcome of a basketball game? Probably not. Is it meaningful in predicting which kid has the best chance of becoming a rocket scientist? Yeah, probably.

EvaFan · Post by **EvaFan** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:50 pm

godix wrote:
Savia wrote:For pretty much any reason- it was basically asking whether or not IQ tests measure more than, well, your "IQ". So whether they approached a measure of 'intelligence' (the G of old, or Gardner's multiple intelligences, or whatever), or your ability to take tests, or how white middle class you were, or whatever.
No see, IQ test is one of those things you gotta ask 'meaningful in relation to what'. Is it meaningful for predicting the outcome of a basketball game? Probably not. Is it meaningful in predicting which kid has the best chance of becoming a rocket scientist? Yeah, probably.

Is it meaningful to take an IQ test? Probably not, unless its offered by the military. Usually they have reasons for wanting your test results.

Savia · Post by **Savia** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 8:35 am

This seemed like a worthwhile discussion point that was wondering off the topic in its original thread, so I've split it into its own one.

Thoughts? : )

Corran · Post by **Corran** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:35 am

IQ is simply a number to compare one's ability to grasp concepts or notice patterns to others. 100 is what the average Joe should supposedly be able to attain.

I've read that if you take the quotient/100 and multiple it by your physical age, the resulting number is considered your mental age.

To me, IQ is only useful for identifying quick learners. Such individuals would be excellent for positions that required troubleshooting problems or thinking outside-the-box. However, a quick learner != a successful person. If the individual has no drive or motivation, their gift will be wasted.

I think it would be interesting to group students based on their IQ and see if it is practical to teach classes at different speeds... but yeah, if the students are slackers, a high IQ won't help. (I don't doubt this has been done before...)

CodeZTM · Post by **CodeZTM** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 11:04 am

Corran brings up a lovely point.

However, I tend to think of an IQ number similar to a bragging right. If it's high, you tell everone (usually) in earshot. If it's low, you ignore it and (usually) preach how it's not an accurate perception of intelligence.

Me?

I truely think that an IQ number is useful, as well as a hinderance.

*Useful: LIke Corran said, I think think that it would be quite useful in the education system, if executed correctly. Then again, you have the whole motivation thing, which would make it very difficult to execute anyhing.

*Hinderance: Kind of a downer for anybody really motivated, to be told "ha ha, you have a low IQ". We need people who are motivated to work hard, even if its not in the realm of academia.

But to be totally honest, I never truely thought about IQ's until the personality thread.

:O

BasharOfTheAges · Post by **BasharOfTheAges** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 11:36 am

Along Corran's line of discussion... IQ is a measure of how intelligent you could be, not how intelligent you are (at least that's always how I had it explained to me), so its only real use is in comparing like-motivated individuals. Now unless you happen to be an unmotivated person, you're likely to think that's not a fair comparison since unmotivated people are <strike>worthless slime that sully the face of the planet </strike> statistical outliers in a otherwise well-defined system. But since they exist in such large numbers and since you can usually fake your way through a lot of jobs by pretending you're motivated for a few months or years, their impact on overall career placement (which is really what IQ tests come down to at their very nature) is minimal.

Fall_Child42 · Post by **Fall_Child42** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:43 pm

Most Drs or Psych I've talked to have discounted the IQ test as any sort of reliable universal intelligence test. Much like how the Lie detector test has been largely discredited, yet still remains in use.