In reference to In ancient Greece, was an idiot a non-politician? it was mentioned that “idiot” was once technically defined as someone whose IQ is in the range of 0 to 25.
Is it really possible to have an IQ less than 25? How often does this happen? Is it at the point that someone is so mentally disabled that they can’t take a test?
Good question. At first, I thought to get such a low score meant either that the person had just doodled on the paper - incapable of really taking the test - or made a great effort to **answer every question wrong ** (against statistics, which indicate some answers would have to be right by chance).
But then, I remembered that the early IQ tests were extremly language- and culture specific - more lists of questions “What is X?” (I remember being stumped when reading a question asking which things belonged together, listing a briefcase and a gasometer, because I had no idea what a gasometer was.) So I guess it would be easier to score badly on an old test not because you were dumb, but because you lacked the specific knowledge.
These days, IQ tests are constructed so that the average score is 100 (it shifts a bit, which leads to a re-norming, but 100 is the average) with a standard deviation of 15. This means that roughly 68% of the population scores in the range from 85-115; about 27% score either 70-85 or 115-130; less than 5% score 55-70 or 130-145; and .26% score either below 55 or above 145. Please don’t nitpick me about rounding and slightly-overlapping ranges; I’m trying to give a general context here. A smiley indicates my sincerity and tone: 
Without knowing which test you’re referring to, I can’t say what the range was or how scores were obtained and interpreted. However, here’s a page with contemporary and historical classifications by IQ range. 69 and below is called “Extremely low” and represents only 2.2 percent of the theoretical population. In DSM-IV terminology, that range is further divided into 4 categories of mental retardation, with scores under 20 described as “Profound.” The range that schools call “mild and moderate mental retardation” runs from 35-70. Note however that DSM has other criteria beyond the obtained IQ score.
The examiner should (note that I don’t say “the examiner always…”) account for the examinee’s linguistic and cultural factors in the test report.
FTR, this refers to a Staff Report by Fierra, not an answer by Cecil…
My apologies. I forgot that section even existed :-[ (embarassed smily… where is it??). It’s so small, why don’t we just combine it with Comments on Cecil’s Columns?
People have asked that in the past, and the answer has been that Cecil wants his own distinct forum to focus on his own questions so he can work more efficiently. He does read his own forum, even if he doesn’t comment on it. And besides, he’s the boss - if he wants a gay Teletubbies fanfic forum, you can rest assured that soon people will be recasting Macbeth and posting their scripts…
According to Wikipedia, it was Henry Goddard who proposed in 1910 a classification system for those with below normal IQ’s. This is the scale mentioned in the staff report.
Off to the Comments on Staff Reports forum.
bibliophage
moderator CCC
This staff report regarding the origin of the term “idiot” sheds new light on a political cartoon I spotted shortly after one of the last two presidential elections.
The cartoon depicted a senior citizen couple walking together. The husband was wearing a T-shirt that read, “Don’t blame me! I didn’t vote!”. The wife wore a T-shirt that read, “<-- I’m with Stupid.”
I wonder if the cartoonist was aware of the idiot - non-political-participant connection when he came up with that.