ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
I agree with you.
You're not quoting me.
You're not quoting me.
-
P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat
Do ideas, both in quality and quantity, grow just as our population grows?
- Thread starter tmdoca
- Start date
swilow
Bluelight Crew
Exposition of a Skim Reader
IQ tests only measure how good someone is at IQ tests. Its a bit of a joke to think they indicate that much else...
edit: which I see has already been said by our Journeying brother
:D
IQ tests only measure how good someone is at IQ tests. Its a bit of a joke to think they indicate that much else...
edit: which I see has already been said by our Journeying brother
:D
Last edited:
swilow
Bluelight Crew
Journyman16
Bluelighter
T'was a joke, hence the smiley at the end... :DYou've anthropomorphized God twice in a single sentence.
Literally, by making God a person... then, by implication, with the inspiration comment.
You're assuming that God functions as a person functions.
That God is inspired, like we are, and then creates.
Creation, in my opinion, is an inevitability.
God creates, just as we procreate.
God creates, just as rain falls.
If you're going to argue against religion, you should give yourself a challenge.
Setting up pins just to knock them down is unworthy of your intelligence.
ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
By that logic, all aptitude tests only prove how good people are at aptitude tests.
Maths exams, too, only prove how good people are at maths exams (not maths).
In fact, testing - in general - doesn't prove anything! It's all meaningless!
...
Tests designed to assess intelligence are imperfect.
But all testing, really, is imperfect. Isn't it?
IQ tests are better than school testing, however, which can - quite easily - be learned by rote and is more an indication of memory / motivation.
As far as standardized IQ tests go, I'm not sure if there really is a better option...?
For the critics of IQ tests: what do you suggest as an alternative?
...
The first time I took an IQ test, I scored very well.
I wasn't "good at IQ tests", because I'd never encountered one before.
I was not studious, either. I didn't study at all for my high school finals.
Journeyman said they test for a very specific set of tools.
It seems to me that pattern recognition applies to practically everything.
(All intellectual pursuits, and the universe itself, can be reduced to patterns.)
Last edited:
Journyman16
Bluelighter
How about we remove schooling as it is today and go back to providing environments where people can learn how to learn and then go learn what they want? I'm pretty sure with all the folks around we will still fill the quotas of people to be the everyday handy types and even setting up to remove garbage etc. Not everyone sees working 40 - 60 hours per week as their main reason for being alive.
And in a rational society such as suggested by a Non-Aristoleian world anyone would see value in doing things that need doing - they just wouldn't be tied into that rut until they die, such as occurs now.
IQ tests don't work for several reasons - if you are significantly 'lower' in score than the designer, they are not testing you at all. If you are at or higher than the designer, they aren't testing you at all.If you aren't the same race and upbringing as the designer, they aren't testing you at all. If your life has been productive but not academically, they are not testing you at all.
It's different to aptitude tests because aptitude (normally) doesn't have a single standard to be measured against. Aptitude tests, done properly, simply bring out skills of an individual to provide a guide as the that particular person. Maybe when it is applied to vocation it could be seen in a similar way to IQ tests, but as a straight-out test, it is a very different focus.
And in a rational society such as suggested by a Non-Aristoleian world anyone would see value in doing things that need doing - they just wouldn't be tied into that rut until they die, such as occurs now.
IQ tests don't work for several reasons - if you are significantly 'lower' in score than the designer, they are not testing you at all. If you are at or higher than the designer, they aren't testing you at all.If you aren't the same race and upbringing as the designer, they aren't testing you at all. If your life has been productive but not academically, they are not testing you at all.
It's different to aptitude tests because aptitude (normally) doesn't have a single standard to be measured against. Aptitude tests, done properly, simply bring out skills of an individual to provide a guide as the that particular person. Maybe when it is applied to vocation it could be seen in a similar way to IQ tests, but as a straight-out test, it is a very different focus.