Gee, Scoob, I wonder if screencap is relevant to pop music's effect on the brain? (link in comments)
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (25)
sorted by:
Now you're going "source". You want an example? The ASVAB is an IQ test, and people retake it and/or practice to get higher scores. Recruiters tell people do to this. Understanding how a test works, and memorizing question TYPES and how to solve them does indeed improve test scores, it's measurable, and it is statistically significant. Same goes for IQ adjacent tests, like the LSAT or GRE.
The big 5 personality traits affect leadership style, but we are talking about charisma; charm, wittiness, people skills, the ability to inspire people, etc. Rhetoric can be practiced by any sophist and improved, but charisma is partially a product of emotional intelligence, and your ability to inspire others ain't captured on IQ tests. Napoleon was a genius, so was Newton. But Newton had zero day game and thus stayed unmarried, while Napoleon let a generation to slaughter.
Yes, there are a hundred factors, a thousand factors, with athleticism. But underlying ALL athletic ability is a kinetic/spacial ability to put your body where it should be at the right time, and that ain't captured on IQ tests.
I also mentioned artistic ability. Michelangelo likely had a high IQ, but you can't take a high IQ individual and, given enough training, make a Michelangelo out of him. Nonsense to think you can.
Anyway, to your summation, I mostly agree. High intelligence people, as measured by IQ at least, have the ability to be a Renaissance man. But what you have to realize, is that IQ is just a poor, pretty sad, measure of intelligence given our limited understanding of our brain and how thought and conscienceness work. What general IQ doesn't capture, the theory of multiple intelligences at least TRIES to, which is formulate a way to measure intellectual strengths and weaknesses. Admittedly, it has problems as a theory, I don't discount that.
Back to my original comment. It's a hypothesis I have that Jews have higher than average verbal IQ based on three data points.
I could be wrong, it's just a hypothesis.
Yeah this is exactly what I'm talking about. Practically every single category here is testing your knowledge on a subject. This is not an IQ test, it doesn't produce an IQ score. It's a proxy test. You're not talking about IQ tests.
Newton could have been a neurotic introverted mess with no conscientiousness, that's basically what you said but captured with the Big 5. Those personality traits have been heavily studied, they play a big role in why men tend to be leaders more often than women. Saying that it's just a "style" just throws that entire body of research to the side. Try being an agreeable leader that is not assertive, it's not possible. I think you're using "emotional intelligence" as Big 5 traits associated with good leadership. Being an assertive, extroverted person, who has no neurotic thoughts doesn't have to do with intelligence. If you want to talk about game, that's what you need.
Yeah and just like those thousands of factors, this could be only 1% of the equation. Perhaps experience & knowledge is a lot more critical. Discussing with a million variables particularly when it comes to athletics is pointless. We can find a better analogy with your Michelangelo comment.
Right, nobody can be exactly someone else. He had his own life experiences and memories. Extremely high IQ individuals are at an exponential advantage when it comes to reaching that level. It seems we agree on this fully.
The problem is that "multiple intelligences" claims that this is innate. If you count training & knowledge you're just back to IQ being the only innate intelligence. That's the crux of the inbreeding argument. If you agree with this, perhaps we are using different words to describe the same thing.
Have you taken the ASVAB? It's an IQ test, the AO sections in particular, which is pictures of shapes that you have to mentally imagine and rotate and such so they can test your spatial reasoning. Moreover, you're also making the mistake of thinking that whatever IQ test you've taken is the same as IQ tests since they were developed in the early 20th Century. They've changed, a lot. Early tests showed that most people were retarded, which was just patently stupid (ironically)
As for athletic ability, it COULD be 1%, but long, long experience tells us it's not. I'm guessing you're not a competitive athlete, and certainly not one that has competed at the higher levels. Boxing is called the "sweet science" for a reason, because while there are skills/training/practice involved, so much of it is impossible to impart and is intuitive (reading your opponent, knowing distance, when to strike and with what, etc.). There is a imperceptible quality about athletic genius that some people are born with that is not measured in tests but trophies and medals.
As for extremely high IQ individuals, history and experience tells us that these people tend to not amount to much more than the average person. As Thomas Edison said, it's 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. IQ is nothing but a proxy measurement for a thing we don't even fully understand, for example, what is a "thought"? It's more than a bio-chemical process in your brain, but we aren't very good at measuring people having better/quicker thoughts than other people when we can't quantify "thought" itself very well.
With all due respect, this has been very interesting, but it is taking up to much of my time, this is especially the case when I am very specific and you to push the goalposts or repeat the same thing said another way. I acknowledge the weakness of multiple intelligence theory, but it at least accounts for what we see in life, that is things like idiot savants, charismatic losers, genius in mom's basement, and most people being average.
I look forward to your reply, thanks.
Re: tests changing, athletics, high IQ and perspiration, that's how I see it as well. High IQ autistic neckbeards on Reddit aren't a pinnacle of humanity, they're a drain.
For your test, no I haven't taken it, and Assembling Objects and Paragraph Comprehension indeed sound like something you would get on an IQ test. That's one quarter of the test, the other 75% is obviously not IQ based, e.g. "Automotive and Shop Information" or "Word Knowledge". It's a proxy. I don't understand why this is controversial to you. This portion is possible to study for.
Ashkenazi Jews make up a large portion of lawyer, banking, and music industry demographics because top schools are incredibly nepotistic towards Jewish applicants. There's no evidence for "verbal intelligence" that they are born with. When they see Goldberg on the application it gets a green check. Innate Multiple Intelligence is one of the many lies that we are told to make ourselves feel better about discrepancies.