Man arrested for owning the wrong book

Man arrested for owning the wrong book

it should never be illegal to own a book, even if that book is controversial.  

A person with an IQ of 100, should have less freedom than one with a IQ of 180,

thus establishing that we need never mistake Wylted's philosophy as a reflection of American values.

I still say that gathering information for terrorists should be legal. No action should be taken until you do a crime. 

Participate in planning = should be clear legally.

Carry out plans= should be illegal.

This makes it easier for high IQ people to reach their objectives, and we as a society want high IQ individuals such as those termed "master minds " to be uninhibited when pursuing their goals. 

A person with an IQ of 100, should have less freedom than one with a IQ of 180, the suggested changes to the laws I make above would help high IQ individuals have more influence over society.  

This is the most fun opinion anyone's ever had on here. Wylted, you really are some sort of genius. 

Supporters of IQ testing have been quick to point to correlations between IQ and job performance as evidence of test validity. A closer look at the data and results, however, suggests a rather murkier picture. Here we have acknowledged the methodological advances in meta-analyses from which such evidence has been drawn, while drawing attention to the problems surrounding them in this particular area. We conclude with a summary of the main points:

1. Much in developmental theory, and psychology in general, depends upon the validity of IQ tests.
   
2. In the absence of agreed construct validity this has weighed heavily on indirect validity using correlations with criterion outcomes among which job performance has a special status.
   
3. Hundreds of studies prior to the 1970s reported low and/or inconsistent correlations between IQ and job performance.
   
4. These correlations have been approximately doubled using corrections for supposed errors in primary results and combining them in meta-analyses. Such corrections have many strengths, theoretically, but are compromised in these cases by the often uncertain quality of the primary studies.
   
5. The corrections to sampling errors, measurement errors, and to range restriction have required making a number of assumptions that may not be valid and have created a number of persistently contentious issues.
   
6. The claim that the IQ-job performance correlation increases with job complexity is not born out in more recent studies.
   
7. A range of other—including noncognitive—factors could explain a correlation between IQ and job performance, and even constitute part or all of the enigmatic “general factor.”
   
8. There remains great uncertainty about the interpretation of IQ-job performance correlations and great caution needs to be exercised in using them as a basis for the validity of IQ tests and associated concepts.
   

As others have pointed out, statistical corrections are no magical compensation for weak data and that it is risky to reach conclusions about test validities from those currently available (Oswald & McCloy, 2003; Russell & Gilliland, 1995). The only solution is properly conducted primary studies, with larger representative samples, better measures, and so on. Until they are available, investigators should be extremely cautious about disseminating conclusions about IQ test validities, from correlations between IQ and job performance.

We don't even know if IQ tests can accurately predict job success much less if they're leaders. 

pirate radio stations, bomb making and manufacturing drugs.

A person with an IQ of 100, should have less freedom than one with a IQ of 180, the suggested changes to the laws I make above would help high IQ individuals have more influence over society. 

I still say that gathering information for terrorists should be legal. No action should be taken until you do a crime. 

However, you probably should give them all the same basic human rights. If the 180 IQ man made more out of the same things given because he is smarter, that is his responsibility for being smart.

"On the basis of the evidence reviewed here, I think it is fair to conclude that the traditional psychometric literature on cognitive ability—popularly resurrected in The Bell Curve—vastly overstates the case for the role of IQ in the stratification process. On the other hand, to say that the case has been overstated—even that it has been overstated with great lapses of scholarship and with racist overtones—does not say that there is no place for cognitive ability in our understanding of the stratification process. Both as defense against excessive claims on both sides of the “IQ debate” and in pursuing the scientific enterprise, we ought to seek and produce new evidence of the role of cognitive abilities in social stratification" (pg. 57)