Realizing IQ... In-Utero...

OK. I guess the topic says it all. Some German Scientist has discovered a way to determine a babies IQ way early into its developement. Ignoring all the future developments this technology opens doors too, it’s pretty amazing haw far weve come as a species isnt it? Im not exactly sure where I stand on this soon to be issue. Ive been going back and forth all day on it. Without this taking a turn to an abortion issue, let just discuss the logistics of our future if less intelagent children were terminated before thier birth. If all humans had an IQ between 120 and 150+, what kind of world would we live in. Please spare me the flames, but my first respone was that it would be very possitive. Then I ask myself, who would pick up our trash, who would fix our toilets and who would mow the lawns of our parks and keep our schools clean? And already I realize ive made a rash generalization that IQ is relative to ones aspirations in life. I know personally this is not the case because despite my high IQ, I am not especially career driven and have not set high goals for myself. Then it occurs to me that with this kind of intelagence it is very likely that we may not have garbage to be picked up in this super-smart future. Think of all the inventions and great inovations that would lie ahead with a popuation full of Einstiens. And assuming with a gene pool full of parents with high IQ’s, the bar for intellagance would only increase in height. Children would only get smarter and smarter as generations continue. I fully believe evolution has brought us to breaking point, and we have the power to interviene with this natural process. We know too much about DNA, our chemical make-up and mutations at this point. Natural evolution it too slow a process, and its it tough to believe that we will not cause ourselves to progress faster than “natures plan”. I believe man’s evolution in our hands at this point. It is inconceivable to me what new frontiers lie ahead for us. I really wish I was born 200 years from today… TV, Microwaves and computers are great and thats quite a bit I suppose for a small chunk of history but you all know we will never slow down and there are great things to come that we can not even dream up at this point.
Anyway, just a little perspective into our not-to-distant future.

Thoughts…?

Can’t hear you, my Urban Legend Alarm is beeping too loud.

Um, I don’t suppose you’ve got a cite for the “some German scientist” part, so I can shut the alarm off? Thanks.

I don’t have a cite, but I recall reading a few years back that people of average intelligence were more likely to be successful, in terms of careers and contributions to society, than people of above average intelligence. Why this was so wasn’t exactly clear, but without knowing why, it seems overly optimistic to expect a huge improvement in society to be caused by increasing IQ.
I wish I could find a cite for that study. It makes a great excuse for all us underachieving high IQ’ers. :smiley:

Since when is intelligence considered immutable and determined before birth?

(I’m not even gonna go into the absurdity of thinking that intelligence can be quantified with a single numerical measure. Please. Restrain me.)

Let’s nail our footsies to the floor.

One answer URBAN LEGEND: Insofar as the biomechanical aspects of intelligence are yet to be understood, and that indeed the genetics of intelligence is as of yet not understood, and further that post natal nutrition, environment etc. can and do play huge roles in the development of intelligence (even in a physical sense in terms of brain development) the premise is a crock.

Actually I think that would make for a better GD than the OP. Is intelligence immutable and determined before birth? Given a controlled environment throughout life, is it a given that a person will end up with an “IQ” that is theoretically determinable before birth by his/her genes? Of course some objective way of measuring intelligence would have to be invented, or we could come up with some arbitrary measure, such as how long does it take said person to multiply two large numbers in his/her head or maybe measure the person’s writing ability or something.

Sorry for the long sentences.

PeeQueue

This is trivially negatable, as any number of external influences can cause sharp drops in measured IQ (lead poisoning, big rocks to the head, exposure to Paully Shore, etc.)

It is perhaps interesting to consider whether measurable IQ values have an immutable maximimum in each individual, and that that maximum limit is determined before birth.

Is this an extension of the work on mice?
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/99/c/0901.htm#get smarter

Precisely, and apparently non-stimulating environments have detrimental phsysiological impacts on early brain development. I.e. lock a genetically high-potential kid in a box for the early years of his life and you create an idiot.

I am sure there is some kind of immutable maximum for each individual, but the real problem is finding a non-subjective definition of intelligence. IQ is just not it. I would rather forcefully argue that until the biomechanics of brain function are understood more fully that we can not begin to seperate cultural expectations from actual physical functionality of the brain (which has to be imho the real question of ‘inherent’ intelligence). This is probably something attainable in the relatively near future.

Still, as I think about it, considering the variability in expression of traits, including post natal development (e.g. deprived of some key vitamins etc.) I think that precise definition is probably impossible. Perhaps a rough estimate.

I think that’s an urban legend. How the hell could you test abstract reasoning and problemsolving in utero?

I take issue with the idea that if two parents of high IQ have a baby that the child will have a higher IQ. It doesn’t work like that. Silverman has done a study of parents of gifted kids and she found that parents and their children generally test within 10 IQ points of each other. That’s either side of the child’s IQ score though. And once you reach the extremes of IQ, that is not true. Siblings tend to be within 10 IQ points of each other but not the parents.

A gene was found that does seem to be linked to intelligence (of the sort measurable by IQ testing) but nurture most assuredly plays a role.

Tourbot

That study is around. Given time, I could find it ;). It refers to people of IQ 180 and above. Leta Hollingsworth in her book Children of IQ 180 and above (snappy title eh?) comments that children of this level of IQ have one of the hardest jobs of adjustment to society imaginable. There do seem to be a higher incidence of neurological disorders with profoundly gifted kids, such as ADHD, Tourettes, dyslexia, and autism.

Up to IQ of 150 appears to be socially optimal.

I believe that IQ tests do test a particular type of intelligence which is worth testing for some kids. These kids tend to be different to ‘normal’ kids in similar ways.

Uhhh, no? 100 is average…if everyone had 150 IQ, then 150 = 100. Kinda like scoring above 1600 on SATs.

whether or not it is an urban legend, it is a useful thought experiment at least in a time of genetic engineering, abortions, and early disease detection. I think we start up a [new] gattacca post.

So anyway, for the OP, I think desire for new things is what drives men to do the things they do (and women too, sigh so PC) not intelligence. While you may need to have mild intelligence to do a task, I do not think that geniuses are perfect (Cecil excluded, of course!). I think what it takes is a firm grasp of reality, a background in some field (not necessarily college folks), and a desire to do new stuff.

$.02

Just a note here on the IQ’s, who the hell has an IQ of 150? This is 3.333… standard deviations from 100. This is about 4.29E-4 of the whole population. There should be about 128,000 of these people in the whole United States. At an average high-school of about 2500, this is about one student. If people with exceedingly high IQ’s tend to have problems adjusting, then the “point of social and IQ test intelligence” should be a lot lower. 135-40, maybe?

On the OP: We cannot yet measure intelligence outside of the womb, even after people have actually gone through all of the enviromental factors that affect intellignece. This has to be pure UL, if we cannot even measure intelligence, how can we predict it.

High Intelligence Society: Back in the middle ages, people were probably considerably less intelligent than they are today, even upper classes. As long as there is a spread in intelligence, there will always be people on the sour side of the bell curve. Yeah, it sucks. If a robot cannot yet do it, they will probably be stuck cleaning toilets.

Unreasonable personal attack on the OP:
I don’t particularly like either you or your OP’s, Metro. The vast amjority are patronizing and you seem to hold most other human beings in low esteem. From your first, calling all religion “silliness” to the current one in which you cannot but help mention your own “high IQ.” In my frank opinion, you have not demonstrated an overwhelming level of intelligence yourself. Addmittedly, you could still be a genius and never happened to come upon the background knowledge of how IQ scores are assigned, but you might consider not making errors beyond the OP’s question (a matter of opinion) before knocking other people.

Yeah, that rant probably belonged back on that religion thread.

You just annoy me more than a little.

Thanks, Elliot

threemae where exactly do you get that line of reasoning?

in a school of 1000 there should be 33 students that have 150+ IQ

I remember when I got a 157 IQ there were like 20 other people at my school who also got that. Now my last IQ test was 127(though it might be because I had a cold one of the days and scored average shudder on math) so I dont really think IQs mean anything at all.

“How the hell could you test abstract reasoning and problemsolving in utero?”

Well if the brain size stays in the same ratio you could probably pinpoint the part of the brain that controls abstract reasoning and problem solving.

Asmodean, brain size does not directly indicate intelligence, although there is some evidence for a slight correlation between larger brain size and higher intelligence. However, it’s not as if retarded people have tiny brains, average people have average brains and genuises have giant brains; measuring the size of the brain (or any part of the brain) in utero would not tell you anything really useful about that person’s intelligence (though it would alert you to anencephilitic infants and any other abnormal brain development, I suppose). I daresay my severely-retarded cousin has approximately the same size of the “abstract reasoning” part of the brain as I do; it just doesn’t work as well as it could.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Gaudere *
**Asmodean, brain size does not directly indicate intelligence, although there is some evidence for a slight correlation between larger brain size and higher intelligence. **

Evidence both pro and con, Gaudere.
Con:
Sex differences in human brain size and the general meaning of differences in brain size.
Can J Psychol. 1991 Dec;45(4):507-22.

Race and brain weight: a note on J.P. Rushton’s conclusions.
Psychol Rep. 1990 Feb;66(1):337-8.

Pro:
Brain size and intelligence in man: a correction to Peters.
Can J Exp Psychol. 1993 Dec;47(4):748-50; 751-6.

Race, brain size, and intelligence: another reply to Cernovsky.
Psychol Rep. 1991 Apr;68(2):500-2.

This correlation, incidentally, has been used to argue that men are smarter than women - since they tend to be larger, have larger heads, and correspondingly larger brains.

So that’s an actively raging debate in the psychological/psychiatric community and the jury’s still out.

For further discussion, see:
Brain size, head size, and intelligence quotient in monozygotic twins.
Neurology. 1998 May;50(5):1246-52.

Overall levels of brain activity,as measured by functional MRIs (fMRI), and PET scans, do seem to correlate to intelligence, as measured on standardized IQ tests. However, there is an awful lot of debate on this issue. If you’re interested in some of it, go look at:

Correlating EEG and IQ: a new look at an old problem using computerized EEG parameters. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1983 May;55(5):493-504.

Spontaneous EEG correlates of intellectual functioning in talented and handicapped adolescents. Percept Mot Skills. 1982 Jun;54(3):751-62.

Movement-related potentials during development: a replication and extension of relationships to age, motor control, mental status and IQ.
Int J Neurosci. 1984 Oct;24(2):81-96.

Differences in resting EEG related to ability.
Brain Topogr. 2000 Spring;12(3):229-40.

Is that enough cites for the moment, folks?
A lot of this stuff got covered in the more popular literature in “The Bell Curve”, I understand, although I personally have not read that.

A psychometrics professor of mine once observed ‘your score on an IQ test indicates how well you score on IQ tests’. And that’s just about all it measures. Although for decades psychometricians have been trying to develop a measure of ‘intelligence’ that is independent of cultural background, personal history, gender, etc. they will admit that they have not entirely succeeded. The standardized IQ tests that are routinely given in the United States are biased. Middle-class white boys do better on them than children from ethnic or economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Does this mean that middle-class white children are smarter than other kids? No.

Well, yeah, although a maternal AFP blood test will do the same thing.

Probably yes, although if we put you both into an fMRI machine we would unquestionably see differences.

Okay, I’m done for the moment.

Oh, and btw, if you’re going to boast about your high IQ in the OP of a thread of this sort, Metropochris, I’d advise running a spellchecker on your post. Consistently misspelling ‘intelligence’ does not speak highly of your own.

Too bad you don’t remember, or never learned, your elementary statistics. 3.333 standard deviations on a normal curve do not correspond to a tail of 3.333% of the population.

If so, then you either went to a very large school or the testing procedure was flawed or your school attracted an extremely high concentration of brilliant IQ test takers.

Since I do remember my elementary statistics I know which of those options I consider most likely.

Felice
I believe even those studies which purport to show a correlation between brain size and intelligence are careful to specify that they are dealing with population tendencies, not boundaries on an individual’s capacity. As such, they would seem useless in the type of individual prognostication discussed in the OP.

I am aware of that. That’s why I said “there is some evidence for a slight correlation.” :wink: I was also aware of the evidence against it. In my consideration, I’m leaning towards accepting the validity of a slight statistical scoring advantage in IQ tests (which we all know are certainly flawless methods for determining “intelligence” :rolleyes: ) for larger brains, but it would by no means be useful for determining “intelligence” in utero in any specific case.

The problem with this measurement (if we look back to the question in the OP) is that the fetus must, I believe, have developed actual thought patterns for such MRIs and PET scans to be even vaguely useful measures of intelligence–and even an ardent pro-choicer such as myself would be extraordinarily reluctant to condone abortion once a fetus is apparently “thinking” simply because s/he might not be genius-level. So even if it was a viable method for measuring intelligence in utero, the information would likely not be useful in “weeding out” the less bright.

Oh, you’re absolutely right. I find the concept of determining IQ (let alone intelligence) in utero rediculous on the face of it. ‘Some German Scientists’ sounds like an urban legend if ever I’ve heard one. I’m trying to think of how you could measure fetal brain activity, and I’m not coming up with any reliable techniques that would not be harmful or fatal to the fetus in question. (Heck, the validity of fMRI is still the subject of considerable debate , and that’s on adult brains!)
And as you say, even if if were possible to measure brain activity, how you could conclude intelligence in that immature a life form boggles the mind. The question of what defines ‘intelligence’ is rather interesting, though.

There are methods currently used to measure fetal brain activity; for example http://www.ctf.com/Publicity/CP.html , although this is really a pretty new science. Currently, I don’t think anyone’s done enough research to even have a solid handle on what range of activity is indicative of “normal” for fetal brains, and I’ve never seen any studies correlating fetal readings with later intelligence. I don’t know how good of a job the fetal MEG does anyhow; I have seen fMGI used in in utero fetal brain activity research studies, despite the article I linked to saying it was “too risky”.