Forum » In the News

Bush or Kerry?

 
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 12 Nov 2004, 01:23

    Here's my 25 cents for you

    Quoth lbf:
    Does IQ-testing has established value? I'm sure it's designed in a scientific way and all that shizzle, but I'm rather sceptical about them, what with possible biases (gender, location,etc.). Besides, I find it strange that one could compute such data; do you have a unique IQ score taht you keep for all your life? How does the age when you take the test come into play?


    IQ is the score you get as a result of taking a test. It is not an intrinsic property of your brain. It is not an attribute you possess. It is a test result. In 10 years from now, you still got a B on that math test in 9th grade. Would you get a B if you took it again? It doesn't matter.

    Strictly speaking, a person who has never taken an IQ test doesn't have an IQ. Their IQ is null. Undefined. Division by zero. Estimating someone's IQ based on a standardized test score is straightforward and demonstratably accurate, as far as that goes. Especially since many of those tests are normalized specifically so they CAN be corresponded to IQ values.

    IQ has little or nothing to do with intelligence in general. But that's outside the scope of this discussion. There is historical (and yet recent) data in each state that can be used to compare it to other states. Regardless of the absolute values, the positions of each state relative to the others would be identical, no matter how you manipulated the data, assuming you manipulated the data in a reasonable way, and in the same way for each state. And, of course, assuming you used the same data each time.

    That's all obvious. I think people have a big problem with this stuff because they feel offended about their particular state results, feeling that it reflects on their personal intelligence in some way. It doesn't, and isn't meant to.

    • lbf said...
    • User
    • 12 Nov 2004, 01:28
    Sums it up okay. But then again, what is IQ testing meant to do? It doesn't sound like there's a million practical applications to compiling IQ test results and comparing them, then, right?

    And I'm so sorry about my text/sig ratio. :p (Actually, I kinda like your sig.)

    I'm so adjective, I verb nouns.
    What demon possessed me that I behaved so well? - H.D. Thoreau, Walden
    Edited by lbf on 12 Nov 2004, 01:29
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 12 Nov 2004, 04:36

    Let me wax sociological a bit

    It's meant to do the same thing that a GPA does, or an SAT score does. It gives people who put faith in the testing method a way to compare people, for various purposes. Job placement being the main focus, obviously. Like any point of comparison, the ultimate utility is that the HR guy can say, "Don't blame me because the guy I hired went nuts and shot 15 people before shooting himself, he scored 1550 on his SAT!"

    When you live and work in The Artifact, it's essential that everyone has something external to point to, to justify their decisions. Accountability is an axiom of The Artifact.

    Why was the average IQ of each state tabulated? The hoax versions were created as political propaganda. The real one was probably made to debunk all the hoax versions. But morbid curiosity is just as good a reason. Why are there so many tests you can take online, most of which don't even pretend to give meaningful results? Many people are addicted to comparing themselves to others in every conceivable way.

  • Re: Psst.

    Quoth supruzr:
    If you don't like it, that's really too bad. There are only two points that you could possibly dispute:

    1. The validity of ACT and SAT scores being translated to an IQ score.

    2. The magnitude of the adjustment (10 points negative, in this case).

    In response to point 1, SAT scores before 1974 directly correspond to an IQ value on the Otis-Gamma scale. Scores between 1974 and 1995 effectively correspond to that scale, but might bear adjusting somewhat, the closer you get to 1995. In 1995 the test was recentered, so later scores need to be adjusted for that, also. ACT values are only used in those 22 states where a sufficient number of SAT scores were unavailable.

    In response to point 2, as the website says:

    • Estimated IQ for all citizens of a state is normally set 10 points less than the IQ of SAT test takers, to make a national average of 100 IQ. This difference is proportionally reduced when over 60% of high school grads take the SAT. The overall results also fit better with 4th grade test results.

    No argument there. We've known for years that SAT scores (or GRE scores, for that matter) tend to covary with IQ scores. Of course, correlation is a tricky thing, and there's no proof that IQ tests and the SAT actually measure the same variable; after all, height and weight are also highly correlated. However, I'll certainly agree that SAT scores provide a good estimator of IQ scores.

    The 10 point reduction doesn't bother me too much either, as it doesn't affect the ordinal ranking of state IQs (which, I presume, is what's at issue here).

    I suspect you're accusing it of being "seriously flawed" because you don't want to agree with the numbers.
    Hmmm, not sure where you got this from. You may be surprised to learn that I don't take personal offense to such banal things as state-by-state IQ rankings. Do you always assume that anyone who disagrees with you must have some underlying normative motivation? Time to put mommy's cookie-cutter back in the cupboard, junior.

    Nonetheless, I'll admit that my original post was a bit unclear. These results, regardless of the origins of the data, simply cannot be used as the basis for a causal argument. Since that's how their partisan proponents have been using them, I precipitantly assumed that was their intended use. But, really, they're nothing more than insignificant numbers, similar to me saying, "I've noticed that the sun tends to shine during the daytime but disappears at night". And that's ironic because you're actually agreeing with me on this but don't seem to realize it.

    Edit: by the way, until you do something about that picture I will continue to believe that you do, in fact, look like a goon.

    Edited by zarathustra on 12 Nov 2004, 07:07
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 21 Nov 2004, 04:23
    we fought about this in school, what does IQ have to do with anything, facts could be screwed to get what they want, ppl just lie, its politics. my CCD teacher also joked around when we were talking about trusting and honoring someone who was not honorable 100% of the time, and someone yells out " brainwash them." our teacher answers, "y else do u think Bush is still president." i also sided with Kerry during the election, and was upset when i found out bush won. i'll never forget this quote from John McCain(, pretty sure it was him,) about each side being evil, but kerry was the better evil and bush was just a corporation dressed as a man. the elections are over and done with and thank god, Bush wont win the next election (another way to think of his win instead of bringing the US lower than it already is).

    • dampf said...
    • User
    • 21 Nov 2004, 18:10
    the IQ usually doesn't really change, but I had, when I was an exchange student in the us, first an ACT score of 24. After I took "act prep" at school I had 32 at the end of the year... my IQ is the same since the last 3 years ;) And yet, IQ doesn't mean you're smart or anything. I know someone who had 80 and was really smart and was a straight A student and yet other guys have 120 and fail one test after another

  • My IQ is 150 (Surprising i know) but it doesn't mean i know dick all. In fact i've gotten 67 on the last 3 tests i've taken.

  • Multipule intelligences is where it is is.
    http://www.thomasarmstrong.com/multiple_intelligences.htm
    Just a little bit of background?

    --[o.O] ::
    • Zheft said...
    • User
    • 22 Nov 2004, 20:03

    Re:

    Quoth dampf:
    the IQ usually doesn't really change, but I had, when I was an exchange student in the us, first an ACT score of 24. After I took "act prep" at school I had 32 at the end of the year... my IQ is the same since the last 3 years ;) And yet, IQ doesn't mean you're smart or anything. I know someone who had 80 and was really smart and was a straight A student and yet other guys have 120 and fail one test after another


    Usually, IQ-test are built to test whether or not you see any connection in a series of numbers (, pictures, cards, whatever).
    And whats more important than IQ is what you make of it.
    I could have a whoppin' 190 IQ, but it would be quite useless if I were lazy and such.

  • Quoth Zheft:
    Usually, IQ-test are built to test whether or not you see any connection in a series of numbers (pictures, cards, whatever).

    I'm stumped on the ontopicness of the discussion "IQ scoring" in the discussion "Bush or Kerry," actually, and I thought my IQ was above average. ;) [Yes, I edited that. :)]

    -Scott

    Edited by giveuptheghost on 23 Nov 2004, 02:31
  • Maybe they are refering to a picture that shows states voting by IQ?

    --[o.O] ::
  • I could have a whoppin' 190 IQ, but it would be quite useless if I were lazy and such.

    That could explain my sudden grade drop.

    I doubt that the IQ of the electorate effects how they vote. If that was so, one candidate would get at least 80% of the vote.

  • I'm British, so I just see one as being as bad as the other.

  • kerry or naider - sad that bush's won.

    stay tuned,
    _flawless_
  • Anyone seen this week's Weltschmerz? It's rather amusing.

  • Bleh. Suck my schlong.

  • no

  • Re:

    Quoth jeffersoninnit:
    Anyone seen this week's Weltschmerz? It's rather amusing.


    Quoth beanbags:
    Bleh. Suck my schlong.



    no to which?

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 21 Dec 2004, 03:21

    Re:

    Quoth jon5bok:
    Kerry.

    I really don't feel like explaining myself.


    word.

  • Re: Re:

    Quoth glazzycopter:
    Quoth jeffersoninnit:
    Anyone seen this week's Weltschmerz? It's rather amusing.


    Quoth beanbags:
    Bleh. Suck my schlong.



    no to which?


    to sucking his schlong

  • Re: Re: Re:

    Quoth cobrapower:
    Quoth glazzycopter:
    Quoth jeffersoninnit:
    Anyone seen this week's Weltschmerz? It's rather amusing.


    Quoth beanbags:
    Bleh. Suck my schlong.



    no to which?


    to sucking his schlong



    sfs

  • Re:Bush or Kerry?

    ShagLoro said:
    Personally, I say Kerry because no matter how two-faced he seems, he's obviously more intelligent than George W. Bush.

    Thoughts?

    My thoughts exactly

    • Babs_05 said...
    • Moderator
    • 5 Jul 2012, 16:59
    Please don't bump old threads.

    /locked

Anonymous users may not post messages. Please log in or create an account to post in the forums.