I'm not denying intelligence isn't real BUT I.Q. tests are circular AF, even the professional WAIS-IV ones.Ofc I'm gonna do good on them if I read literature in my free time and did a MsC in applied mathematics.How do they get around this problem?
>>18419784>problemIq tests measure something, and that thing is correlated with a lot of life outcomes and your ability to perform a lot of tasks. If you don’t like calling it IQ, call it something else. “G”. Whatever, it’s like renaming niggers, everyone will pick up instantly on what you are talking about.
>>18419784There are Culture Fair IQ tests
The problem with IQ tests is this: you do better on IQ tests the second time around, even with the questions changed. You'll do much better if you do the second test shortly afterward, but the effect is also significant if you once did an IQ test years ago. This is because your mind is now primed and trained to solve such problems.People who partake in modern society and received a proper education, and especially those who actually use their education in daily life, are latently primed to excel at such tests, at the very least in comparison to some tribesman or unschooled urchin who has literally never seen an exam sheet."Culture Fair" IQ tests can only go so far, if you went back in time and tried to administer them to Han dynasty court officials they'd still be baffled and fumble them.
>>18419855So you think modern education would help people excell at these iq tests. But some random Chinese court official, who probably studied way more than the average person today, would fail them? I think he would ace them.
>>18419855If there were some population that excelled in cognitively demanding domains but did poorly on IQ tests, we'd chuck out the IQ tests.
>>18419860>But some random Chinese court official, who probably studied way more than the average person today, would fail them? I think he would ace them.Maybe a Song or Ming dynasty one if even that (Qing would be modern/industrialized enough to not have much trouble), but far back in the Han era, information and problems were presented so differently from the Western standard you'd have trouble parsing them, just like they'd have trouble parsing modern documents (even beyond any language barrier naturally)>>18419869Indeed. And yet there are populations that created and maintained flourishing and complex pre-modern civilizations, that are also clearly capable of operating in and maintaining modern society, and yet score as low as in the fucking 50s on IQ tests. If some dude can work as a car mechanic in the 21st century, and he is legally mentally retarded according to IQ tests, you have a problem.Mind you, they're still useful for gauging intelligence within a population.
>>18419839That include XOR gates I got taught in my technical highschool
>>18419882>car mechanicHe would do good at the physical block arrangement test which is a test included in WAIS
>>18419928He ought to, yes, if the test actually measured his perceptual reasoning or whatever, and not just his familiarity with tests. Would he?
>>18419882There are no mechanics sporting a “50” iq.
>>18419939Except, apparently, in pretty much the entire third world.It seems you do not have the mental capacity to comprehend that IQ tests are calibrated on a specific population, and that the distribution in your graph is only valid in Western culture (or even more specifically North America I suspect.) It probably wouldn't even apply in Greece or Japan.
>>18419950The average third worlder cannot do mechanical work, they live an entirely bovine existence. The native mechanics they do produce are extremely high performing brownoids.
>>18419954>The average third worlder cannot do mechanical work, they live an entirely bovine existence.You appear to be describing your brain-rotted indolent zoomers, and not the people who actually have to do mechanical work or repair their own cars and equipments if they don't want to starve.>The native mechanics they do produce are extremely high performing brownoids.An interesting hypothesis. Then, who do they have working as the 4/5ths of the list that's more cognitively demanding than "Mechanics, auto"?
>>18419961They don’t exist in browntopia, or only in extremely small numbers, or are done by foreigners. Like 80% of browns live literally like animals and they have a shitter version of a white society among the top 20%
>>18419784Brainlet cope DNR
>>18419784>I'm not denying intelligence isn't realAnon...
>>18419984I have to pull my ESL card here, one negation too many.
>>18419938I mean there is circularity, if you tinker with geometric parts for your job then get the same thing at the clinical test you will likely do very well. That was my point.
>>18420036Understandable, sorry. As a ETL I empathize. What language is that?
>>18419784>Ofc I'm gonna do good on them if I read literature in my free time and did a MsC in applied mathematics.Well those are things an intelligent person would do so
>>18419784>howbecause if you can do that you really are smart
>>18419784>How do they get around this problem?They don't, really. IQ tests are by far the closest approximation we have to a true measurement of intelligence, but they're still very far off.Better than nothing is all they are. Which, mind you, is still quite the result considering nothing is inherently less misleading than something.
>>18419784They're not circular because there's an external criteria applied to make the definition relevant.Circularity would be if you defined IQ as intelligence and intelligence as IQ, and then said that it measured it with no regards to what intelligence actually IS. HOWEVER, intelligence has a definition ("the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills") and thus a criteria to operate from, and by which we can say that an IQ test more or less represents intelligence.>>18419964lmfao do people really believe this ?
>>18420488Do I have to post webms of Indian “manufacturing”?
>>18419784To me IQ is a value used to set a floor and filter retards.High IQ individuals wont be the genius people think they are but low IQ people are definitely idiots who shouldn't be trusted with complex tasks and IQ scores are most useful in filtering these people.
>>18419954>>18419964>there are no engineers or mechanics whatsoever on the third worldIf you believe this you're actually retarded. I know you'll follow up with an equally retarded retort like, "den why dey so poor".
It's always been funny to me how /pol/ thinks psychology is a Jewish liberal arts discipline for women up until intelligence quotients are involved at which point it is unquestionably no less of a hard science than physics.
>>18420841Your identifying people that have a problem with ego, they exist regardless of their place on the political spectrum.
>>18419784It's a convoluted topic.For instance IQ tests can in practical situation be used to diagnose dyslexia - I forgot the exact details but if some particular subtests land average deviation(or maybe two?) below the average this is a basis for diagnosing it.So in practice if a kid is suspected of having it and gets top scores from all other subtests but the particular ones associated with dyslexia are merely above average, he's dyslexic. If they're all equally bad then he's just stupid even though he'll still have the learning issues typical for dyslexics.Which btw. means that mainstream psychology, in real world situations agrees with Spearman's hypothesis, making the whole debate around IQ where "experts" will deny it even existing all while contributing money to psychological associations, who set that standard, a complete farce.This however explains the topic in itself. IQ tests were, first and foremost diagnostic tools. Then being self-referential is irrelevant when they're being used to decide whether a conscripted man should be moved to officer school(the US did thad during WW1 because building an army from scratch is difficult), whether someone should be given up on and just put on gibs and left to rot, or whether some kid has problems with spelling words correctly because he's an idiot or because of some dysfunction. They're not meant to be a comparative tools, they are just adapted to it, and the best way to get sort of reasonable information from them is to use g-fsctor instead of raw scores.
>>18419784what does a man from picrel has to do with the topic? I feel like it's a good thing that I don't get the reference and it makes me a better person
>>18420534Yes
>>18419784>I'm not denying intelligence isn't real>I'm not denying>isn't realbut I deny that yours is.
