Generally, people who score low or would score low tend to try to invalidate the tests. This is usually done to make them feel better.
Weirdly I mostly see the contrary. Those who get low score think it validate that they are "stupid", and those with high score say it mean nothing because there is no way that they are that smart. _________________
Generally, people who score low or would score low tend to try to invalidate the tests. This is usually done to make them feel better.
i scored well and i think they are complete and utter bullcrap. _________________ on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493
Oh ye of little faith. As if issues like this are never caught.
Google itself gives you what you want, not what is true. As I said before, Wikipedia does have standards. They encourage citing peer-reviewed sources themselves and not original research. They even have places dedicated to debate on the reliability of sources (click).
Wikipedia is pretty good if you stick to the well established articles. Newer articles can be sketchier. _________________ http://www.voterocky.org/
Joined: Feb 01, 2012 Posts: 1364 Location: Planet Earth
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:00 am Post subject:
I'm not inclined to take any result of such a test seriously. I have some interesting personal experiences with these tests. At one point, I've supposedly taken two formal tests, administered by a psychiatrist. One said I was 'below-average in intelligence', and one said I was intelectually gifted. Both were probably wrong. Another test said I had 'average intelligence', and that the ideal type of higher education for me would be vocational. I'm now going to university.
If all of these tests are so blatantly wrong, I see no reason to trust them. However, one thing I must credit them for is that they're much better than online tests, especially if those are trying to sell you something. Once, I got all answers on an online test wrong on purpose, and it said I had 'average intelligence'. If I had some answers correct, it said I was a genius and that I should definitely buy a certificate to prove that.
Given that the topic of discussion is "Discussion about IQ tests", and given that according to said IQ tests men are smarter than women, how is that an issue up for debate?
Whether or not IQ tests measure [Insert your subjective definition of intelligence that you neglected to tell anyone else in the thread] and so on, men score higher than women.
The accuracy of IQ tests, the applicability of IQ test scores in fields, the usefulness of what different tests measure and such are valid topics of discussion.
This is not me "dictating" what people can and cannot post about. I'm just pointing out that disputing that IQ tests show that men are smarter than women according to the tests, by attacking the tests is like attacking the weight bench because men on average can bench press more, because just lifting stuff isn't an accurate measurement of "strength".
Given that the topic of discussion is "Discussion about IQ tests", and given that according to said IQ tests men are smarter than women, how is that an issue up for debate?
Whether or not IQ tests measure [Insert your subjective definition of intelligence that you neglected to tell anyone else in the thread] and so on, men score higher than women.
The accuracy of IQ tests, the applicability of IQ test scores in fields, the usefulness of what different tests measure and such are valid topics of discussion.
This is not me "dictating" what people can and cannot post about. I'm just pointing out that disputing that IQ tests show that men are smarter than women according to the tests, by attacking the tests is like attacking the weight bench because men on average can bench press more, because just lifting stuff isn't an accurate measurement of "strength".
also on topic is the fact that IQ tests are not necessarily very good at objectively measuring intelligence. _________________ on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493
Given that the topic of discussion is "Discussion about IQ tests", and given that according to said IQ tests men are smarter than women, how is that an issue up for debate?
Whether or not IQ tests measure [Insert your subjective definition of intelligence that you neglected to tell anyone else in the thread] and so on, men score higher than women.
The accuracy of IQ tests, the applicability of IQ test scores in fields, the usefulness of what different tests measure and such are valid topics of discussion.
This is not me "dictating" what people can and cannot post about. I'm just pointing out that disputing that IQ tests show that men are smarter than women according to the tests, by attacking the tests is like attacking the weight bench because men on average can bench press more, because just lifting stuff isn't an accurate measurement of "strength".
Putting aside the validity of the tests, the tests actually don't show that men as a group are smarter than women as a group. As somebody pointed earlier in the thread, men score in larger numbers at both ends of the bell curve. Tested men outnumber tested women at the stratospherically genius level, but also at the profoundly mentally retarded level. If you are going to put everybody into only two groups (men/women), you don't get to clip out the profoundly retarded men who mess up the "smarter than" argument.
Joined: Jan 29, 2008 Posts: 5179 Location: Seattle Area
Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 5:12 pm Post subject:
Master_Pedant wrote:
William Delaney's aggressive, confrontational, and relentless style is more analogous to the Black Knight's.
Maybe, but I still say he just has to find his own Boswell to catalog and filter his utterances. I would agree that chopping off his appendages isn't terribly effective when arguing with him. _________________ Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Given that the topic of discussion is "Discussion about IQ tests", and given that according to said IQ tests men are smarter than women, how is that an issue up for debate?
Whether or not IQ tests measure [Insert your subjective definition of intelligence that you neglected to tell anyone else in the thread] and so on, men score higher than women.
The accuracy of IQ tests, the applicability of IQ test scores in fields, the usefulness of what different tests measure and such are valid topics of discussion.
This is not me "dictating" what people can and cannot post about. I'm just pointing out that disputing that IQ tests show that men are smarter than women according to the tests, by attacking the tests is like attacking the weight bench because men on average can bench press more, because just lifting stuff isn't an accurate measurement of "strength".
Putting aside the validity of the tests, the tests actually don't show that men as a group are smarter than women as a group. As somebody pointed earlier in the thread, men score in larger numbers at both ends of the bell curve. Tested men outnumber tested women at the stratospherically genius level, but also at the profoundly mentally retarded level. If you are going to put everybody into only two groups (men/women), you don't get to clip out the profoundly retarded men who mess up the "smarter than" argument.
Actually men AS A GROUP outperform WOMEN AS A GROUP by between 3 and 5 points higher on average as I've documented with multiple sources earlier in the thread. Go back, read my source data, no retarded men were clipped out.
@Hyperlexican how do you define intelligence? The definition famously used back in the late 1920s if I remember correctly was "Anything the IQ test measures"
