The masturbatory "we're smart" threads

The BBQ Pit
201

What about a computer programmer who can’t write a coherent email?

Look, you don’t have to be a genius to write some HTML. A lot of the things you describe are learned skills. I mean I wouldn’t consider myself a dummy because I don’t know how to operate an industrial lathe.

I agree that test scores and academic and professional achievements don’t tell the whole story, but sometimes they are a pretty good indicator. One of my buddies who’s a trader introduced us to one of his analysts and the guy was literally a rocket scientist and a brain surgeon (degrees in aerospace engineering and an MD). Now he’s designing models using math that’s far above anything I
learned in engineering school. Now I’m pretty smart, but I simply don’t have the mental horsepower or work ethic to mirror his acomplishments. His brain was clearly operating on a whole other level.

On the other hand, I’ve worked with people I’m sure are complete morons. They somehow got into a position above their abilities and they’re fine as long as they can bullshit. As soon as they are forced to actually “do” something, they freeze up and hope you either forget you asked them or ask someone else. And pretty much they can get away with it for a year or so after which point they find some other sucker to hire them.
I think for some reason we like to think all intellectual goals are achievable as long as you put in the effort. I don’t believe that any more than I believe I ever had any chance whatsoever of being an NBA point guard.

202

An interesting interpretation of King of Soup’s comments. It’s my guess that it wasn’t necessarily King of Soup’s interpretation, but I’ll let him speak for himself about that.

But I’m VERY confused by your comments. My question to King of Soup was, who decides whether one should have to use their mental abilities for the good of the community.

Now you’ve claimed that it’s a moral obligation to do so but still haven’t answered who decides. You’ve now told me who doesn’t decide. Apparently the government doesn’t decide. And so far, you’re the only one claiming the moral imperative. So do you decide?

Let me make it clear that I wasn’t asking if there’s someone out there that thinks it’s a good idea to use one’s mental abilities for the good of the community. After all, since the Parable of the Talents is in the Bible, I’d expect a good many people to agree with the statement.
But there are moral imperatives in the Bible regarding, say homosexuals, that not all people agree with. So claiming that one agrees with the moral imperative doesn’t mean that all people will. I was just noting that when one makes a moral imperative like that, one should take into account who gets to decide since there are people who will disagree.

But then you further muddied the water by saying that the person gets to trump society’s obligation by saying that they don’t love using that ability, then they don’t have to use it. So it’s a moral imperative to use your mental abilities for the good of the community unless you choose not to, then it’s not? That’s not much of a moral imperative at all.

203

Where? Quote the post.

204

Well, the individual in question decides. I agree with him, that’s all. I just wanted to make it clear that while I agree with him, I don’t propose forcing people to do what I feel is morally right. (I don’t think he does, either. It’s just the tone of your response to him seemed to imply that’s where you thought he was going with it.) Or maybe you were trying to say that whether one uses one’s mental abilities is an entirely subjective thing, which may be true. I don’t know. I think people should contribute to the world around them. I have more respect for people who do. Maybe I wouldn’t call it a moral obligation, I’m just fucking sick of people being self-centered assholes to one another and wish more people would think like he does.

205

My pretty little head is all in a whirl here.

I was told I had taken an IQ test back in elementary school. (maybe it was the Stanford-Binet?–that name rings a distant bell). This was in either 4th, 5th or 6th grade (I can tell you which classroom it was in the building, but not which grade it was. I can’t seem to dredge up the memory of which teacher administered it).

But here is where it gets interesting. The teacher, once the results were in, told us that she could not tell us our scores, but that she had to leave the classroom for a few minutes (this was back in the late 60s-early 70s when teachers could and did leave classrooms for whole minutes at a time) and that the scores were on her desk.

Of course, Tommy K., David T. and a few others went up to her desk as soon as she left the room and peaked. I was shy, scared of my own shadow and afraid of authority. Tommy K came to my desk and said that he knew that the teacher wanted us to know our scores, she just was getting around the “don’t tell” part, so I went up to look.

Just to get this out of the way, my score was 126. I thought I was dumb, because Tommy K’s was 145. (we were in the same reading group all through elementary. I had a huge crush on him for years. Turns out he was gay and is most likely dead now from the 80s AIDS epidemic. :frowning: Sorry, I’m digressing). I still don’t consider myself Dope smart, but perhaps I am only intimidated by the snark here? Sorry, another digression…

Now, I never went into a room and had hours long testing with strange adults in my life (not alone, anyway). OK, I have never had my IQ truly tested. So, what was this score? An approximation? An equivalency? I’m not being falsely modest here–I’m not all that smart in many areas. My math skills would lead some of you to tear your hair out, after you stop wetting yourself from laughter. I don’t consider myself all that logical–I hate problems like if Tim wears only green hats and Debbie is gay, what color hat does Frieda like if she is having Tim’s baby?

Actually I’m at a point in my life where I have two warring factions in my head: complete despair at doing anything with my life,* ever*, and an apathy so wide and deep it cannot be crossed. But this thread piqued my interest, so I have a question for all the IQ experts out there:
What good does it do 1. to know your IQ and 1. what application does it have? I see no point in the damned test at all, unless it can be applied in some practical way. And why do equivalencies with other tests if they are not accurate? IOW, what’s if for?

As for the premise that intelligence should be used for good–the jerk within me asks, why? If one is athletic, does that mean one must play sports? If gifted in music, be a musician? I have to go libertarian here and say that intelligence should be used to ensure the individual’s wellbeing and happiness first, then others, if desired. Sure, it’d be nice and that person would be well regarded, but it is not a requirement of life that you used your intelligence to help the world. I agree with you, Olive4, in theory, but…(there was a time when I did think that with great privilege came great responsibility. Now I’m not so sure).

206

I’d like to see someone come in here and say “oh, my IQ was tested, for some strange reason, and it was 98”. It’ll never happen, tho. I don’t think we’ll ever see a self-claimed IQ below 118 or so.

207

Orange of course. :smiley:

I understand what you’re saying, IQ really doesn’t mean all that much. It may indicate an aptitude for certain things but that is really only useful in an academic setting. It sounds good to be able to announce a high IQ but in the end it’s just another random fact. Everyone is good at different things and for some people that’s taking IQ tests.

208

zuma: Perhaps because children who are of average intelligence usually aren’t IQ-tested at all? With the girl that I mentioned earlier in the thread, she was pulled out of class and formally tested, presumably because the teachers had figured out that she was a bit ahead of her peers (like I said, she was a pretty bright kid as far as I can remember). The rest of us average-type kids were never tested, because I suppose it would’ve been expensive and time-consuming to do properly, and pointless because nobody was really worrying about what to do with us; we were all doing fine with the standard curriculum. I don’t know if it might be different in other countries but here I think the tests are only carried out at all if there’s some reason to think the kid is either significantly above or below the average. (Of course, it’s possible someone might have been wrongly perceived as gifted and turned out to be dead-on average when tested, but that would probably be unusual in itself.)

209

Oh, my IQ was tested, and for some strange reason, it was 98.

I say “strange” because for every question I wrote “FART!!” as an answer, and my “signature” was a thumbprint of own feces. (To this day, it remains my personal best.)

210

I’ll answer your question: Yes. :smack: God take pity on the next person to use it in correct context on the SDMB.

211

Eleanor, I’m going to jump to the middle of your post and answer these questions:

IMO, the answers are 1. None, and 2. None. As far as why they do equivilencies, I think it’s because people don’t really understand the limitations of IQ tests, and they get seduced by easiness of having a number to compare one person to another…it’s such a nice, linear scale, isn’t it?

I can’t imagine how they came up with the numbers in your class, because I think you would remember if you had been administered a true IQ test. Maybe they converted your Iowa Test scores somehow? But any which way, I think what your teacher did was very wrong. I guess I can understand that she thought you had a right to know what your scores were, but to allow the class to see each others’ scores is really not a good thing, IMO. It’s too easy for kids to categorize themselves based on that tiny little piece of information, which as you say, really has no good practical application the way a well-designed aptitude test might. And not only were you categorizing yourself, you were able to compare yourself to the other students. Doesn’t sound like a good idea to me. Does it do you any good to know that Tommy has a 145? What does that mean to Tommy? To you? Sounds only like a way of making some kids feel bad about themselves and some kids to get an overinflated ego about it…neither of which is part of the recipe for success in my book.

As far as you doing something with your life, that comment I don’t get. IIRC, you are a nurse…sounds like you are doing something pretty valuable. Not that I believe that someone with brains should have to do something to help mankind…there’s brains, and then there’s desire. Take doctors…some kids breeze through medical school because they are super smart. Some just memorize well. Some work their asses off and barely make it through. But what they all have is the desire to be doctors…if they didn’t, it wouldn’t matter how smart they were. I think that there will always be some who want to achieve and are very driven towards a particular goal. Other people have a lot of interests, and don’t channel their smarts in one direction. They may not be as “successful” in the way we typically define it, but that’s not because they aren’t smart enough to be. A lot of it has to do with personality, and you know, those folks can be just as happy and productive as anyone else.

212

Actually, the SAT, ACT, GRE, and MAT are all achievement tests. These tests do not measure ability, and I have never heard of a conversion of achievement scores into IQ scores. An IQ test and achievement test measure two completely different areas. The first measures intellect the latter measures knowledge. Intelligence tests are not necessarily tied closely to skills development in school. IQ tests provide a picture of capacity to learn not achievement. How can an instrument designed to measure one thing accurately measure something else entirely?

213

I find that really strange, especially around the SDMB. We have a number of linguists, writers and generally intelligent, well read people here. I simply don’t get why someone using a term like that is thought of as showing off. I tend to use “10 dollar” words on a regular basis. It isn’t showing off, it’s just what feels natural.

214

I don’t suppose there’s any inherent value, just as knowing you can bench press 200 lbs isn’t particularly useful. In the context of putting kids in classes where they will have the most opportunity to learn or for identifying potential learning disabilities it may be helpful. There’s been a lot of criticism over the years regarding putting kids into class “tracks”. I’m not particularly well versed on the subject, but it seems to me that much of that criticism comes from parents who’s kids are in remedial or mainstream tracks and not advanced or gifted programs. It doesn’t seem particular fair or productive to me to try and teach everyone at the same pace as the class will inevitably have to proceed at the pace of the slowest kids.

I had a battery of IQ tests taken in college because one of my professors was concerned I might have ADD (and my grades weren’t so good). Turns out I tested very high in most areas except for auditory retention where I was merely average. I’m sure it didn’t help I found civil engineering to be boring as fuck either. Also, it helped explain why I find non-interactive classroom and lecture hall settings so tedious in general while left on my own, I can focus on the same exact material for hours.

In any event, it’s useful to me in that I know to take more notes as I tend not to retain information I hear as well as I retain things I do or see.

215

I was gifted in school. I was so gifted that I couldn’t figure out how to dress myself and have beneficial social interactions with my peers, and so I got my ass kicked everyday. And when that was over, I decided to be traumatized and further alienate people by wasting time whining about how I got my ass kicked everyday because I was smart. That’s how fuckin’ smart I am. I couldn’t spare the requisite thirty minutes to figure out the basics of human social interaction at the fuckin’ kindergarten level. Instead I taught myself Klingon and spent the next twenty years getting shit on by life.

216

I think the reason I took an IQ test in third grade was for the gifted program replacement. It has had no bearing on my life since - although at the time my eight-year-old self felt secure in the knowledge that I was smarter than everybody else. :rolleyes: I’m not even sure I accurately remember what my score was.

Has ANYONE in either thread said that IQs matter in the grand scheme of things? Maybe for younger children it’s a way to assess academic potential (up to a certain point) and for older people it’s a way to get into Mensa (for whatever the hell it’s worth), but I feel like everyone more or less agrees that in the end it doesn’t mean crap. So what were we arguing about again?

217

You forgot to tell us your IQ. Your claims are meaningless unless you make up a number! Meaningless, I tell you!

218

Meh to what my teacher did. It’s so long ago that I am no longer sure if I saw Tommy’s score or he told me. His high IQ didn’t spare him any pain later in life, that’s for sure. (and there is no reason why it should have).

I find the whole focus on this sad. Like Sarahfeena said, we all have something to contribute, for better or ill. Perhaps I’m just meh about life right now, but my attitude can be summed up with “it is what it is.” What is average, anyway–100? And what does that average measure (and miss)?

I think my “test” was an extrapolated one from another standardized test of some kind. I can see value in tracking students and see no reason not to. The problem comes when kids don’t fit into simple categories (ie gifted/learning disabled or poor discipline but smart in areas type kids). Hell, thinking about that and the problems those kids face makes me want my kids to be average.

219

Your statement has a few underlying assumptions.

First, how do we decide what contributing to the world means? Did the scientists who created the atom bomb contribute to the world under your definition? Do the panhandlers on the street?

Second, from my understanding, if the individual in question gets to decide what they want to do with their lives, that is indeed a subjective moral standard. For there to be an objective moral standard, there must be external standards which are being applied to determine if the moral standard is being met. If you allow other people to decide on what they want to do but then judge them for not meeting your standards that are not explicit, that’s something else, I think.

An example.

Let’s say you have a friend who is totally gifted at housecleaning–she can clean anything, does it wonderfully and loves doing it. But because housecleaning only pays 1/3 of what bookkeeping does, she decides to do the bookkeeping. She is not good at bookkeeping and certainly doesn’t enjoy it, but she’s able to put food on the table and clothe her kids. Is she morally deficient and a self-centered asshole that she’s not using her housecleaning skills?

Another example.

There’s a guy that’s really smart and breezed through medical school and was really great at helping patients. He was a very competent and skilled doctor for a few years, but after a few years, he got overwhelmed with the stress of having people’s lives depend on his decisions. So he decides to stop doing that and takes up carving tree sculptures for very rich people, who use these sculptures for their fancy parties. Does this man get your moral censure and your labeling? And if so, are you advocating that we all do the same?

220

Allow me to respectfully disagree with you. The SAT used to be an acronym for “Scholastic Aptitude Test,” although it has now been changed to the slightly more ambiguous “Scholastic Assessment Test.” Part of what these tests do is indeed measure what you have learned to date. However, the purpose of them is to predict how you will do in the future at a particular discipline, which is why they have different ones for the different graduate courses of study.

The part of your post I do not disagree with at all is the idea that the scores from these kinds of tests can convert to IQ scores. As I said before, these are not IQ tests and I do not believe that any such conversion would be accurate. The reason that I say there might be correspondence of some kind is because native intelligence has an effect on how well we are able to learn. It’s not the only piece of the puzzle, though, our personalities, style of schooling, even social-economic status all have their effects as well. So, a high-IQ score may relate somehow to a high aptitude-test score, but they won’t have a 1-to-1 equivalence.