A Human Quotient- what do you think?

Post Reply New Topic

There are many psychological test that measure everything from the intelligence quotient to social quotient. How come there is isn’t a test to measure the human quotient? Kind of like the Gom Jabbar test in Dune or the android test on Blade Runner. The way I see it is being human is not an all or nothing deal. I wouldn’t call some serial killers human for instance. Maybe some people are a throwback to the Neanderthals. There should be a human quotient where being human can be quantified. When I meet someone and try to get to know them I like to put some kind of label as to how human they are; the same way everyone else does with everything from cognitive to emotional abilities. Don’t tell me you don’t because you probably don’t talk to someone with down syndrome or someone with serious emotional problems the way you would to a store clerk or your auto mechanic. There are sub humans among us in everyday life; they look human, they sound human but in fact they are somewhere between the apes and Mother Teresa for example. I’m not sure if that was a good example since I never met Mother Teresa. In fact I’m not even sure what a highly human person would be like other than the fact that they would have a good sense of appreciation of consequence. They would be someone, who wouldn’t do something horrible and later on when you asked them why they did it, quite honestly, say, “I don’t know”. What do you think?

But the thing is that you would have to measure how human they are, who could you possibly use as a scale, who would say what is human. Would you say that it is emotion or would you say that or is doing more human stuff ie not acting so much like an animal, or would you say that it is being closest to the most average person.

First off, it would not be closest to the most average person. That would be like saying the most intelligent person is the person who scores closest to 100 on an IQ test. Secondly it is not emotion. Emotion is a by product or a tool. That would be like saying the most human person is the one who has the most rage and grief and tears. As for forming a scale, you have to admit that there is a trend of accomplishments, achievements and advances the human race has made since coming down from the trees and out of the caves and I don’t mean scientifically either. There have been incidences of regression throughout history such as genocide and wars etc. but surely you can see that in general there is a trend and direction ethically, philosophically and the way we perceive the universe. Even in the Stanley Milgram experiment almost forty percent of the test subjects refused to deliver a shock. What I am proposing is to find some way of testing to see how far along each person has come on the path to being more human. In fact we may even be able to extrapolate from where we were to where we are heading.

His name escapes me, but a man once said that you can measure a societies advancement by the amount of soap they use. Which is interesting because it speaks of their concern for appearance, health and socially acceptable behavior. It also might relate to their relative disposable income. Soap has been around almost since the discovery of fire.

So certainly their must be some qualities that are measurable, yet dont favour first world countries.

I think your human test is undefinable. Because what makes us more human to you sounds like sophistication and intelligence but i'm sure people with an excess of those things can be severely lacking in other very human traits. Humans are after all just animals seen by our main instinct in life is for sex, food, shelter, basic needs.

I think that a human test, would be a good idea. I'd like to know if I'm on the alien or animal end, of the spectrum.

..

doubleposts.

Absolutely unbelievable idea. It's the sort of thing that would just further encourage discrimination, bullying, even vigilantism, since the idea comes across as having a clear theme of exclusion and divisiveness. I'd go so far as to say it sounds almost Nazi-esque in its concept. What possible purpose could this Human Quotient idea have other than labelling people? What are you trying to encourage or hope for, some sort of pogrom against people whose Human Quotient is below whatever level's deemed to be subhuman, since that's what you're calling people after all?