• S&T Forum Guidelines
  • S&T Moderators: VerbalTruist | Skorpio | alasdairm

Psychology IQ is largely a pseudoscientific swindle

IQ is a basic measurement of a person's a ability to do well in ideal circumstances. They're stupid, and they have very little merit. Also, if a person tests high for IQ and abysmally for EQ (like my dad lol) then they can often end up just truly shitty people.

I've done 2 proper IQ tests in my life and one cheap dodgy free online one. The first one was year 9 and for a careers thing at school. We got told we could go to lunch when we finished the test so I picked my pen up and just shot down the page marking rand boxes. Walked up to the front and handed it up. Teacher was like 'you can't have gotten the right answers on this' and I was like 'no I know, but I get to leave early now and have a two hour long lunch while these guys sit here sitting a meaningless test so whose the smart one really?'

He didn't have a response to that.

Second test I did was when I had my autism assessment done. It was higher than my brother, dad and mum by a bit. Idk what the minimal scores for joining Mensa are because I've never bothered to look it up but it could be approaching that. However if I did that, everyone would know I would be a huge prat. The things that IQ tests fundamentally can't measure is for example people like myself with significant areas of skill or talent, but huge deficits. I cannot do maths. At all. I need to fingercount single numerals. I also have huge executive functioning problems now, and I am not the person I used to be.

When I did a dumb cheap test I got bored of doing it half way through (maybe page 3) and I just randomly guessed the answers for any question that I COULD solve but was gonna take longer than 10 seconds. Final score was a dubious 135.

The thing is, in my work as a support worker I have a client I hang with who has his intellectual disability listed as moderate. I don't believe it's that bad for a second. It's just that you clearly cannot measure a person's IQ who is both illiterate and completely unwilling to verbally communicate. It's totally impossible.

Ido Kedar is a young autistic man who was presumed to be cognitively delayed or have a moderate ID. He was put into ABA therapy which did him not benefits. His mum eventually removed him, and stumbled on a letterboard (like, just the alphabet on wooden slat) and he began 'speaking' full sentences.

Ido was a multiple time published author writing at university level by the time he was 13. His mum removed him from ABA at 8. He graduated valedictorian of his mainstream honours final class of high school.

And his measured IQ was in the 'moderate intellectual disability' range which iirc is below 70...

So yeah, I don't put much stock in IQ tests. Anyone who goes round telling people constantly how super duper smart they are and how high their score is... well the thing is, genuinely smart people don't need to convince people that they are smart. The people who realise they are smart will notice, and mention it. The people who THINK they're really smart but aren't, will usually underestimate the quiet people who don't go round parading it.

People HATE being told someone is way smarter than them, especially when it's condescending. Smart people usually know that.

The other reason I have this opinion is that there is ZERO level of whatever my intelligence is which has had what I would term an overwhelming net positive to my mental health. I'd say it's actually the reverse, and detrimental. Plus, when I was homeless it didn't matter how 'booksmart' I was, i learnt quick from the people who were homeless longer than me and being 'smart' did Jack shit for me.

Lastly, the whole thing is like, when a person spends a lot of time around people who are on average, a bit or moderately smarter than them (as I did at law school, since the lowest score required to get into my law school was 96/99.95 and that was my exact score. Many, many people I went to uni with in that degree got high school leaving scores of 99.95/100. No mean feat.

I somehow was able to pass, get my degrees, with a good GPA (5.5/7) plus several awards for duxing some of my law courses (even being homeless my first year or so, plus my at times very heavy but for the most part, not terrible IV heroin, meth, other opiates, other drug use disorders, but some of my closest friends were GPAs of 6.75/7 WHILE doing their Honours thesis, which meant they actually were overloading their study hours by an entire course PLUS working as a clerk for the director of public prosecutions.

I love being around people who know more about stuff than me. I love having them explain those things to me. It's an opportunity to learn and grow.

I don't super love it when people think they know more about certain topics than me which they sort of irrefutably don't, and act condescending. But if that's what floats their boat, who am I to judge.
 
Just a thought but don't you have to PAY to be a member of MENSA? With $60/year based on someone passing a test, do people REALLY think it uses a test MOST people will fail. It's a BUSINESS!

I would argue that one thing MENSA certainly doesn't test for (intentionally) is common sense.

Just who pays so they can say they are members? Who needs that external validation?

Actually achieving complex tasks that require the application of logic over months or even years seems like a much more reliable metric. So all I will say is that I was a professional computer games programmer for 17 years. You WILL have heard of at least 1 title... but knowing that you can flip the box and know who I am.

I am the first to admit that I could be making the entire thing up but I was a specialist - optimized assembly language. Now computers and consoles (and their associated compilers) are so good, their just isn't a role for me any more.... oh, and the epilepsy and other injuries make it kind of tricky as well.

But I suppose that games are always a speed?space tradeoff with the occasional clever trick invented for a specific title so maybe not so complex. But I did feel that the 87 people I worked with were all very clever... and 1 guy was in MENSA and he quit after a year.....

I'm not showing off because I'm quite sure others have or are doing even more complex jobs, but as a rule of thumb, programmers tend to be good with symbolic logic.
 
Lol

F4D96eMW0AErhJb
 
Compensation ≠ income.

Someone with ADHD was born into wealth... proving what exactly?
 
i don't think inherited wealth would generally be considered compensation.

i understand compensation to mean the totality of one's salary, benefits, bonuses, 401k matching, etc.

e.g. my company pays me a salary but my total compensation is about twice my salary when the other factors are included.

but... i agree with your point. that graph shows a single statistical outlier which, to me, doesn't really prove anything (beyond a single data point has a very low iq and a very handsome compensation package).

alasdair
 
I just thought it was funny so I posted it here

It made me think of an incredibly low IQ person I knew that started a landscaping company and made like $500K a year but couldn't even comprehend hypotheticals like:

"If your house burned down how would you feel?"

"But my house didn't burn down"

"But how would you feel if it did?"

"But it didn't"
 
alasdairm said:
i don't think inherited wealth would generally be considered compensation.

i understand compensation to mean the totality of one's salary, benefits, bonuses, 401k matching, etc.

e.g. my company pays me a salary but my total compensation is about twice my salary when the other factors are included.

but... i agree with your point. that graph shows a single statistical outlier which, to me, doesn't really prove anything (beyond a single data point has a very low iq and a very handsome compensation package).

alasdair
Click to expand...

FMI how do YOU pronounce outlier? In Australia I noted they pronounce it 'out liar'. In the UK we recognize it as a French loan-word and pronounce it as such. I'm not complaining, just wondering.
 
Electrum1 said:
I just thought it was funny so I posted it here

It made me think of an incredibly low IQ person I knew that started a landscaping company and made like $500K a year but couldn't even comprehend hypotheticals like:

"If your house burned down how would you feel?"

"But my house didn't burn down"

"But how would you feel if it did?"

"But it didn't"
Click to expand...

Burn down his house, THEN ASK.
 
Nassim Nicholas Taleb's article 'IQ is largely a pseudoscientific swindle' raises several important questions about the validity and utility of IQ tests, but his overarching dismissal of the field may be seen as overly harsh and lacking nuance. Taleb criticizes the statistical methods used in psychology, particularly the use of P-values, but fails to acknowledge the ongoing debates and reforms within the field aimed at improving research integrity. Moreover, his critique doesn't offer a comprehensive alternative for measuring cognitive abilities, leaving the reader questioning what should replace IQ tests if they are as flawed as he suggests.

Taleb also discusses the Flynn effect to highlight the environmental dependencies and potential circularities in IQ testing. While this is a valid point, it's worth noting that many experts in the field are already aware of these limitations and are working on more dynamic models of intelligence that take multiple factors into account.

His skepticism towards IQ as a measure of intelligence is likened to the failure of 'value at risk' (VaR) models in finance. While the analogy is thought-provoking, it somewhat oversimplifies the complexities of both fields. IQ tests, despite their limitations, have been shown to have some predictive value for academic performance, job performance, and other life outcomes. To dismiss them entirely is to ignore the empirical data supporting their limited but non-negligible utility.

Taleb's article also delves into the issue of self-reporting biases and the dangers of making sweeping statements about populations based on IQ scores. While these are valid concerns, they are not new criticisms and are actively discussed within psychological and educational circles.

Finally, Taleb addresses the responses to his piece, particularly from psychologists and Alt-Right groups, accusing them of a lack of statistical understanding. While it's crucial to hold any scientific field to rigorous standards, Taleb's own arguments could be criticized for lacking a balanced view and for not fully engaging with the existing literature that addresses some of his concerns.

In summary, while Taleb's skepticism serves as a valuable counterpoint that sparks necessary debate, his categorical rejection of IQ testing risks throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater, undermining the potential for constructive improvements and refinements in the field of cognitive assessment."
 
Eligiu said:
IQ is a basic measurement of a person's a ability to do well in ideal circumstances. They're stupid, and they have very little merit. Also, if a person tests high for IQ and abysmally for EQ (like my dad lol) then they can often end up just truly shitty people.

I've done 2 proper IQ tests in my life and one cheap dodgy free online one. The first one was year 9 and for a careers thing at school. We got told we could go to lunch when we finished the test so I picked my pen up and just shot down the page marking rand boxes. Walked up to the front and handed it up. Teacher was like 'you can't have gotten the right answers on this' and I was like 'no I know, but I get to leave early now and have a two hour long lunch while these guys sit here sitting a meaningless test so whose the smart one really?'

He didn't have a response to that.

Second test I did was when I had my autism assessment done. It was higher than my brother, dad and mum by a bit. Idk what the minimal scores for joining Mensa are because I've never bothered to look it up but it could be approaching that. However if I did that, everyone would know I would be a huge prat. The things that IQ tests fundamentally can't measure is for example people like myself with significant areas of skill or talent, but huge deficits. I cannot do maths. At all. I need to fingercount single numerals. I also have huge executive functioning problems now, and I am not the person I used to be.

When I did a dumb cheap test I got bored of doing it half way through (maybe page 3) and I just randomly guessed the answers for any question that I COULD solve but was gonna take longer than 10 seconds. Final score was a dubious 135.

The thing is, in my work as a support worker I have a client I hang with who has his intellectual disability listed as moderate. I don't believe it's that bad for a second. It's just that you clearly cannot measure a person's IQ who is both illiterate and completely unwilling to verbally communicate. It's totally impossible.

Ido Kedar is a young autistic man who was presumed to be cognitively delayed or have a moderate ID. He was put into ABA therapy which did him not benefits. His mum eventually removed him, and stumbled on a letterboard (like, just the alphabet on wooden slat) and he began 'speaking' full sentences.

Ido was a multiple time published author writing at university level by the time he was 13. His mum removed him from ABA at 8. He graduated valedictorian of his mainstream honours final class of high school.

And his measured IQ was in the 'moderate intellectual disability' range which iirc is below 70...

So yeah, I don't put much stock in IQ tests. Anyone who goes round telling people constantly how super duper smart they are and how high their score is... well the thing is, genuinely smart people don't need to convince people that they are smart. The people who realise they are smart will notice, and mention it. The people who THINK they're really smart but aren't, will usually underestimate the quiet people who don't go round parading it.

People HATE being told someone is way smarter than them, especially when it's condescending. Smart people usually know that.

The other reason I have this opinion is that there is ZERO level of whatever my intelligence is which has had what I would term an overwhelming net positive to my mental health. I'd say it's actually the reverse, and detrimental. Plus, when I was homeless it didn't matter how 'booksmart' I was, i learnt quick from the people who were homeless longer than me and being 'smart' did Jack shit for me.

Lastly, the whole thing is like, when a person spends a lot of time around people who are on average, a bit or moderately smarter than them (as I did at law school, since the lowest score required to get into my law school was 96/99.95 and that was my exact score. Many, many people I went to uni with in that degree got high school leaving scores of 99.95/100. No mean feat.

I somehow was able to pass, get my degrees, with a good GPA (5.5/7) plus several awards for duxing some of my law courses (even being homeless my first year or so, plus my at times very heavy but for the most part, not terrible IV heroin, meth, other opiates, other drug use disorders, but some of my closest friends were GPAs of 6.75/7 WHILE doing their Honours thesis, which meant they actually were overloading their study hours by an entire course PLUS working as a clerk for the director of public prosecutions.

I love being around people who know more about stuff than me. I love having them explain those things to me. It's an opportunity to learn and grow.

I don't super love it when people think they know more about certain topics than me which they sort of irrefutably don't, and act condescending. But if that's what floats their boat, who am I to judge.
Click to expand...
Wow, you've really given this a lot of thought, and I couldn't agree more with many of your points. Your year 9 IQ test story is hilarious but also spot-on. It shows how the context can totally skew what the test is supposed to measure. I mean, who wouldn't want a two-hour lunch break instead of filling in bubbles on a sheet, right?

Your point about having strengths and weaknesses really hits home. IQ tests are so one-dimensional; they don't capture the full picture of who we are. And don't even get me started on EQ. It's like you said about your dad being book smart doesn't make you a good person or even someone who can navigate life well.

The story about Ido Kedar is mind-blowing. It's a perfect example of how we can't put people in boxes based on some arbitrary test. There's so much more to a person's abilities and potential than what can be measured on paper.

I also totally get what you're saying about mental health. Being "smart" doesn't make life's challenges any easier in fact, sometimes it can make things harder. Your experience with homelessness is a sobering reminder of that.

And yeah, being around people smarter than you can be so enriching. I love learning new things from people who are experts in their fields. But like you said, the ones who are truly smart don't need to go around bragging about it.

Your take on this whole IQ thing is really refreshing. It's high time we look beyond numbers and scores to see people for who they truly are
 
IQ tests do have an unintended value. ANYONE who states their IQ clearly requires even the most tenuous external validation and will even PAY good money for it.

Membership – Mensa

mensa.org.uk mensa.org.uk

£12 MENSA Home Test
£29.95 Supervised IQ Test
£29.95 Submit Prior Evidence

£55 per annum membership.


Anyone else note that it's a MENSA home test BUT a supervised IQ test. Disingenuous wording.
 
AlsoTapered said:
IQ tests do have an unintended value. ANYONE who states their IQ clearly requires even the most tenuous external validation and will even PAY good money for it.

Membership – Mensa

mensa.org.uk mensa.org.uk

£12 MENSA Home Test
£29.95 Supervised IQ Test
£29.95 Submit Prior Evidence

£55 per annum membership.


Anyone else note that it's a MENSA home test BUT a supervised IQ test. Disingenuous wording.
Click to expand...
You have to do the supervised one to become a member
 
Has anyone EVER failed a MENSA test? Maybe it's worth £10 to someone to find out. Ensure you get NONE of the questions correct, post it off, see what happens. Maybe you need a FEW correct ones as a zero would be unlikely in a multiple choice test even if you randomly select....

So a bloody gerbil would (on average) score 25%.

Similar to the story of the guy who sent a sample of his pet lizard's saliva to 23AndMe... and they pronounced that the subject was 48% West Asian and 51% Ashkenazi Jewish.

It's a BUSINESS.
 
AlsoTapered said:
Has anyone EVER failed a MENSA test? Maybe it's worth £10 to someone to find out. Ensure you get NONE of the questions correct, post it off, see what happens. Maybe you need a FEW correct ones as a zero would be unlikely in a multiple choice test even if you randomly select....

So a bloody gerbil would (on average) score 25%.

Similar to the story of the guy who sent a sample of his pet lizard's saliva to 23AndMe... and they pronounced that the subject was 48% West Asian and 51% Ashkenazi Jewish.

It's a BUSINESS.
Click to expand...
It’s a standardised iq test, they use the caterall III-B.

Strong smell of butthurt coming for your direction 😂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top