What IQ Tests Can't Tell You

I.Q. scores have been rising steadily, by about 3 points per decade, ever since they were first administered. This is known as the Flynn Effect and it means that if we take the average teenager of today with an I.Q. of 100 and project the trend back to the 1900s, the average I.Q. would have been somewhere between 50 and 70. An I.Q. of 70 or below usually marks a mental disability. So, if I.Q. gains are in any sense real, "we are driven to the absurd conclusion that a majority of our ancestors were mentally retarded."

Just a couple of thoughts.

College and other higher education used to be restricted to the upper classes. It wasn't available to everyone. Most students did not graduate from high school. Today, a greater cross section of races and IQ levels are tested. Much of the IQ testing variances happens today because we test a larger cross section of people.

Education teaches to the test. If I've been exposed to a question type before, I have a better chance of answering it correctly. Here's an old chestnut that I've seen before: Draw four straight lines without picking up the pencil or retracing, and touch every dot.

This is the correct answer.

If you've seen this before, you have a much higher chance of getting it correct, and also of getting similar questions correct that are based on the same technique.

IQ testing people who know what they're doing can evaluate IQ very accurately, because there are correcting techniques to compensate for lack of formal education and other variances. IQ testing, although used and trusted, is discredited in the general populace as not being "that accurate" because it reveals some things that just aren't politically correct. Asians test out highest. Jews test out second. Whites after that. Then hispanics. Then blacks. The variances show that it takes an above average intelligence black to compete with an average intelligence white. Affirmative action, test norming, and other techniques are used to try and equalize results, but in the final analysis, the only way to get an equal representation of races in professions is by quotas. The Illuminati cannot and will not admit this, but if you look at their actions, you know they believe it. In the firefighter case before Sotomayor, the real issue is this: A large percentage of the town is black. The fire department is almost entirely white. They've got to have more black firefighters at upper ranks to appease the voters. The black firefighters could not compete academically. The town went to their only politically viable option. Damn the qualifications. Promote by race.

Intelligence is not the only variable, but all other things being equal, a more intelligent person will beat a less intelligent person in almost anything. You can say, "Oh yeah? Gimme a 280 pound super strong moron and he'll be a better offensive lineman than a 130 pound genius!" Very true. BUT, take a 280 pound super strong moron and pit him against a 280 pound super strong intelligent guy and he's going to lose.

What you're demanding is that the Kpelle tribesman accept the conditions as you've defined them, and to apply no knowledge beyond what you will allow. And if he fails to follow the approach you demand, his divergence from that approach is assessed (by you) as "stupid."

It's an IQ question. Since the author of the article does not describe exactly how the exam went about, we are forced to make certain assumptions. We assume that the Kpelle tribesman has been told that his intelligence is being tested, or at least that he knows that the tester is testing him in some way. It would be silly to assume that the tribesman was ambushed along the road by masked researchers who then demand to know whether the non-rice farmer is Kpelle. If the tribesman knows he is being tested, then he also understands that the test comes from the perspective of the tester, or that there are certain conditions for the test. If he does not understand that, then that is, in itself, a display of lower intelligence. But, to satisfy your pedantry, you can create any non-culture-specific test you like with a 300-page, lawyer-approved addendum which describes the conditions of the 3 sentence syllogism, and I would bet money that any tribesman who can get the question right after reading and understanding all of your specified conditions would also be able to get the question right without them.

LOL! You're an arrogant sort, but you're not very convincing.

Part of the problem with our world today is that people fear speaking openly about things. One of the curses of the Leftist infection of our society is that people more and more accept the foolish notion that there is no right answer, just as there is no Right and Wrong, and there are no winners and losers, and there is no Good and Evil. We have people excusing the 9/11 terrorists, for example, because not only can they not recognize evil anymore when they see it, but they cannot even admit to the existence of evil, nor can they admit to the fact that not all cultures are equal. Instead, they worship at the altar of equivalence in all things, and go to great lengths to justify, intellectually, such an obviously false position.

Your argument is exactly along those lines. You are in the same school of people who dumb down schools for black Americans because to demand the same standards from them as from white students is culturally and racially biased. That attitude actually cheats black children of their opportunity for a real education, but since you won't hold them to any real standard, they don't bother to learn.

Furthermore, any attempt by others to inject any actual reason or sense into the discussion is met merely with name calling, such as calling me arrogant. Rather than believe that there are some black kids who are stupid, just as there are some white kids who are stupid, and just as there are undoubtedly some Kpelle tribesmen who are stupid, you would prefer to assume that they are all unavoidable stupid by reason of culture, whereas someone like me will show them respect as human beings by applying the same standard to them that I would apply to any men. It is you who are arrogant, because you believe so strongly in the superiority of your particular culture that you think a man is incapable of figuring out a question about a pink widget just because he is a simple tribesman.

It's an IQ question. Since the author of the article does not describe exactly how the exam went about, we are forced to make certain assumptions.

You described the conditions of your own, better, tests. And showed thereby that you have no clue.

We assume that the Kpelle tribesman has been told that his intelligence is being tested, or at least that he knows that the tester is testing him in some way.

You also assume that your Kpelle tribesman is used to thinking in the same way as the researcher. A different outlook on life is far more likely a cultural than an genetic thing ... is IQ supposed to measure cultural effects? And since the Kpelle tribesman's response was logically quite correct from a quite reasonable perspective, clearly he's not so stupid after all.

You're simply assuming away those effects and demanding that the tribesman accept the conditions you set -- IOW, doing exactly what I said you were doing. You're just too arrogant to admit it.

Part of the problem with our world today is that people fear speaking openly about things.

You, sir, are worth no more of my time. Have a nice life.

In the spirit of openness, I will openly and frankly state that you're a hypocrite ... every disparaging trait you attribute to the Kpelle tribesman is found in your own posts. Attempts to "inject reason and sense" into your little diatribe is met with a set of self-serving but unjustified assumptions.

You, sir, are worth no more of my time. Have a nice life.

As a little parlor game for Freepers who are really bored, I'd like to suggest that they take a moment to try to figure out exactly what you are talking about in any of your posts on this subject. Your paragraphs are the written equivalent of modern art - there is no point in trying to make sense of it, but brainless "intellectuals" will still say it is genius.

Having read your responses, I can see that you've either misunderstood every other thing I wrote, or you simply cannot think in a straight line. Either way, please stay in academia, because the real world would never have you.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.