Are IQ tests mainly for the bourgeois?

Post Reply New Topic

well i was searching for a post which i saw earlier to remonstrate, but it is gone now.
the poster said he was tested at school and his results leaked out all over the school and they ostracized him for it.

my IQ was tested often at school, and i never got the results and they were confidential.
that's the way it should be.
to suggest some sloppy spillage of that result into mainstream student attention is ridiculous.

anyway, someone else said that IQ tests are biased toward middle class english speakers.
that may be true to some extent, and for that reason the test is not comprehensive.

but the "what shape comes next" type of questions do not require language to solve.

how to open up a very complicated puzzle box is something that people with high intelligence will figure out and people of lesser intelligence will give up.

here is a little puzzle from a game from the sherlock holmes series, and i can assure you the puzzle is as hard as rubiks cube to solve.

i do not know what IQ is required to solve it, but one has to see in advance that even though you have the partioal design complete, it must be rotated in it's individual parts to facilitate the next piece coming into correct orientation.
the first bit of the clip is me working out how things operated, and then i reset the puzzle at about 25 seconds and embarked on solving it

If you say something that people don't want to hear or believe though that's precisely what they do.

^^ Ayup. Was it Mark Twain? I think? Who pointed out that it's hard to convince someone of anything when their income requires them not to believe it.

He was talking about politicians and other professional liars, but it's a lot more widespread than that. Expand "income" to include marital harmony, group identity, self-image, etc.

I'd almost expect people to take me to task for saying that with "Oh, so anytime people ignore you that means you're right?" at which point I'd say no - there are these things called research papers, there are weighted averages of research papers, there are peer reviewed journals and people in the professions related to the contents of those peer reviewed journals who would consider claims of IQ having very high correlation with career and economic success and not only non-controversial but even settled science. Someone rattling on about the Illuminati or David Icke is a completely different matter.

The above also brings up another topic that deeply concerns me - the collapse of authority. If our broader populace comes to believe that the experts don't know anything, or if the experts confuse themselves for clergy and earn enough skepticism, we start getting to point where anything goes and that's where the genome usually asserts itself in unfortunate ways.

I know you didn't imply any of that but I do realize a lot of people may feel as though I thumbed them in the eye by saying what I did and I want to head that off at the pass.

I get that there might be a wide variety of opinion on what should be done with information but this is also why it scares me that if people think something is impolitic or think that it would empower people with genocidal beliefs that you plug your years, go 'lalala', and stigmatize any discussion around it. The problem there is, if we're forced to confront it as true and have no other narrative than the narrative of people's worst fears - what exactly do they think will happen when the public only has the imagination for one practical outcome?

We should have been discussing it long ago, much more often, under much better circumstances, to search for alternate narratives and now I feel like people procrastinated so long on facing that one down that they've made it truly awkward. It gets considerably worse now if we consider IQ to be almost the sole domain or talking point of people who call themselves race realists. Especially if we do have economic and cultural collapse across the west and don't have alternate narratives as to what to do with this - if we get to be more like Columbia or other places in how we handle social problems (ie. bullets for the homeless, etc.) the outcomes could be catastrophic not just in lives lost but our impression of what our culture can be going forward.

This is where I feel like politeness for the sake of politeness has unacceptable costs.

Theres five pages I don't wanna read through so maybe this has been said, but

"People who boast about their IQ are losers"
-Stephen Hawking

No one's boasted about their IQ yet but thank you for the reminder.

Jordan talks about the realities of IQ from 2:00 minutes on. It really betrays why no one likes it - ie. its relatively static/immobile. Also no, Jordan had nothing to do with the image or title of the video, that was someone else's doing who sampled the material.

When I saw the title I thought it sounded edgy. That is all I have to say.

No, it really doesn't. Your bias is showing . He's definitely smarter than Barry Obama.

Maybe on the Bizarro world.
Seriously, Trump can't string three or four words together coherently, has no understanding of this country's constitutional government, and outside of business is totally ignorant of virtually every subject.