Why do people keep using IQ as a fill in for Intelligence?

Author: Moozer325

Posts

Total: 37
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,175
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
I'm not really sure if this is the right forum for this topic, but I couldn't really find a better one.

The thing that you have to understand is that IQ is not a perfect measure of intelligence. It mostly measures your brain's ability to recognize patterns, which is synonymous with intelligence in some cases, but it is still very imperfect. 

It is really hard to actually quantify intelligence, since it is such a vague term when you really think about it. If someone was really good at math, like NASA level good, you would say they are smart. But you could also say Napoleon, or other military generals were smart. You're using the same metric to evaluate two completely different things. 

People have to remember, IQ is not Intelligence. It's the best we have so far, and it is applicable in some scenarios, but you have to remember that it is very imperfect.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
The thing that you have to understand is that IQ is not a perfect measure of intelligence.
Yes also body fat calipers are imperfect at measuring body fat, but it gets you in the ballpark.

. If someone was really good at math, like NASA level good, you would say they are smart. But you could also say Napoleon, or other military generals were smart.

Yes mathematicians use their intelligence for math and Napolean for Battles. Napoleon likely would have excelled at math, but your average mathematician has an IQ close to 130 and Napolean likely is between 150 and 170 in IQ range. 

People have to remember, IQ is not Intelligence. It's the best we have so far, and it is applicable in some scenarios, but you have to remember that it is very imperfect
Yes also pregnancy tests are not perfect either most are only 99.999% accurate and that is under perfect conditions. 

Here is why IQ matters.


It's useful in determining who we should discourage from voting in elections. You see politicians like to take advantage of stupid people by offering them free shit and stupid people are well stupid, so they vote for free shit. 

One issue with this is that it is harmful in the long term, however there is a second issue. Where do you think they get their free shit from?

They get it from smart people who make a lot more than them. Subsidies are essentially a tax for not being retarded..

I am not trying g to be mean about it. However, have you actually ever talked to a retard? It's somebody with like a 60 IQ and if you have an average IQ of 100, it's just not pleasant. That 40 point IQ difference is huge. 

It's the same thing for me. If I talk to somebody with an IQ of 120, it's essentially like talking to a retard for you, so you can see how sometimes I get frustrated. I mean no harm it's just that it's hard for them to understand me, which can frustrate me.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Napolean estimated to be 145, but that feels low to me http://www.assessmentpsychology.com/301geniuses.htm
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Yep like I thought. Mathematicians are literally retarded and have IQs around 125

https://imgur.com/JoAeMqX
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,175
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@WyIted
You make some good points, but I think you’re overestimating how good of a system it is. It’s the best we have, but it’s still not really that good at all.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
You make some good points, but I think you’re overestimating how good of a system it is. It’s the best we have, but it’s still not really that good at all.
This is what retards say to cope with having a low IQ score. Don't believe their BS, it is really accurate, which is why it is a very good predictor of life outcome, what major you can be successful at and SAT scores. 
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
Also if you got a low IQ score, I don't want you feeling bad for it. You can make up for it by making me your life coach and doing what I say. If you can't be smart than just outsource your thinking to me
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,175
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@WyIted
I haven't actually taken one. Which one did you do?
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@WyIted
@Moozer325
I expect that most people lie about their IQ score.

Do you think that intelligence is genetically predetermined?

Or do you think that intelligence can be increased by home schooling?


Nonetheless, clever people can still do stupid things.

Like taking an army to Russia in the winter.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
I haven't actually taken one. Which one did you do?
They gave it to everybody when I was in school
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
I expect that most people lie about their IQ score.
Yes probably but I would think they do it like the would about height. Just add a few inches



Do you think that intelligence is genetically predetermined?
Yes, but a really bad home environment can limit IQ, bit if you are not starving to death, doing drugs or getting physical punches to your head, the impact is minimal


Or do you think that intelligence can be increased by home schooling?
No, but that intelligent kids can learn more at home


Nonetheless, clever people can still do stupid things.

Like taking an army to Russia in the winter.
They have more potential for stupidity I would say
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@WyIted
Great minds think similarly.

Have a nice day.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,547
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@zedvictor4
I expect that most people lie about their IQ score
My IQ is 500.

Okay, I lied. Its 400.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,547
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
I dont usually meassure people by IQ.

Its by the decisions they make in actual life situations, not decisions on some written test.

The first matters much more, and over 99% of people fail it.

Like, you can have high IQ, but if you fail at decisions in actual life, then it makes no difference.

Actual life is different from IQ tests due to its knowns and unknowns.

Smart retards wrongly assume that they can play with unknown and win, but they mostly lose.

Also, many of the smart retards lack knowledge needed to make their IQ actually useful.

You can be smart, but if you dont know anything, then you might as well go back to other retards.
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
The REAL question: Why do people keep using cheap online unreliable IQ tests as a fill in for one's actual IQ value which is more or less literally immeasurable with more accuracy than decades of dedicated psychological research?

If you say you "know your IQ", most likely, you don't, and because of that you fall relatively low on that scale. Don't ask me. I don't actually know my IQ.
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@WyIted
bit if you are not starving to death, doing drugs or getting physical punches to your head, the impact is minimal
I would argue consistent spanking and punishment treatment would also have a statistically significant effect. Also don't you dare bring up my country again.

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,501
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
I recall that American companies used to perform IQ tests on employees before making a decision whether to promote them or not. I'm not sure if they keep doing it, what I'm sure though is that IQ tests are very useful, it gives you an idea about the smartness of an employee.

However, I think IQ tests are much of a formal procedure in big companies to promote employees because when it comes to small business the employer doesn't need IQ tests to know how smart the employee is, he just needs to observe the employee's performance, the complexity in his language, his reaction to problems, and so on.

Maybe the OP means to say that IQ tests are not accurate at measuring people's IQ, which may be correct because there are several factors that condition the results. For example, if I didn't sleep well I might perform bad in the test, which is a reason why many people drink redbull or a similar beverage before doing something important. The SAT test is also a kind of IQ test, it's important to rule the dumbest students out.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,547
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Intelligence_06
I would argue consistent spanking and punishment treatment would also have a statistically significant effect.
I was spanked.

Thats why I dont feel responsible for my actions.

Nothing is ever my fault, basically.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Intelligence_06
你来这里总是谈论美国政治和美国。如果你认为你能控制我的言论,那你就滚蛋吧。
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@IlDiavolo
I recall that American companies used to perform IQ tests on employees before making a decision whether to promote them or not. I'm not sure if they keep doing it, what I'm sure though is that IQ tests are very useful, it gives you an idea about the smartness of an employee.
It is a big legal Grey area now thanks to a supreme court ruling in I believe 1969. So companies are not doing it to avoid lawsuits, but are using college as a substitute to screen for intelligence. It's an inferior method to screen for intelligence but the only one they feel comfortable with.

Companies that by their nature have to hire non college grads usually perform personality tests to screen for people stupid enough to answer the following question and those like it wrong.

Have you ever stolen an office supply no matter how small?

Is it okay to take home company property without asking permission, for example a pen or pencil?
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,501
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
It is a big legal Grey area now thanks to a supreme court ruling in I believe 1969. So companies are not doing it to avoid lawsuits, but are using college as a substitute to screen for intelligence. It's an inferior method to screen for intelligence but the only one they feel comfortable with.
But I was talking about promoting, not hiring. A friend of mine was promoted to chief among four employees, that was back in 2005. He went through a psycological test, an IQ test, a medical test and an interview.

Was it ilegal too? 
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@IlDiavolo
I recall that American companies used to perform IQ tests on employees before making a decision whether to promote them or not.
like "harrison bergeron" there is a "sweet-spot" for a proper "corporate-goon"

if they're "too smart" they'll ask too many questions and dismantle the system

but if they're "not smart enough" they'll make a lot of mistakes

i think the term for this "sweet-spot" is "mid-wits"

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
The thing that you have to understand is that IQ is not a perfect measure of intelligence.
also,

WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@IlDiavolo
I was unaware of what you meant. I just think it's a Grey area, not illegal
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,175
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@WyIted
So you are measuring your intelligence by a test that you took back in third grade. 

I feel like if you want to really know it you should take one again.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
I Q slightly declines as you age every year, but other than that it remains pretty stagnant 
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,175
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@WyIted
The point I was making was that the test gets more refined, and the average goes up so your score might be more accurate.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 5,414
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Moozer325
The point I was making was that the test gets more refined, and the average goes up so your score might be more accurate.
If an average person takes the test too often the score is artificially inflated by getting better at it. It doesn't improve intelligence. Also no the average does not go up because you have to get more right as a 40 year old than as a 12 year old to get the same score. It's not anIQ improvement because the age co tools make up for it
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 1,175
3
2
8
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
2
8
-->
@WyIted

It's measuring people who only take the test once, so you're argument is irrelevant.