Yeah, so I assume the measuring cup gets bigger over time.Or changes, at the very minimum.
The lack of it is defined in this topic. Intelligence is nothing compared to willingness to work for innovation and change.
The lack of it is defined in this topic. Intelligence is nothing compared to willingness to work for innovation and change.
There was this one time where a group of people were given the challenge (team building and all that) to get across a field. Beforehand they were wrapped in plasticine. Everyone around my group was talking about how they could hop or roll or do this and that.
We took of the plasticine. We won. Heh.
Plus I just like seeing the brains in this forum smash into eachother with great force.
Plus I just like seeing the brains in this forum smash into each other with great force AND BURN.
More accurate.
Linguistic intelligence ("word smart"):
Logical-mathematical intelligence ("number/reasoning smart")
Spatial intelligence ("picture smart")
Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence ("body smart")
Musical intelligence ("music smart")
Interpersonal intelligence ("people smart")
Intrapersonal intelligence ("self smart")
Naturalist intelligence ("nature smart")
Well, you can measure strong, tough, fast easily enough.
It's already been said but I'll say it again. IQ tests are stupid ways to measure intelligence. I personally score low on them because I can't keep my mind focused. Anyone who has read Terry Pratchet think Leonard of Quirm, My mind jumps about way too much for me to focus on the question. This also tends to screw up my ability to revise for tests, combined with my terrible procrastination and I really annoy teachers. I'll be hailed as on of their smartest students due to my ability to pick up information and concepts incredibly fast, and even carry on those concepts to their logical conclusion without having to be told. But I then go and do badly in the exams.
Their timed right? The time it takes me to complete the first question if I'd been focused I could have finished the whole thing.
Pretty much what Armok said sums up my opinion, however I don't define so many intelligences.This is the one I was talking about. As I said, it's going in the right direction but still falls into the trap of trying to lump multiple diverse abilities into a single "intelligence." Unless two abilities ALWAYS covary with each other, they should be considered separate abilities, separate modules, separate intelligences, what have you.
However.
In my opinion an IQ test is an outdated and limited system to measure intelligence, intelligence comes in many forms, not just your "CPU Speed", as Armok puts it. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, of which I prefer, proposes eight different intelligences to account for a broader range of human potential in children and adults. These are:QuoteLinguistic intelligence ("word smart"):
Logical-mathematical intelligence ("number/reasoning smart")
Spatial intelligence ("picture smart")
Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence ("body smart")
Musical intelligence ("music smart")
Interpersonal intelligence ("people smart")
Intrapersonal intelligence ("self smart")
Naturalist intelligence ("nature smart")
I would make a large wall of text but I'm tired.
Wrong! Often you have to read through articles that are much longer than they need to be, and you can never know just by looking what parts are actually important enough to read. There are too many of them. And you can not say that it takes a few seconds to solve a complex and involved algebra equation. I can do that, but not quickly mostly because I have ADHD and a cognitive processing speed disorder. The last tiny contributing factor is just normal child/teenage lack of interest (which everyone has).Their timed right? The time it takes me to complete the first question if I'd been focused I could have finished the whole thing.
The questions take, like, two seconds to answer and it's mostly coming to the logical conclusion of something.
Most of the IQ tests I've seen involve questions like:Wrong! Often you have to read through articles that are much longer than they need to be, and you can never know just by looking what parts are actually important enough to read. There are too many of them. And you can not say that it takes a few seconds to solve a complex and involved algebra equation. I can do that, but not quickly mostly because I have ADHD and a cognitive processing speed disorder. The last tiny contributing factor is just normal child/teenage lack of interest (which everyone has).Their timed right? The time it takes me to complete the first question if I'd been focused I could have finished the whole thing.
The questions take, like, two seconds to answer and it's mostly coming to the logical conclusion of something.
Also has the highest concentration of pot users and sellers.World or country?
Knowledge is the information one gainsso smarts is the ability to see and hear, intelligence is the ability to memorize that stuff, and wisdom is spitting it back out again for regurgitated use?
Intelligence is the capacity to retain that information
Wisdom is the application of that information.
BAM!
Defined.
You might be thinking of aptitude tests like the SAT, which try to measure academic ability.
SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers.
SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers.
I'm not sure where you got that info from.
Most Asian countries (China, Taiwan, and Japan I know for sure) employ a nation-wide exam that tests you on just about every subject possible.
As a result, there's an industry for teaching specifically for these exams. The most commonly used method is simply straight up cramming and hoping you can pull out enough useless facts during the test. As a result, the students who spend the most time memorizing things they'll never need to know (we do it here too, but it's much much worse over there.) are the ones that get accepted into high school.
There's a bunch of criticism about this, namely the fact that cramming info doesn't actually allow you to be effective at work, which resulted in well-educated individuals who aren't capable of fulfilling their job requirements (I don't think I got this across correctly, can't word it properly).
I was looking at some chinese newspapers on a flight from Shanghai the other day, and it had questions from their high school entrance exam, which was a huge (200+ Qs, with essays) test. It had:
World history/geography/culture:
which of the following cities would be least affected by global warming?
a) <city in netherlands>
b) New York
c) Paris
d) etc.
Math, fairly advanced geometry (I'd say it'd fit in well with the hard SAT math questions)
English (this is China), fairly basic, maybe first or second grade
Ancient Chinese Literature
Ancient chinese history
Recent history
Chemistry, biology, and a lot of Gees.
Most of this stuff isn't even taught until taught until high school in the US. This is a test for what would be kids finishing their 9th year (last year in middle school) to get into high school.
Basically, they have the SAT on steroids.
SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers.
I'm not sure where you got that info from.
Most Asian countries (China, Taiwan, and Japan I know for sure) employ a nation-wide exam that tests you on just about every subject possible.
As a result, there's an industry for teaching specifically for these exams. The most commonly used method is simply straight up cramming and hoping you can pull out enough useless facts during the test. As a result, the students who spend the most time memorizing things they'll never need to know (we do it here too, but it's much much worse over there.) are the ones that get accepted into high school.
There's a bunch of criticism about this, namely the fact that cramming info doesn't actually allow you to be effective at work, which resulted in well-educated individuals who aren't capable of fulfilling their job requirements (I don't think I got this across correctly, can't word it properly).
I was looking at some chinese newspapers on a flight from Shanghai the other day, and it had questions from their high school entrance exam, which was a huge (200+ Qs, with essays) test. It had:
Most of this stuff isn't even taught until taught until high school in the US. This is a test for what would be kids finishing their 9th year (last year in middle school) to get into high school.
Basically, they have the SAT on steroids.
If I had a map I could tell you which city would be the answer to that question about global warning. Which ever option is closest to one of the poles; the closer to the equator you are, the more your area is affected by green house gases, apparently.
In fact, I also heard that the north and south poles are the only areas affected by solar winds (which is what causes the auroras), due to the poles of the magnet that is the core being the weakest points in its magnetic field. On top of that, it is hypothesized that Mars lost it's atmosphere to solar winds; there is evidence that mars too had a molten core capable of producing a magnetic field, but it cooled and the field faded, leaving the atmosphere vulnerable to being stripped by the the solar winds (from the sun, obviously).
Now Earth's field is weakening, but it is looking more like the field is weakening from flipping magnetic poles (there is evidence of this having happened before, a long time ago, in more-magnetically aligned minerals, such as magnetite, on sea beds and such where it has not been disturbed by man); it is molten, after all, so any shift would look like a gradual weakening as north and south polarities mix. This temporary weakness would leave the atmosphere vulnerable to solar winds.
From this, I have developed a hypothesis: Solar winds slow the rate of global warming in the poles (those areas least resistant to them). Were this a science project, the problem, or question, would be "do solar winds slow or affect the rate of global warming?"
So if this were to turn out true, the next question would be: Will this have any positive effect on the global warming that will afflict the earth when its field is too weak to protect its atmosphere? Or: Will the temporary vulnerability to the solar winds have a enough of a beneficial effect to make up for the temporary increase in unhealthy radiation? (I would of course say yes out of optimism)
This is of course all just speculation from a 17 year old who may not quite have a good enough grasp on the concepts (although I left details out on purpose for being too long, so keep that in mind) and I'm largely recalling things we went over after EOC exams in Physical Science Freshman year.
But if we assume all of what I said is as I said it, then that would be an example of what those IQ questions we've been making fun of might be aiming for ('dogs can run. Jill can run. Therefore Jill is a . . .' or however it goes).
Edit: Now after posting I realize that if I am at least close to right about some of those concepts, this might have shown up in some science magazine. Then someone will think I just copied that, and it would be embarrassing. But I don't read those sorts of magazines. Or any magazines other than those from which my screen name is derived.
The Philippines had a similar test system.
Then it got switched for one that was worse.