Just for curiosity. If you don't know, make an educated guess.
OK who made that guess
I dont know it because i maxed the tests, but im a MENSA member and that makes me a genius. Score one for me, punks!
I was a member but resigned too many morons
only a lunatic knows he is such, he has a document which says so
AR
only a lunatic knows he is such, he has a document which says so
AR
well one test i got like 171-then another one i took i only got 129.....online IQ tests are so innacurate 
Id say im average
Id say im average
Actually what is the maximum score in an IQ test?
try this one. http://www.highiqsociety.org/common/iqtests/ultrahigh.htm
I've never tried to get into mensa. I figure I'm right at the 97th percentile, so I wouldn't qualify. and even if I did, I'd be one of the dumbest in the group.
I've never tried to get into mensa. I figure I'm right at the 97th percentile, so I wouldn't qualify. and even if I did, I'd be one of the dumbest in the group.
QUOTE
Shit! I was stuck with the first question. Then I had a look to the second one and realized "exceptional intelligence" is not about me.
QUOTE (Neutron+Dec 16 2004, 01:44 PM)
QUOTE
Shit! I was stuck with the first question. Then I had a look to the second one and realized "exceptional intelligence" is not about me.
lol didnt even understand or notice the pattern with the first question-from what i saw the way the balls were moving were totally random and had no mathematical pattern whatsoever-and the blue squares are meant to confuse you i think-or maybe i am meant to be doing something with them blue squares which would explain why i didnt know what the hell was going on
2nd question was easier-normal maths
but i couldnt be bothered by the 3rd
considering im a 17 year old A level student and not even professional mastered mathematicians get half the questions correct theres no point in me taking that test lol.
I would get high scores on average IQ tests and average scores on hard IQ tests and very low scores on Genius type IQ tests like them.
I think il take one of that sites medium tests lol
I got 120 on the ultimate IQ test there
you need 126 to get a membership there
I lost by a lousy 6
pffft!
Ah well il get better as i get older.
120 is
116-125 Significantly above average.
so im happy lol
you need 126 to get a membership there
I lost by a lousy 6
pffft!
Ah well il get better as i get older.
120 is
116-125 Significantly above average.
so im happy lol
On this topic it says ive already voted on the poll but....I havent....so what the hell is going on there?
QUOTE (longlivelinky+Dec 16 2004, 03:33 PM)
On this topic it says ive already voted on the poll but....I havent....so what the hell is going on there?
You probably have voted!
You probably have voted!
I checked that site, and a couple questions i like, but it seems that most of them are just long. In order to make it "difficult", they just make it take really really long to do.
lol if i took a few hours im sure i could do it but yeah its tedious...But IQ tests are meant to be timed really so yeah.
If i have voted i definately didnt know about it
Unless i clicked an option accidently when i went to press "view results"
possibility...
I hate them net questions in that IQ test btw
If i have voted i definately didnt know about it
Unless i clicked an option accidently when i went to press "view results"
possibility...
I hate them net questions in that IQ test btw
the view results button also says null vote. so by clicking that the board thinks you have chosen not to chose.
That's right: "view results" = "null vote"
Hi,
I have no real idea what my IQ is. I don't remember formally taking an IQ test ever. However, it must be over 120, since this was the minimum for the high school I went to.
They say IQ doesn't change over time. I would disagree with this. IQ tests measure only the basic programming of your brain. This can be augmented. IQ will not get lower over time but may get higher with the proper training and meditation. .
z
I have no real idea what my IQ is. I don't remember formally taking an IQ test ever. However, it must be over 120, since this was the minimum for the high school I went to.
They say IQ doesn't change over time. I would disagree with this. IQ tests measure only the basic programming of your brain. This can be augmented. IQ will not get lower over time but may get higher with the proper training and meditation. .
z
Well, it looks like we've got some smart cookies in here. That's pretty much what I figured. I do agree, a person's IQ typically does not change much throughout their life. I also heard that online IQ tests are still accurate to +- 10 points usually. However, their accuracy supposedly decreases with age. (that is, only < 18)
I don't really believe that the tests are an accurate measure of intelligence.
That being said, I am happy with my score of 139. (My highest testing was 141, but my latest was 139)
Rather smart group here...
That being said, I am happy with my score of 139. (My highest testing was 141, but my latest was 139)
Rather smart group here...
My iq is 140, thats all i have to say. It hasnt benefitted me much in terms of school because all the brains in the world cant do the work for you. So at this time my grades dont reflect my so called "iq potential". I doubt anyone here wants to here my auto biography so i'm out.
I was famous for not living up to my potential.
I was the teachers worst nightmare
I was the teachers worst nightmare
I've been tested several times, and I typically range from the mid 130s to mid 140s depending on which test I take. Most of the tests are somewhat culturally biased, the better ones less so.
My teachers always hated that I didn't seem to pay much attention in class. I'd use the typical "could you repeat the question" quite often, but much to the teachers' surprise, I usually had the right answer. (The exception was geography, where I really wasn't paying attention.)
I don't remember more than one or two progress reports throughout high school that didn't have "not working up to potential" next to most of my class listings.
I attended one Mensa meeting after college, where I somehow managed to impress my current boss enough for him to give me a job offer on the spot. My work never disappoints him, but I still get "I like your work, but I have a feeling you could do so much more" at every annual review. I wonder if it ever occurs to anyone that I might be happy cruising along in a position I love while everyone else stresses and struggles just to satisfy?
My teachers always hated that I didn't seem to pay much attention in class. I'd use the typical "could you repeat the question" quite often, but much to the teachers' surprise, I usually had the right answer. (The exception was geography, where I really wasn't paying attention.)
I don't remember more than one or two progress reports throughout high school that didn't have "not working up to potential" next to most of my class listings.
I attended one Mensa meeting after college, where I somehow managed to impress my current boss enough for him to give me a job offer on the spot. My work never disappoints him, but I still get "I like your work, but I have a feeling you could do so much more" at every annual review. I wonder if it ever occurs to anyone that I might be happy cruising along in a position I love while everyone else stresses and struggles just to satisfy?
QUOTE (z+Dec 16 2004, 09:52 PM)
Hi,
I have no real idea what my IQ is. I don't remember formally taking an IQ test ever. However, it must be over 120, since this was the minimum for the high school I went to.
They say IQ doesn't change over time. I would disagree with this. IQ tests measure only the basic programming of your brain. This can be augmented. IQ will not get lower over time but may get higher with the proper training and meditation. .
z
I got 110 last time on that highsociety test then yesterday got 120
your brain can improve and get better
I have no real idea what my IQ is. I don't remember formally taking an IQ test ever. However, it must be over 120, since this was the minimum for the high school I went to.
They say IQ doesn't change over time. I would disagree with this. IQ tests measure only the basic programming of your brain. This can be augmented. IQ will not get lower over time but may get higher with the proper training and meditation. .
z
I got 110 last time on that highsociety test then yesterday got 120
your brain can improve and get better
I did a proper IQ test recently when I applied for my training certificate.
Followed by english and maths tests and background checks with the police.
This was all part of a screening process for people wanting to tutor within the education system.
Well I passed all of the tests.
Maths almost let me down but i just made it over the line.
Im now able to teach within the education system, higher learning and private tuition.
I have computer science and multimedia degree's to boot but needed the trainers certificate to tutor.
Hopefully i can find a job in tutoring or a teachers aid.
Anyhow the IQ test was set in a controlled supervised environment where there was a time limit, a room full of people clicking pens, grunting and cheating would have had serious consequences.
I found it more intimidating and harder to concentrate in a room full of people then the tests you can find online at home in your own time and at your own pace & leisure.
I have an IQ of 135.
What was interesting is that the results explained something of interest in the type of questions i got right and the ones i got wrong.
Apparently im a visual mathematician and should pursue a career move in that direction.
Im not sure what a visual mathematician is and also i just passed the maths test as im very average with maths so im not sure how that works.
Can anyone explain what is a visual mathematician and how can that help me to find my strengths and weaknesses?
Id also like to know what type of careers visual mathematicians work in and in what fields?
Followed by english and maths tests and background checks with the police.
This was all part of a screening process for people wanting to tutor within the education system.
Well I passed all of the tests.
Maths almost let me down but i just made it over the line.
Im now able to teach within the education system, higher learning and private tuition.
I have computer science and multimedia degree's to boot but needed the trainers certificate to tutor.
Hopefully i can find a job in tutoring or a teachers aid.
Anyhow the IQ test was set in a controlled supervised environment where there was a time limit, a room full of people clicking pens, grunting and cheating would have had serious consequences.
I found it more intimidating and harder to concentrate in a room full of people then the tests you can find online at home in your own time and at your own pace & leisure.
I have an IQ of 135.
What was interesting is that the results explained something of interest in the type of questions i got right and the ones i got wrong.
Apparently im a visual mathematician and should pursue a career move in that direction.
Im not sure what a visual mathematician is and also i just passed the maths test as im very average with maths so im not sure how that works.
Can anyone explain what is a visual mathematician and how can that help me to find my strengths and weaknesses?
Id also like to know what type of careers visual mathematicians work in and in what fields?
Me IQ is 40. Me offset you smarties. I go watch bold & beautiful now. Thank you.
...Is an IQ of 40 even possible...
I heard as soon as you hit about 75 youre just classified as pretty much retarded.
visual mathematician id guess would be where you can process a visual object into maths
I suppose it also means you find patterns within objects too and observe things visual as mathematical too...thats just a guess but it seems t fit within the title of "visual mathemetician"
I heard as soon as you hit about 75 youre just classified as pretty much retarded.
visual mathematician id guess would be where you can process a visual object into maths
I suppose it also means you find patterns within objects too and observe things visual as mathematical too...thats just a guess but it seems t fit within the title of "visual mathemetician"
Loco. here's what emode has to say about it.
http://maraist.homelinux.com:5180/~maraist...na_results.html
I don't know who's result that is but google was able to find it.
of course also there are the answers to the test at emode so you could be a super genuis if you want to be.
emode told me I was a Visual Linguist. I don't know if that's something found in other tests or not. they also told me I had an iq of 147. though I don't think that's very accurate.
so take it for what you will. find a job you like. you're probably smart enough to find success in any field.
http://maraist.homelinux.com:5180/~maraist...na_results.html
I don't know who's result that is but google was able to find it.
of course also there are the answers to the test at emode so you could be a super genuis if you want to be.
emode told me I was a Visual Linguist. I don't know if that's something found in other tests or not. they also told me I had an iq of 147. though I don't think that's very accurate.
so take it for what you will. find a job you like. you're probably smart enough to find success in any field.
I think the IQ test is seriously flawed....ignoring the errors and biases that could be easily used to turn over its result...the whole idea that one has a constant IQ is , in my view, impossible. I have seen very smart people forget the simplest of things under pressure and I have seen mediocre people perform well due to either biased support from the instructor or under relaxed condition. I think there is far more in the psychology that is associated with intelligence , than the entity itself.
Hey thanks Matt, longlivelinky..
Thats an interesting webpage with lots of info on visual mathematicians.
Einstein was one by the looks of it.
http://maraist.homelinux.com:5180/~maraist...na_results.html
Im into graphic design, website design and that sort of thing, multimedia, animation in my spare time, for fun etc.. so i guess thats probably my arty/visual side.
My art teacher from school once said my ability to visualize was what i excelled in the most although i didnt understand what she meant at the time.
Apart from art, Ive also got a deep curiousity and passion for science.
If im not on my computer or out, you will find me fixed to the discovery science channel or national geo.
Most of my time online is spent fixated on science websites or analysing mars rovers photos (opportunity & spirit) for anything interesting. Maybe im subconciously looking for patterns in the dirt or something. Actually now im come to think of it, ive always been searching for something. I think thats what drives me. But im not sure what it is.
Science and art, thats me
Oh and unemployed too, ahaha
:-)
Thats an interesting webpage with lots of info on visual mathematicians.
Einstein was one by the looks of it.
http://maraist.homelinux.com:5180/~maraist...na_results.html
Im into graphic design, website design and that sort of thing, multimedia, animation in my spare time, for fun etc.. so i guess thats probably my arty/visual side.
My art teacher from school once said my ability to visualize was what i excelled in the most although i didnt understand what she meant at the time.
Apart from art, Ive also got a deep curiousity and passion for science.
If im not on my computer or out, you will find me fixed to the discovery science channel or national geo.
Most of my time online is spent fixated on science websites or analysing mars rovers photos (opportunity & spirit) for anything interesting. Maybe im subconciously looking for patterns in the dirt or something. Actually now im come to think of it, ive always been searching for something. I think thats what drives me. But im not sure what it is.
Science and art, thats me
Oh and unemployed too, ahaha
:-)
"You're able to understand patterns visually and in numbers. That means your mind can create a mental picture for any problem. In addition to that skill, you possess an intelligence that allows you to apply math to that picture, too. "
Hey my guess was right
lol.
I agree the idea of a constant IQ is utter crap
As long as one has mediocre intelligence they can improve it exceptionally-through time and practice
As we get older certain things in the past we deemed "mind boggling" come to us naturally
I used to be totally RUBBISH at science
and now im in A levels expected to get high grades by my teachers and my 3 subjects are physics chemistry and biology
and thats because i revised and read about science like MAD when doing my gcse on it.
I now understand concepts of science i once before didnt.
I now take in scientific things very easily
I dont usually need to have a fact or theory or a certain way repeated to me to understand it-i usually getit the first time
before i needed a lot of help.
Its the same with maths with me too
used to be brilliant at it
talked all the way through class yet still passed lol
Now when i look at simple maths stuff like fractions my mind has to actually think about it rather heavily when usually it doesnt have to
The brain uses certain parts to interpret certain information
the more you use a certain part obviously the more neurons are passing and stimulating that area of the brain hence the more you do on a certain subject in the end you will get better-hence why practice always makes someone better at something
perfectly understandable and logical
considering most IQ questions are maths based usually and set within patterns we can theorise that if we made someone for months or years do loads of maths based stuff and patterns and things like that they would get a higher IQ.
My IQ has gone up considerably the past 3 years
roll on 130 soon lol
maybe then 140 lol
150 is getting a bit cocky for me though lol
Hey my guess was right
lol.I agree the idea of a constant IQ is utter crap
As long as one has mediocre intelligence they can improve it exceptionally-through time and practice
As we get older certain things in the past we deemed "mind boggling" come to us naturally
I used to be totally RUBBISH at science
and now im in A levels expected to get high grades by my teachers and my 3 subjects are physics chemistry and biology
and thats because i revised and read about science like MAD when doing my gcse on it.
I now understand concepts of science i once before didnt.
I now take in scientific things very easily
I dont usually need to have a fact or theory or a certain way repeated to me to understand it-i usually getit the first time
before i needed a lot of help.
Its the same with maths with me too
used to be brilliant at it
talked all the way through class yet still passed lol
Now when i look at simple maths stuff like fractions my mind has to actually think about it rather heavily when usually it doesnt have to
The brain uses certain parts to interpret certain information
the more you use a certain part obviously the more neurons are passing and stimulating that area of the brain hence the more you do on a certain subject in the end you will get better-hence why practice always makes someone better at something
perfectly understandable and logical
considering most IQ questions are maths based usually and set within patterns we can theorise that if we made someone for months or years do loads of maths based stuff and patterns and things like that they would get a higher IQ.
My IQ has gone up considerably the past 3 years
roll on 130 soon lol
maybe then 140 lol
150 is getting a bit cocky for me though lol
While I don't think IQ is completely constant, it shouldn't change much throughout your life. What you have to understand is that your IQ is simply your ability to learn things, not a measure of how much you already know.
my IQ's 100%!
shouldn't the last category be "I'm a genius"
No, because you didn't write the poll, I did. Therefore, from my perspective, I you are in fact a genius, then I certainly wouldn't say that I am the genius. Anyhow,...
Longlivelinky,
I know what you mean about you never used to be interested in science, or wasnt good at science? and then it comes naturally.
I feel the same way.
For some people I think school is flawed at that level and age.
First off. Survival should be a mandatory subject.
Why real life's lessons and experience is not taught at school eludes me.
I would much rather have been taught how to cook, survive in poverty and budget then half of all the other crap subjects they teach at school.
Unless of course its to train us to be dumb stupid consumers in debt to the bankers and easily controlled through fear.
I would much rather have learned the basics at school, had a break and then gone back to school in my 20's to learn science when my brain was geared up for it and started acting like a sponge and i WANTED to learn about everything, not forced to.
In my teens i wasnt interested in science and maths really, or foreign languages. I just couldnt grasp it and got bored. Drawing was the only thing that i liked at school. Then when i left school and got to about 25, i just wanted to know everything that i didnt want to know when i was at school, like science, maths, etc.
Like you said, all of a sudden it just came naturally and science became appealing.
We dont push teens to wreck thier bodys physically at such a tender age of 12 until they have stopped growing and then apply sports, but we push them mentally when most likely the brain hasnt fully developed at that age and cant absorb (OR WANT TO ABSORB) in many cases, at that age.
Summing up, i dont think the brain absorbs information like science and maths until later in life or should i say, WANT TO for alot of people. Mainly because it hasnt developed until that age when it wants to know everything. That might be just the case for some of us, most of us or the minority, i dont know the stats.
I sure got fed alot of bible studys at 12 though.
Good brainwashing but it didnt work on me.
I was born thinking that there is life besides us out there and i wasnt buying bible studys.
Which is good because now im older i still feel the same way, and ive stayed true to my beliefs.
Im sure its a conspiracy.
Maybe if school started much later in life kids would be more interested in science then in bible studies because they would have had enough exposure to the effect of religion on the world and thier brains would be more like science sponges and more likely to take up a career in science then be fooled into not thinking for themselves.
I know what you mean about you never used to be interested in science, or wasnt good at science? and then it comes naturally.
I feel the same way.
For some people I think school is flawed at that level and age.
First off. Survival should be a mandatory subject.
Why real life's lessons and experience is not taught at school eludes me.
I would much rather have been taught how to cook, survive in poverty and budget then half of all the other crap subjects they teach at school.
Unless of course its to train us to be dumb stupid consumers in debt to the bankers and easily controlled through fear.
I would much rather have learned the basics at school, had a break and then gone back to school in my 20's to learn science when my brain was geared up for it and started acting like a sponge and i WANTED to learn about everything, not forced to.
In my teens i wasnt interested in science and maths really, or foreign languages. I just couldnt grasp it and got bored. Drawing was the only thing that i liked at school. Then when i left school and got to about 25, i just wanted to know everything that i didnt want to know when i was at school, like science, maths, etc.
Like you said, all of a sudden it just came naturally and science became appealing.
We dont push teens to wreck thier bodys physically at such a tender age of 12 until they have stopped growing and then apply sports, but we push them mentally when most likely the brain hasnt fully developed at that age and cant absorb (OR WANT TO ABSORB) in many cases, at that age.
Summing up, i dont think the brain absorbs information like science and maths until later in life or should i say, WANT TO for alot of people. Mainly because it hasnt developed until that age when it wants to know everything. That might be just the case for some of us, most of us or the minority, i dont know the stats.
I sure got fed alot of bible studys at 12 though.
Good brainwashing but it didnt work on me.
I was born thinking that there is life besides us out there and i wasnt buying bible studys.
Which is good because now im older i still feel the same way, and ive stayed true to my beliefs.
Im sure its a conspiracy.
Maybe if school started much later in life kids would be more interested in science then in bible studies because they would have had enough exposure to the effect of religion on the world and thier brains would be more like science sponges and more likely to take up a career in science then be fooled into not thinking for themselves.
QUOTE (Loco+Jan 13 2005, 08:25 AM)
Unless of course its to train us to be dumb stupid consumers in debt to the bankers and easily controlled through fear.
Ding ding ding ding!
We have a winner folks.
Someone finally gets it, and they didn't even need to take an idiotic IQ test to proove their intelligence.
Ding ding ding ding!
We have a winner folks.
Someone finally gets it, and they didn't even need to take an idiotic IQ test to proove their intelligence.
Well apparently I am a Visual Mathematician. Maths was always my strongest subject (and I now teach it) but what is interseting is that I am also a professional musician, yet the test didn't pick this up. I play a lot of improvised stuff, and maybe the 'visual' skills help in improvising. The whole music maths debate is rather interesting.
I definently dont know if i'm a geneus L.O.L
QUOTE (Jason Morrill+Jan 26 2005, 09:30 PM)
I definently dont know if i'm a geneus L.O.L
97 out of 100 for my age 16
97 out of 100 for my age 16
This IQ thing has briefly intrigued me. I sat the Mensa test once and passed at 151. However, one has to take in the following facts:
At the time the Cattel III and Weschler test were deem ed most accurate. I say BUNK. The tests are based on your linguistic abilities and mathematical skills primarily. It is HOW they questions are formulated is what's important. Yes, the questions can be long and convoluted but, the trial is to sort the abstract into some ordered structure. More recent tests involve visual abilities only. As in, quickly judge which is the longest of two line presentaed on a screen over let's say, .25 seconds.
The expected rates are developed from standard questions offered to a statistically valid population of several thousand. The distribution curve is normal (Bellcurve) and therefore one can assign the statistical probability that the "victims" test score put's them at some "percentile". That is, if you score 98% or better than the rest of the sample population, then you are admitted to mensa. Or densa whatever you call it. The average or mean is 100.
Different societies or geopgraphical locations score different ranges and means. When I was "in", the UK scored 5% better than Ireland and Ireland, 5% better than the US. It could be said that recent electoral results bear this out LOL.
PS: If you don't have a smattering of stats, imagine the positive (up) side of a sine wave. The range is the distance from one tail ( intersection with the axis ) to the other. The mean is the highest part of the curve.
I gave up Mensa after about a year because I found them to be people who rarely were able to function socially, were elitist, prejudiced, insecure and without a rounded out ability to imagine anything other than the one and only interest they had. Stamp collecting, chess, card theory. things of that ilk. And God help those who made a living out of that one and only interest.
My experience tells me that intelligence is but one tiny part of a human. And, there are different types of intelligence. Take the motor mechanic, dirty hands and all. The eggheads go to him to get a repair. The mech cannot begin to explain his fault finding abilities, he just knows............ Is'nt THAT intelligent?
At the time the Cattel III and Weschler test were deem ed most accurate. I say BUNK. The tests are based on your linguistic abilities and mathematical skills primarily. It is HOW they questions are formulated is what's important. Yes, the questions can be long and convoluted but, the trial is to sort the abstract into some ordered structure. More recent tests involve visual abilities only. As in, quickly judge which is the longest of two line presentaed on a screen over let's say, .25 seconds.
The expected rates are developed from standard questions offered to a statistically valid population of several thousand. The distribution curve is normal (Bellcurve) and therefore one can assign the statistical probability that the "victims" test score put's them at some "percentile". That is, if you score 98% or better than the rest of the sample population, then you are admitted to mensa. Or densa whatever you call it. The average or mean is 100.
Different societies or geopgraphical locations score different ranges and means. When I was "in", the UK scored 5% better than Ireland and Ireland, 5% better than the US. It could be said that recent electoral results bear this out LOL.
PS: If you don't have a smattering of stats, imagine the positive (up) side of a sine wave. The range is the distance from one tail ( intersection with the axis ) to the other. The mean is the highest part of the curve.
I gave up Mensa after about a year because I found them to be people who rarely were able to function socially, were elitist, prejudiced, insecure and without a rounded out ability to imagine anything other than the one and only interest they had. Stamp collecting, chess, card theory. things of that ilk. And God help those who made a living out of that one and only interest.
My experience tells me that intelligence is but one tiny part of a human. And, there are different types of intelligence. Take the motor mechanic, dirty hands and all. The eggheads go to him to get a repair. The mech cannot begin to explain his fault finding abilities, he just knows............ Is'nt THAT intelligent?
One more thing to add to my last post. If the result was 99.999%, then one has to call into question the validity and accuracy of the figure. Remember, the population used to construct the model must get larger and larger to find that 1 in 100,000 person who scores so well. How could one infer anything from a sample population inadeguate to identify such unique individuals? Wouldn't these people suffer horribly to the point that they seem catatonic or autistic. An Idiot Savant perhaps? Would they be likely toever get tested?
my last test came out that I was a linguist.nothing about visual though.I was disapointed but my wife seemed happy about it!? 
It's very unclear to me what "intelligence" is.
Accordign to the dictionary I looked in it's defined as "the ability to learn facts and skills and apply them, especially when this ability is highly developed". What does that really mean?
Consequently, what is "to learn"? Again, according to the dictionary: "the acquisition of knowledge or skill".
And "knowledge"
Accordign to the dictionary I looked in it's defined as "the ability to learn facts and skills and apply them, especially when this ability is highly developed". What does that really mean?
Consequently, what is "to learn"? Again, according to the dictionary: "the acquisition of knowledge or skill".
And "knowledge"
It's very unclear to me what "intelligence" is.
Accordign to the dictionary I looked in it's defined as "the ability to learn facts and skills and apply them, especially when this ability is highly developed". What does that really mean?
Consequently, what is "to learn"? Again, according to the dictionary: "the acquisition of knowledge or skill".
And "knowledge"? = "general awareness or possession of information, facts, ideas, truths, or principles"
In society the people most often defined as intelligent are the ones who get best scores on normal test or remember everything they read, hear, or see. People are amazed at them. But they are often the most gullible and dangerous ones.
If this is the definition (not the one from the dictionary) of intelligence then computers are intelligent.
What I lack in the definition of intelligence, and I believe to be the most important aspect of the human brain, and least used, is the ability to process information yourself. Deduction and rationalization. Not to be guided or tought what the information means, which is often the case in most schools.
You could of course say that "... apply them, ..." in the dictionary definition of intelligence is just that, but I don't agree. For.ex. learning and applying a certain task by reading or watching someone else do it is just a memory process (learning a fact) and copying that process in action (applying it).
Accordign to the dictionary I looked in it's defined as "the ability to learn facts and skills and apply them, especially when this ability is highly developed". What does that really mean?
Consequently, what is "to learn"? Again, according to the dictionary: "the acquisition of knowledge or skill".
And "knowledge"? = "general awareness or possession of information, facts, ideas, truths, or principles"
In society the people most often defined as intelligent are the ones who get best scores on normal test or remember everything they read, hear, or see. People are amazed at them. But they are often the most gullible and dangerous ones.
If this is the definition (not the one from the dictionary) of intelligence then computers are intelligent.
What I lack in the definition of intelligence, and I believe to be the most important aspect of the human brain, and least used, is the ability to process information yourself. Deduction and rationalization. Not to be guided or tought what the information means, which is often the case in most schools.
You could of course say that "... apply them, ..." in the dictionary definition of intelligence is just that, but I don't agree. For.ex. learning and applying a certain task by reading or watching someone else do it is just a memory process (learning a fact) and copying that process in action (applying it).
I scored a 149. Better than I thought I would actually. As an idea...can people post some other online tests and then their scores on each. Then the tests can be cross checked with the individuals scores and others as well. This will give us an idea of which are the "easier" and "harder" tests. As well as a feeling for the validity of the online tests.
QUOTE (longlivelinky+Dec 16 2004, 02:58 PM)
I got 120 on the ultimate IQ test there
you need 126 to get a membership there
I lost by a lousy 6
pffft!
Ah well il get better as i get older.
120 is
116-125 Significantly above average.
so im happy lol
Lol! I got 125 on that one and got 135 on the Verbal IQ test. They want you to pay to become a member and I'm a cheap bastard so thats a no go.
I got bored with the other tests, took too long and I get distracted too easily.
you need 126 to get a membership there
I lost by a lousy 6
pffft!
Ah well il get better as i get older.
120 is
116-125 Significantly above average.
so im happy lol
Lol! I got 125 on that one and got 135 on the Verbal IQ test. They want you to pay to become a member and I'm a cheap bastard so thats a no go.
I got bored with the other tests, took too long and I get distracted too easily.
You have to pay?
bleh
I dont mind paying for things as long as its worth it, the problem i have with internet costs is the fact that i dont have a credit card as you cant get one til youre 18
im up to 122 on that test now
I also took the amazingly challenging exceptional intelligence test-whereby hardly anyone gets reven 2 answers right...apparently
and i got 110
which isnt exactly brilliant
But considering i got an above average score in a test to notice geniuses im happy still
Havent taken the verbal test
Im not...exactly brilliant at languages even my own being english >_<
I prefer numbers lol
bleh
I dont mind paying for things as long as its worth it, the problem i have with internet costs is the fact that i dont have a credit card as you cant get one til youre 18
im up to 122 on that test now
I also took the amazingly challenging exceptional intelligence test-whereby hardly anyone gets reven 2 answers right...apparently
and i got 110
which isnt exactly brilliant
But considering i got an above average score in a test to notice geniuses im happy still
Havent taken the verbal test
Im not...exactly brilliant at languages even my own being english >_<
I prefer numbers lol
Just out of interest...the poll has an option for lower than an IQ of 79
But im trying to wonder if someone with that kind of IQ could get onto the internet
and/or whether theyd realise the <79
means less than 79
and would probably think the < is a typo or something
The lowest IQ ive seen someone get is 94 i think
But im trying to wonder if someone with that kind of IQ could get onto the internet
and/or whether theyd realise the <79
means less than 79
and would probably think the < is a typo or something
The lowest IQ ive seen someone get is 94 i think
Ah im very proud of my IQ of 143 score on www.iqtest.com
But if im honest-that IQ test seems rather easy
But if im honest-that IQ test seems rather easy
hahaha
i don't think who has less than 130 IQ can make an IQ test for measuring 180
who made those super hard tests is surely on the high score list.
intelligence is not about "finding the code" who finds out the code wins $$$, just subscribe ...
do any of you think taking some of these tests are useful for anything? entertainment?
is it worth taking the time with iq tests? have nothing better to do?
why whould someone want to measure his iq above 130? because: i'm the king?
.
i don't think who has less than 130 IQ can make an IQ test for measuring 180
who made those super hard tests is surely on the high score list.
intelligence is not about "finding the code" who finds out the code wins $$$, just subscribe ...
do any of you think taking some of these tests are useful for anything? entertainment?
is it worth taking the time with iq tests? have nothing better to do?
why whould someone want to measure his iq above 130? because: i'm the king?
.
Doesnt IQ just test cognitive ability usually?
which means someone with an IQ of 130 could make a question that could baffle someone with an IQ of 180
Its similar to the scenario of "Oh thats simple"
yeah-when you have the answer
but the human mind is very interesting and someone who makes a question and is the only one who knows the answer for that period of time can be a question in which someone may have trouble with IQ of 180 or not.
also
dont mean to make a biography or anything but it does have relevance to how the human mind can be pushed to acquire knowledge
Longlivelinky,
I know what you mean about you never used to be interested in science, or wasnt good at science? and then it comes naturally.
I feel the same way.
For some people I think school is flawed at that level and age.
First off. Survival should be a mandatory subject.
Why real life's lessons and experience is not taught at school eludes me.
I would much rather have been taught how to cook, survive in poverty and budget then half of all the other crap subjects they teach at school.
Unless of course its to train us to be dumb stupid consumers in debt to the bankers and easily controlled through fear.
I would much rather have learned the basics at school, had a break and then gone back to school in my 20's to learn science when my brain was geared up for it and started acting like a sponge and i WANTED to learn about everything, not forced to.
In my teens i wasnt interested in science and maths really, or foreign languages. I just couldnt grasp it and got bored. Drawing was the only thing that i liked at school. Then when i left school and got to about 25, i just wanted to know everything that i didnt want to know when i was at school, like science, maths, etc.
Like you said, all of a sudden it just came naturally and science became appealing.
We dont push teens to wreck thier bodys physically at such a tender age of 12 until they have stopped growing and then apply sports, but we push them mentally when most likely the brain hasnt fully developed at that age and cant absorb (OR WANT TO ABSORB) in many cases, at that age.
Summing up, i dont think the brain absorbs information like science and maths until later in life or should i say, WANT TO for alot of people. Mainly because it hasnt developed until that age when it wants to know everything. That might be just the case for some of us, most of us or the minority, i dont know the stats.
I sure got fed alot of bible studys at 12 though.
Good brainwashing but it didnt work on me.
I was born thinking that there is life besides us out there and i wasnt buying bible studys.
Which is good because now im older i still feel the same way, and ive stayed true to my beliefs.
Im sure its a conspiracy.
Maybe if school started much later in life kids would be more interested in science then in bible studies because they would have had enough exposure to the effect of religion on the world and thier brains would be more like science sponges and more likely to take up a career in science then be fooled into not thinking for themselves.
I was forced to go to church and got bored with it and never took it in either, even when I decided to actually listen I thought “wtf? How do you work that one out?” or “riiight…that makes as much sense as giving McDonalds your pet cow to look after lol”
At a young age our brains are more practical and factual-why do you think we only learn facts and play with many objects in younger years?
Then when we get older our brains start its cognitive ability(obviously some young people have this already but it isn’t common) and can use logic and understanding to think of things, Like this site, many people know many facts-but you don’t just hear them blurt them out, they always present the fact, then support it, then show there understanding of it to use it to there advantage of what theory they wish to discuss-which reaches us at a late age or sometimes never (I know some really dumb people not trying to be mean, but sometimes the things they make decisions on etc are just….so obviously flawed…)
During middle school my science teachers didn’t present the work in a way I found interesting or in a way I could grasp and understand, kind of similar to some maths teachers (they always bloody exist) whereby the tell you to press buttons on a calculator and you get the answer but they never damn well explain WHY (and I hate that).
Same with high school-I got a U (so bad cannot be graded) in my science tests, then in year 11 I got the one of the best science teachers ive ever had. He put humour into science and it made me very interested and because id screwed up my past years I had to do loads of coursework and something like 9 separate modules of science within mere months, In the end I was able to get my coursework to an acceptable standard in the given time but he said I had to get 89% of my test correct to just get a C, which I did, which made me very happy.As to foreign languages-could never do them, and still cant do them, and weirdly im getting more useless at maths…mainly because I haven’t done it in years(not hardcore maths anyway)
My want for knowledge also came about when it came to discussions and I either couldn’t participate or looked like a bloody dummy and hated myself for it and wanted vast amounts of knowledge, which is why I now spend hours online just reading and reading, which has helped a lot funnily enough as pretty near every lesson I get I remember reading about it which gives me a nice advantage.
Aaaand
My experience tells me that intelligence is but one tiny part of a human. And, there are different types of intelligence. Take the motor mechanic, dirty hands and all. The eggheads go to him to get a repair. The mech cannot begin to explain his fault finding abilities, he just knows............ Is'nt THAT intelligent?
Well this is the thing you see, people always deem intelligence being great when you have hair sticking out like Einstein with maths no one can understand written on a board, most do anyway.
However there are skills which some people never get or can do
This brings me back to neural activity
The brain fires more neurons in an area that your working with, which is why practice does indeed make perfect and it becomes second nature in your brain when you do it for a long time, intelligence is definitely relative, while hyper space travel and quantumn mechanics requires an amazing amount of knowledge and intelligence to do and comprehend, it isn’t exactly a very good thing if your goal is to fix a cracked swimming pool or something, which is where a simple builder then outsmarts you (dads a builder and is very intelligent given the stereotypical “stupidity” builders apparently have, but he reads Stephen hawkings books etc and fully understands them)
Intelligence is dependant on the goal you seek, while some goals contain more information, it doesn’t make the intelligence required more. Intelligence is DEFINITELY relative.
which means someone with an IQ of 130 could make a question that could baffle someone with an IQ of 180
Its similar to the scenario of "Oh thats simple"
yeah-when you have the answer
but the human mind is very interesting and someone who makes a question and is the only one who knows the answer for that period of time can be a question in which someone may have trouble with IQ of 180 or not.
also
dont mean to make a biography or anything but it does have relevance to how the human mind can be pushed to acquire knowledge
Longlivelinky,
I know what you mean about you never used to be interested in science, or wasnt good at science? and then it comes naturally.
I feel the same way.
For some people I think school is flawed at that level and age.
First off. Survival should be a mandatory subject.
Why real life's lessons and experience is not taught at school eludes me.
I would much rather have been taught how to cook, survive in poverty and budget then half of all the other crap subjects they teach at school.
Unless of course its to train us to be dumb stupid consumers in debt to the bankers and easily controlled through fear.
I would much rather have learned the basics at school, had a break and then gone back to school in my 20's to learn science when my brain was geared up for it and started acting like a sponge and i WANTED to learn about everything, not forced to.
In my teens i wasnt interested in science and maths really, or foreign languages. I just couldnt grasp it and got bored. Drawing was the only thing that i liked at school. Then when i left school and got to about 25, i just wanted to know everything that i didnt want to know when i was at school, like science, maths, etc.
Like you said, all of a sudden it just came naturally and science became appealing.
We dont push teens to wreck thier bodys physically at such a tender age of 12 until they have stopped growing and then apply sports, but we push them mentally when most likely the brain hasnt fully developed at that age and cant absorb (OR WANT TO ABSORB) in many cases, at that age.
Summing up, i dont think the brain absorbs information like science and maths until later in life or should i say, WANT TO for alot of people. Mainly because it hasnt developed until that age when it wants to know everything. That might be just the case for some of us, most of us or the minority, i dont know the stats.
I sure got fed alot of bible studys at 12 though.
Good brainwashing but it didnt work on me.
I was born thinking that there is life besides us out there and i wasnt buying bible studys.
Which is good because now im older i still feel the same way, and ive stayed true to my beliefs.
Im sure its a conspiracy.
Maybe if school started much later in life kids would be more interested in science then in bible studies because they would have had enough exposure to the effect of religion on the world and thier brains would be more like science sponges and more likely to take up a career in science then be fooled into not thinking for themselves.
I was forced to go to church and got bored with it and never took it in either, even when I decided to actually listen I thought “wtf? How do you work that one out?” or “riiight…that makes as much sense as giving McDonalds your pet cow to look after lol”
At a young age our brains are more practical and factual-why do you think we only learn facts and play with many objects in younger years?
Then when we get older our brains start its cognitive ability(obviously some young people have this already but it isn’t common) and can use logic and understanding to think of things, Like this site, many people know many facts-but you don’t just hear them blurt them out, they always present the fact, then support it, then show there understanding of it to use it to there advantage of what theory they wish to discuss-which reaches us at a late age or sometimes never (I know some really dumb people not trying to be mean, but sometimes the things they make decisions on etc are just….so obviously flawed…)
During middle school my science teachers didn’t present the work in a way I found interesting or in a way I could grasp and understand, kind of similar to some maths teachers (they always bloody exist) whereby the tell you to press buttons on a calculator and you get the answer but they never damn well explain WHY (and I hate that).
Same with high school-I got a U (so bad cannot be graded) in my science tests, then in year 11 I got the one of the best science teachers ive ever had. He put humour into science and it made me very interested and because id screwed up my past years I had to do loads of coursework and something like 9 separate modules of science within mere months, In the end I was able to get my coursework to an acceptable standard in the given time but he said I had to get 89% of my test correct to just get a C, which I did, which made me very happy.As to foreign languages-could never do them, and still cant do them, and weirdly im getting more useless at maths…mainly because I haven’t done it in years(not hardcore maths anyway)
My want for knowledge also came about when it came to discussions and I either couldn’t participate or looked like a bloody dummy and hated myself for it and wanted vast amounts of knowledge, which is why I now spend hours online just reading and reading, which has helped a lot funnily enough as pretty near every lesson I get I remember reading about it which gives me a nice advantage.
Aaaand
My experience tells me that intelligence is but one tiny part of a human. And, there are different types of intelligence. Take the motor mechanic, dirty hands and all. The eggheads go to him to get a repair. The mech cannot begin to explain his fault finding abilities, he just knows............ Is'nt THAT intelligent?
Well this is the thing you see, people always deem intelligence being great when you have hair sticking out like Einstein with maths no one can understand written on a board, most do anyway.
However there are skills which some people never get or can do
This brings me back to neural activity
The brain fires more neurons in an area that your working with, which is why practice does indeed make perfect and it becomes second nature in your brain when you do it for a long time, intelligence is definitely relative, while hyper space travel and quantumn mechanics requires an amazing amount of knowledge and intelligence to do and comprehend, it isn’t exactly a very good thing if your goal is to fix a cracked swimming pool or something, which is where a simple builder then outsmarts you (dads a builder and is very intelligent given the stereotypical “stupidity” builders apparently have, but he reads Stephen hawkings books etc and fully understands them)
Intelligence is dependant on the goal you seek, while some goals contain more information, it doesn’t make the intelligence required more. Intelligence is DEFINITELY relative.
To back my 130-180 IQ thing more
You dont see scientific advancement only happening through people with higher IQ's now do you?
an answer to something just needs the right way of thinking
which theoretically can be done with someone of average 100 IQ.
As long as you look over data all you need is your mind to work similarly the way of the for now unknown answer and you get the answer.
Its kind of like a maze-the maker knows the route because he made the question but the one who has to get through the maze has to work the way the makers mind did to get through
thats not a brilliant analogy but...meh
You dont see scientific advancement only happening through people with higher IQ's now do you?
an answer to something just needs the right way of thinking
which theoretically can be done with someone of average 100 IQ.
As long as you look over data all you need is your mind to work similarly the way of the for now unknown answer and you get the answer.
Its kind of like a maze-the maker knows the route because he made the question but the one who has to get through the maze has to work the way the makers mind did to get through
thats not a brilliant analogy but...meh
nope, you see?
i was telling about this, iq means intelligence, you can have a 180 IQ but you cannot know everything, iq test is not about knowledge, knowledge test is knowledge test.
i was primarily thinking of i have these find the code iq test thing, it is so unintelligent, take a pencil, and try try try ... this is all about, very cheap trick making you think you have ... and you know, subscribe ...
i was telling about this, iq means intelligence, you can have a 180 IQ but you cannot know everything, iq test is not about knowledge, knowledge test is knowledge test.
i was primarily thinking of i have these find the code iq test thing, it is so unintelligent, take a pencil, and try try try ... this is all about, very cheap trick making you think you have ... and you know, subscribe ...
This conversation has been seized
i can imagine someone whose intelligence can be decribed after 10 questions...
Is an IQ of 230 even possible?and 400?
erm...hmmm
thats definately one boost mode lol
sorry matrix seems i misunderstood you yes i understand what you mean now
QUOTE
You dont see scientific advancement only happening through people with higher IQ's now do you?
I would say that smart people make bigger discoveries than the average joe. That doesn't mean joe didn't contribute, but smarter people will tend to contribute much more.
Everyone keeps talking about: smart, intelligent, and knowledge. Some saying that knowledge and intelligence are not the same thing. Others compare smart to being intelligent. No real concistency at all.
Actually says a lot about many of the people getting high scores on these funny tests. They don't even know what they are being tested on.
Actually says a lot about many of the people getting high scores on these funny tests. They don't even know what they are being tested on.
einsteins IQ is relatively (hahaha major irony) low and look what he contributed to science
its a more exaggerated version of the 180IQ to 100IQ but from what i know einsteins IQ was 160
considering some people are getting 40-70 points above that and arent making contributions to science id say its a good example
although the1 you are in GENERAL correct-it is usually the smarter people who contribute.
WayuU
Although you are in some respects correct that some people believe in different ways of what smart and intelligence is
all you posted is how none of it has consistency
you failed to specify why and back it up
you also failed to specify what you personally think intelligence and being smart is
and considering we dont know fully about the brain its all opinionated and the best guess going and in general how academic one is to base intelligence onto them, but as i said intelligence is relative.
The IQ tests we are taking tests mainly the cognitive power of the brain and logic.
its a more exaggerated version of the 180IQ to 100IQ but from what i know einsteins IQ was 160
considering some people are getting 40-70 points above that and arent making contributions to science id say its a good example
although the1 you are in GENERAL correct-it is usually the smarter people who contribute.
WayuU
Although you are in some respects correct that some people believe in different ways of what smart and intelligence is
all you posted is how none of it has consistency
you failed to specify why and back it up
you also failed to specify what you personally think intelligence and being smart is
and considering we dont know fully about the brain its all opinionated and the best guess going and in general how academic one is to base intelligence onto them, but as i said intelligence is relative.
The IQ tests we are taking tests mainly the cognitive power of the brain and logic.
QUOTE (Guest_longlivelinky+Feb 22 2005, 06:36 AM)
all you posted is how none of it has consistency
you failed to specify why and back it up
you also failed to specify what you personally think intelligence and being smart is
I thought my first post was clear on my thoughts about intelligence and what I concider to be the most important aspect of a human brain.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...findpost&p=5722
English is not my primary language so wording, sentence composition, and spelling may be a bit off at times. I apologize for that. Maybe gets a bit unclear.
you failed to specify why and back it up
you also failed to specify what you personally think intelligence and being smart is
I thought my first post was clear on my thoughts about intelligence and what I concider to be the most important aspect of a human brain.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...findpost&p=5722
English is not my primary language so wording, sentence composition, and spelling may be a bit off at times. I apologize for that. Maybe gets a bit unclear.
No your english is fine-I missed that post so sorry
However i think the answer to what intelligence is, is "common sense" (although it isnt that common)
like you say
the ability to know and remember facts is what a computer does yet we say computers arent smart (funny how many times humans contradict there own definitions)
However with common sense you can question what you read and/or use the information to your advantage which would seem smart and intelligent.
Many people can probably get brilliant university degrees but are useless with jobs and the big wide world because there brains dont use that knowledge to there advantage-it happens regularly.
Having fancy test scores dont mean much-although they do contribute a lot to most people as long as they use that information to there advantage.
In this respect you could say humans are more of an opportunistic animal than a rational thinking animal.
However i think the answer to what intelligence is, is "common sense" (although it isnt that common)
like you say
the ability to know and remember facts is what a computer does yet we say computers arent smart (funny how many times humans contradict there own definitions)
However with common sense you can question what you read and/or use the information to your advantage which would seem smart and intelligent.
Many people can probably get brilliant university degrees but are useless with jobs and the big wide world because there brains dont use that knowledge to there advantage-it happens regularly.
Having fancy test scores dont mean much-although they do contribute a lot to most people as long as they use that information to there advantage.
In this respect you could say humans are more of an opportunistic animal than a rational thinking animal.
I've thought a lot about this. Lots of people tell me I am smart. many tell me that I am the smartest person that they know. though I ask them why they think I'm smart and they really can't give me an answer.
I think intelligence is the ability to make connections between different thoughts in your head. I can't get thru a post without my mind going off on 20 different tangents as I type it. some of you might have noticed this. but it also holds true on everything else. if I hear someone say 2 or 3 words that happen to be in the lyric of a song, that song pops into my head. then 4 or 5 other things also pop in that may or may not be related. and following that trail, I often, in a matter of seconds, end up on a totally different subject.
I also see different possible outcomes. (which gets me into trouble a lot) to a certain scenario. I seem to do this automatically. This allows me to look at a problem from many different points of view at once, and I often come up with ideas that seem suprising and unexpected from my co workers or peers.
that and I'm able to assimilate and extrapolate new ideas and concepts very quickly which allows me to learn new skills and perform a great many tasks in a short amount of time.
but all of this seems to go back to taking data and connecting it to other pieces of data quickly. so in the end, to put it into computer terms. Intelligence seems to be a combination of Ram (memory) and Bandwidth (the ability to access large stores of memorys and pull things out that are related to the item in your processing center)
but this could just be for me, someone else who is intelligent may have a brain that works totally different but produces similar results.
I think intelligence is the ability to make connections between different thoughts in your head. I can't get thru a post without my mind going off on 20 different tangents as I type it. some of you might have noticed this. but it also holds true on everything else. if I hear someone say 2 or 3 words that happen to be in the lyric of a song, that song pops into my head. then 4 or 5 other things also pop in that may or may not be related. and following that trail, I often, in a matter of seconds, end up on a totally different subject.
I also see different possible outcomes. (which gets me into trouble a lot) to a certain scenario. I seem to do this automatically. This allows me to look at a problem from many different points of view at once, and I often come up with ideas that seem suprising and unexpected from my co workers or peers.
that and I'm able to assimilate and extrapolate new ideas and concepts very quickly which allows me to learn new skills and perform a great many tasks in a short amount of time.
but all of this seems to go back to taking data and connecting it to other pieces of data quickly. so in the end, to put it into computer terms. Intelligence seems to be a combination of Ram (memory) and Bandwidth (the ability to access large stores of memorys and pull things out that are related to the item in your processing center)
but this could just be for me, someone else who is intelligent may have a brain that works totally different but produces similar results.
After reading Matt's version of inteligence I'm stuck by not only the accuracy of that account, but for me the close resemblence of it to that of A.D.H.D. Isn't it stange how one is an ability, the other considered a disability? My experience is that with one you can choose to let your mind wander into and out of certain collabrative thoughts, the other is more of a rollercoaster, sit down,strap in hold on. They are probably the same thoughts, just less control over them. In case you're curious, I'm a high school drop out with an I.Q. of 146 and A.D.H.D. I guess the bright side is I save money on thrill ride tickets!
I.Q., or Intelligence Quotient, is defined as Mental Age divided by Physical Age. The debate between psychologists is how Mental Age is determined. There are a many tests used that can give a person a general idea of how much they have developed such as volume recognition. For example, up until about eight years or so children will think that if a liquid in a regular glass that was filled were poured into a taller, elongated glass the taller glass will be holding more liquis than the regular glass even when the regualr glass was filled again right in front of them. Mental development can be hindered by biology hence you need to grow to be able to comprehend some things.
Intelligence is widely defined as: A. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge.
B. The faculty of thought and reason.
Depending on your surroundings you may not need to acquire a massive amount of knowledge to live normally. For example, a tribesman in Austrailia will most likely not need to know about mortgages as an average person living in the United States will. So, many things need to be considered when determining a person's intelligence.
Intelligence is widely defined as: A. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge.
B. The faculty of thought and reason.
Depending on your surroundings you may not need to acquire a massive amount of knowledge to live normally. For example, a tribesman in Austrailia will most likely not need to know about mortgages as an average person living in the United States will. So, many things need to be considered when determining a person's intelligence.
QUOTE (Guest_martin+Feb 23 2005, 03:19 PM)
After reading Matt's version of inteligence I'm stuck by not only the accuracy of that account, but for me the close resemblence of it to that of A.D.H.D. Isn't it stange how one is an ability, the other considered a disability? My experience is that with one you can choose to let your mind wander into and out of certain collabrative thoughts, the other is more of a rollercoaster, sit down,strap in hold on. They are probably the same thoughts, just less control over them. In case you're curious, I'm a high school drop out with an I.Q. of 146 and A.D.H.D. I guess the bright side is I save money on thrill ride tickets!
I haven't been diagnosed, but I'm fairly certain I am ADD as well. though I did manage to make it thru High school and 3 years of college. well 2 years of college, the last one really didn't count.
but I assure you, I do not choose to let my mind wander. it does it all on it's own, often when I don't want it too.
I haven't been diagnosed, but I'm fairly certain I am ADD as well. though I did manage to make it thru High school and 3 years of college. well 2 years of college, the last one really didn't count.
but I assure you, I do not choose to let my mind wander. it does it all on it's own, often when I don't want it too.
Matt' here is a test of your intelligence.
Answer these groupings of questions, if ya can.
A.What is the overall value of Jesus Christ, as opposed to his intrinsic value?
B.Why is the population of India, getting to be very much like the population of the United States?
C.Is mankind on Earth, almost a manufactured, or grown sort of population and how is God similar to Wal-Mart, or a superstore?
D.Does the main Christian God on Earth have an office here and if he does, is or would this office being going into decline?
F.How have personally hand held communications and information storage devices, changed mankind as we know him and has this change been either for the good or bad, or is this statement leading to a relativism?
G.What is the relative morality of young wimen needing money and participating in the action, known as a panty page?
Furthermore attached to this action, is this social action by these girls, to get the money they need, a relativism, as lots and lots of teens do this to get money, or is this a moral infraction?
>defination panty page,, a lite level of erotic web page, were only some elemtns of erontica are shown.This perfomance is often thought to be a money earner for the first second year of college age females, who have trouble makeing money in other way.
H.If the major churches and religions involved in sex scandals, where to have had the issue of sex infraction taken away from the mathematical inclusionary brackets, and had cannibalism replacing sexual infraction, then what would be the nature of the violation?
Too much cannibalism, or canibism is wrong?
J.If mankind were to be able to explore and land on the moon tomorrow and when NASAs spaceship landed there, there were already aliens,. there, living on the moon.Furthermore the aliens publicly went over to our astronauts and said to the astronauts so the words,, "We were already here"?!, got into the i.p news can headset of the astronauts, then how would everyone react to the news and the statements, "We were already here"?!....?
K.If you owned a house-hold rovbot, that cleaned for you as a maid, a roving floor model, that had picked up after you and one day there was a fit of jealousy, which caused your house cat, using a Japanese cat to English translator to come up to you along with this robvot and they were to ask you, who do you love more?...What and how would you answer their question, as the robot cleans up for you, however the cat is a companion that curls up to you, when you enjoy your evenings. (Note robot is a top of the line emergent intelligence model top of the line)
How would you word you answers, so that each did not become estranged?
Answer these groupings of questions, if ya can.
A.What is the overall value of Jesus Christ, as opposed to his intrinsic value?
B.Why is the population of India, getting to be very much like the population of the United States?
C.Is mankind on Earth, almost a manufactured, or grown sort of population and how is God similar to Wal-Mart, or a superstore?
D.Does the main Christian God on Earth have an office here and if he does, is or would this office being going into decline?
F.How have personally hand held communications and information storage devices, changed mankind as we know him and has this change been either for the good or bad, or is this statement leading to a relativism?
G.What is the relative morality of young wimen needing money and participating in the action, known as a panty page?
Furthermore attached to this action, is this social action by these girls, to get the money they need, a relativism, as lots and lots of teens do this to get money, or is this a moral infraction?
>defination panty page,, a lite level of erotic web page, were only some elemtns of erontica are shown.This perfomance is often thought to be a money earner for the first second year of college age females, who have trouble makeing money in other way.
H.If the major churches and religions involved in sex scandals, where to have had the issue of sex infraction taken away from the mathematical inclusionary brackets, and had cannibalism replacing sexual infraction, then what would be the nature of the violation?
Too much cannibalism, or canibism is wrong?
J.If mankind were to be able to explore and land on the moon tomorrow and when NASAs spaceship landed there, there were already aliens,. there, living on the moon.Furthermore the aliens publicly went over to our astronauts and said to the astronauts so the words,, "We were already here"?!, got into the i.p news can headset of the astronauts, then how would everyone react to the news and the statements, "We were already here"?!....?
K.If you owned a house-hold rovbot, that cleaned for you as a maid, a roving floor model, that had picked up after you and one day there was a fit of jealousy, which caused your house cat, using a Japanese cat to English translator to come up to you along with this robvot and they were to ask you, who do you love more?...What and how would you answer their question, as the robot cleans up for you, however the cat is a companion that curls up to you, when you enjoy your evenings. (Note robot is a top of the line emergent intelligence model top of the line)
How would you word you answers, so that each did not become estranged?
I used to have ADD and was threatened to be put into a special school...but wasnt
Actually it would explain the whole "theres a fine line between madness and genius" similar to how adhd is considered a disability and someone not of adhd is an ability
Matt your interpretation of intelligence is definately in many ways correct, however i think intelligence is defined over many things, your account being one of them for sure
as to "Depending on your surroundings you may not need to acquire a massive amount of knowledge to live normally. For example, a tribesman in Austrailia will most likely not need to know about mortgages as an average person living in the United States will. So, many things need to be considered when determining a person's intelligence. "
As i said before-intelligence is relative unto the goal you seek.
Matt this relativity between intelligence explains why people think youre smart probably, you obviously know a lot about physics and science and science has always had a reputation of being 'amazing" and also "hard to understand" so i think its your friends who cant gain that knowledge as good or well as you and might be in some ways jealous because they want there goals to be similar to yours and have large amounts of the intelligence you hold
Actually it would explain the whole "theres a fine line between madness and genius" similar to how adhd is considered a disability and someone not of adhd is an ability
Matt your interpretation of intelligence is definately in many ways correct, however i think intelligence is defined over many things, your account being one of them for sure
as to "Depending on your surroundings you may not need to acquire a massive amount of knowledge to live normally. For example, a tribesman in Austrailia will most likely not need to know about mortgages as an average person living in the United States will. So, many things need to be considered when determining a person's intelligence. "
As i said before-intelligence is relative unto the goal you seek.
Matt this relativity between intelligence explains why people think youre smart probably, you obviously know a lot about physics and science and science has always had a reputation of being 'amazing" and also "hard to understand" so i think its your friends who cant gain that knowledge as good or well as you and might be in some ways jealous because they want there goals to be similar to yours and have large amounts of the intelligence you hold
Phillip-while your questions are interesting i cant fail to notice (and maybe noticing this is what is tests intelligence??) that a lot of the answers are of personal preference, meaning there is no TRUE right or wrong answer?
Which also brings me back to the 130IQ and 180IQ debate
If phillip was extremely ignorant and arrogant and asked them questions and matt didnt answer them the way phillip answers them-phillip being arrogant and ignorant (dont get mad at me im using this as an example ok lol) would say matt is stupid.
Like the way someone with an IQ of 130 might pick something up that someone of an IQ of 180 cannot because there minds have there own "personal preference" and there own way of working, its similar also to when you get a subject in school whereby you cant understand the simple parts everyone else understands yet when you get to the advanced part you seem to one of few who understand-that has happened to me often.
Which also brings me back to the 130IQ and 180IQ debate
If phillip was extremely ignorant and arrogant and asked them questions and matt didnt answer them the way phillip answers them-phillip being arrogant and ignorant (dont get mad at me im using this as an example ok lol) would say matt is stupid.
Like the way someone with an IQ of 130 might pick something up that someone of an IQ of 180 cannot because there minds have there own "personal preference" and there own way of working, its similar also to when you get a subject in school whereby you cant understand the simple parts everyone else understands yet when you get to the advanced part you seem to one of few who understand-that has happened to me often.
Answer, groupings of questions.
A. Ambassador and representative by example. The intrinsic is held by those in need, or the theocracy.
B.Due to electronics and the Indians speaking English and being able to meet worldwide needs.Social contimanination factor.
C.Yes, like a grown product, more like cattle.Yes, through book The Andreasson Affair, seems to be made in component parts, as any product would be?
D.Yes according to Betty Luca, a crystal cave complex, over two miles in length.
F.Some changes destructive, however a relativism, as the more things change, the more they stay the same.
G.A social relativism as this practice is a commonance.If X amount of money is only supplied from a certain source, then in order to maintain their personal economies, what was once thought of as immoral, is now considered middle of the road.
H.Another relativism, as this would mean that in some respects, mankind would already be cannibals.Too much of anything.
J.Everyone would say, they were already there, why didn't we know, the government must have known, or the aliens were sneaky?
K.Cats aren't onus to anyone or anything.They take things in their own time and warm up, when they want to.
So make peace with the rovbot and the cat, however let the cat accept the rovbot on his own terms, in his own good time?
A. Ambassador and representative by example. The intrinsic is held by those in need, or the theocracy.
B.Due to electronics and the Indians speaking English and being able to meet worldwide needs.Social contimanination factor.
C.Yes, like a grown product, more like cattle.Yes, through book The Andreasson Affair, seems to be made in component parts, as any product would be?
D.Yes according to Betty Luca, a crystal cave complex, over two miles in length.
F.Some changes destructive, however a relativism, as the more things change, the more they stay the same.
G.A social relativism as this practice is a commonance.If X amount of money is only supplied from a certain source, then in order to maintain their personal economies, what was once thought of as immoral, is now considered middle of the road.
H.Another relativism, as this would mean that in some respects, mankind would already be cannibals.Too much of anything.
J.Everyone would say, they were already there, why didn't we know, the government must have known, or the aliens were sneaky?
K.Cats aren't onus to anyone or anything.They take things in their own time and warm up, when they want to.
So make peace with the rovbot and the cat, however let the cat accept the rovbot on his own terms, in his own good time?
so how do you score this?
and if you get all the questions on an iq test right, how do they tell what your IQ is?
and if you get all the questions on an iq test right, how do they tell what your IQ is?
Re Matt, Clan Of The Cave-bear, Ayiallia
hehee i got an average 100 and i guessed it all lol hehehehhehehe guess im not academically associated or talanted enough but when i get my space drive up an runnin hehehehe i still wont pass their tests
Folks, ADD doesn't exist! Kids have short attention spans, it's just a fact of life. The only reason kids get diagnosed with "ADD" is because teachers don't want to have to deal with the normal activity of kids. It's getting so bad that the teachers are going to start saying, "Ok, here's your book, and here's your riddelin. Next!" Seriously, I bet that'll happen within the decade.
I disagree. I think that ADD does exist, but it is severely over-diagnosed. Also, I think that it is more of a continuum, with no set line that delineates whether or not one has it.
I do know that Ritalin worked wonders for me as a boy. I was much happier and my grades shot up.
It is now my hypothesis that I ADD is a mild form of autism.
Back on topic: years ago, I saw on a show on PBS that there are several different kinds of intelligence. I don't remember whether it was 7 or 9, but I do remember it was an odd number (funny how the mind plays that kind of tricks on you). These different kinds of intelligence are present in everybody, with their levels independent of each other, so someone might excel in one area, but be a little slow in another area. The IQ test measures only a few of these, and unevenly at that.
I do know that Ritalin worked wonders for me as a boy. I was much happier and my grades shot up.
It is now my hypothesis that I ADD is a mild form of autism.
Back on topic: years ago, I saw on a show on PBS that there are several different kinds of intelligence. I don't remember whether it was 7 or 9, but I do remember it was an odd number (funny how the mind plays that kind of tricks on you). These different kinds of intelligence are present in everybody, with their levels independent of each other, so someone might excel in one area, but be a little slow in another area. The IQ test measures only a few of these, and unevenly at that.
I also think ADD exists. mostly because I'm not a kid anymore and I still have a problem with it. though I went to school before ADD so I was just lazy.
when they locked me in the closet all day, I got all my work done no problem. when I had to sit in class and listen to the teacher drone on about crap I figured out 20 minutes ago, forget it.
and the homework always seemed like such a mountain. and to this day I can't read a text book for more than 3 minutes without either falling asleep, or looking down and realising that I was off on some tanget for the last two pages and have no idea what I had just read. (it's an interesting sensation to be reading words, and thinking about something else and not noticing.)
all I know is that my brain isn't like everyone elses, because most people don't seem to have these problems, and I really don't think it's just a matter of mental discipline.
when they locked me in the closet all day, I got all my work done no problem. when I had to sit in class and listen to the teacher drone on about crap I figured out 20 minutes ago, forget it.
and the homework always seemed like such a mountain. and to this day I can't read a text book for more than 3 minutes without either falling asleep, or looking down and realising that I was off on some tanget for the last two pages and have no idea what I had just read. (it's an interesting sensation to be reading words, and thinking about something else and not noticing.)
all I know is that my brain isn't like everyone elses, because most people don't seem to have these problems, and I really don't think it's just a matter of mental discipline.
QUOTE (Matt+Feb 28 2005, 03:01 AM)
I can't read a text book for more than 3 minutes without either falling asleep, or looking down and realising that I was off on some tanget for the last two pages and have no idea what I had just read. (it's an interesting sensation to be reading words, and thinking about something else and not noticing.)
all I know is that my brain isn't like everyone elses, because most people don't seem to have these problems, and I really don't think it's just a matter of mental discipline.
You're not alone. It looks like you are describing me, there.
all I know is that my brain isn't like everyone elses, because most people don't seem to have these problems, and I really don't think it's just a matter of mental discipline.
You're not alone. It looks like you are describing me, there.
Actually ive just realised
Intelligence is what the dictionary says,
However the things everyone discuessed goes towards the way the human brain works, meaning its a form of intelligence-but youd need to make a new word for it...thats all
Intelligence is what the dictionary says,
However the things everyone discuessed goes towards the way the human brain works, meaning its a form of intelligence-but youd need to make a new word for it...thats all
I used to have that problem matt...but its gone now, as long as im interested in it i can do it.
[ /de-lurk]
Feeling a bit inadequate are we?
Funny how the poll shows everyone to be above average/100 mark.
Online "IQ tests" tend to inflate scores to pander to the insecurities. So as to increase traffic, sell more ads, have repeat customers.
More credible "IQ tests" are ALL supervised by qualified psychometricians.
What masquarades as online "IQ tests" on some Hi-IQ societies is at best a "Power test" (definition in psychometry) and often just a quiz to guess what the test designer was thinking (and not much more). They offer little more than correlation of subjects scores with other more credible tests the subjects may have done. Eg, a subject may have done the Wecshler WAIS-III and/or SAT and also do one of these hi-iq power tests. The authors of these power tests seem to be content in offering a suite of these correlations only.
IQ. What is it really? Is it a ratio of mental age over chronological age? Is it where ones scores on the test falls with respect to the rest of the population, converted to a gaussian z-score? If so its no longer a quotient. Is it a Rasch score?
Okay, lets step back a bit.
What is Intelligence? Have we got that right yet?
Is it ability to solve difficult problems? Or lots of ordinary problems really quickly and with low error rate? So then what is a 'problem' and who decides what they are, and more importantly, which ones to include?
According to the APA 1996 Intelligence Task Force Report, http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/apa_01.html, they havent yet agreed that intelligence is sufficiently defined for them to be able to test for it. And even those aspects which they think they have defined, they know they cannot test most of!
In physics, some quantities are much easier to measure and test (with repeatability). Unfortunately, quantities like 'intelligence' in the social sciences are much harder to test for because their definition is not settled yet.
What use does it have? Absolutely none I contend. It doesnt even give the false sense of security to those who seek it.
Better tests are those you study and prepare for. They're called subject examinations. Or aptitude tests. At least with them, there's a more direct correlation with the score you get at the end, and how much of the learning material you have retained/understood. Thereby providing relevant guidance to either a future employer, OR indication to the subject as to whether they're wasting their time, and possibly not interested.
Even for medical diagnostic purposes there are far more accurate and specific tests. Tests for memory, tests for anti-social behaviour, etc.
There will come a day, when IQ tests and IQ testing will be relegated the same undignified status as Phrenology now has.
If you have time to burn, http://www.mental-testing.com/
[/lurk]
Feeling a bit inadequate are we?
Funny how the poll shows everyone to be above average/100 mark.
Online "IQ tests" tend to inflate scores to pander to the insecurities. So as to increase traffic, sell more ads, have repeat customers.
More credible "IQ tests" are ALL supervised by qualified psychometricians.
What masquarades as online "IQ tests" on some Hi-IQ societies is at best a "Power test" (definition in psychometry) and often just a quiz to guess what the test designer was thinking (and not much more). They offer little more than correlation of subjects scores with other more credible tests the subjects may have done. Eg, a subject may have done the Wecshler WAIS-III and/or SAT and also do one of these hi-iq power tests. The authors of these power tests seem to be content in offering a suite of these correlations only.
IQ. What is it really? Is it a ratio of mental age over chronological age? Is it where ones scores on the test falls with respect to the rest of the population, converted to a gaussian z-score? If so its no longer a quotient. Is it a Rasch score?
Okay, lets step back a bit.
What is Intelligence? Have we got that right yet?
Is it ability to solve difficult problems? Or lots of ordinary problems really quickly and with low error rate? So then what is a 'problem' and who decides what they are, and more importantly, which ones to include?
According to the APA 1996 Intelligence Task Force Report, http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/apa_01.html, they havent yet agreed that intelligence is sufficiently defined for them to be able to test for it. And even those aspects which they think they have defined, they know they cannot test most of!
In physics, some quantities are much easier to measure and test (with repeatability). Unfortunately, quantities like 'intelligence' in the social sciences are much harder to test for because their definition is not settled yet.
What use does it have? Absolutely none I contend. It doesnt even give the false sense of security to those who seek it.
Better tests are those you study and prepare for. They're called subject examinations. Or aptitude tests. At least with them, there's a more direct correlation with the score you get at the end, and how much of the learning material you have retained/understood. Thereby providing relevant guidance to either a future employer, OR indication to the subject as to whether they're wasting their time, and possibly not interested.
Even for medical diagnostic purposes there are far more accurate and specific tests. Tests for memory, tests for anti-social behaviour, etc.
There will come a day, when IQ tests and IQ testing will be relegated the same undignified status as Phrenology now has.
If you have time to burn, http://www.mental-testing.com/
[/lurk]
max iq is 300, average is 80-100, all the tests everywhere are inaccurate, on one i got 197, another i got 156 (though it told me i like to play around with words and am an intense thinker, so points in thier favor there)
lurker, while I totally agree with just about all of your points, I do find a small fault with one.
this is a forum about science and more specifically, advanced physics.
I think it's safe to say a forum like this is more likely to attract those at the higher end of the bell curve.
and anyone who is here and is not, isn't going to be honest about it.
But like you said, when a site tells you that you have an IQ of 158, and then asks for money, it's a pretty safe bet that it's not all that accurate.
QUOTE
Funny how the poll shows everyone to be above average/100 mark.
this is a forum about science and more specifically, advanced physics.
I think it's safe to say a forum like this is more likely to attract those at the higher end of the bell curve.
and anyone who is here and is not, isn't going to be honest about it.
But like you said, when a site tells you that you have an IQ of 158, and then asks for money, it's a pretty safe bet that it's not all that accurate.
For one, I imagine that most people that clicked on that survey either lied or don't even know their IQ. Most people have never actually been tested, and have just made up their own IQ.
Secondly, IQ is a total sham anyway. I think anybody that believes that intellegence can be measured by a simple test and then quantified into a single integer is, well, mentally deficient. To me that's about as scientific as saying "how good does this pizza taste?" and you replying with "it's quantifiable goodness is 160". It's an oversimplified analogy but you get the idea. It's absurd to think that we could quantify something as abstract as "intellegence", especially into a single integer.
Also, IQ tests themselves are completely unidirectional. They only measure a very specific type of cognitive skill. Intellegence comes in many different forms. Mozart would probably score relatively low on a standard IQ test, despite his obvious genious. Nobody would argue that Michaelangelo was a genious, but I doubt he would score very well on an IQ test either.
Oh, and for the record, A.D.D. is NOT a real disorder - unless you define it as Absense of Discipline Disorder. Mainly it is a convienent way for psychiatrists (who get kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies) to sell all sorts of new an expensive drugs - and it's an excuse for parents to not have to take the blame for bad parenting.
When a child acts up in school, it's because they are bored. It's why children act up in any situation. Boredom. When I was a kid, I got spanked for acting up - so I quickly learned not to act up. I was awefuly bored in school, but I didn't act up because my parents properly trained me not to. I didn't pay attention to things because I wasn't interested in them, not because of any mental disorder. The problem today is that good parenting has gone by the wayside. So kids get bored in school and stop paying attention to the teacher and start acting up. This is not a mental disorder, it's just a simple lack of discipline.
Aside from negligence on the parent's side I can also blame the schools for being antiquated and boring in their teaching methods. I'm in constant dismay at the fact that we have so much wonderful technology that could make learning so much fun, but schools mostly still rely on outdated books and the old fashion method of "read all this crap today and then take a test on it tomorrow to see if you memorized it".
Secondly, IQ is a total sham anyway. I think anybody that believes that intellegence can be measured by a simple test and then quantified into a single integer is, well, mentally deficient. To me that's about as scientific as saying "how good does this pizza taste?" and you replying with "it's quantifiable goodness is 160". It's an oversimplified analogy but you get the idea. It's absurd to think that we could quantify something as abstract as "intellegence", especially into a single integer.
Also, IQ tests themselves are completely unidirectional. They only measure a very specific type of cognitive skill. Intellegence comes in many different forms. Mozart would probably score relatively low on a standard IQ test, despite his obvious genious. Nobody would argue that Michaelangelo was a genious, but I doubt he would score very well on an IQ test either.
Oh, and for the record, A.D.D. is NOT a real disorder - unless you define it as Absense of Discipline Disorder. Mainly it is a convienent way for psychiatrists (who get kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies) to sell all sorts of new an expensive drugs - and it's an excuse for parents to not have to take the blame for bad parenting.
When a child acts up in school, it's because they are bored. It's why children act up in any situation. Boredom. When I was a kid, I got spanked for acting up - so I quickly learned not to act up. I was awefuly bored in school, but I didn't act up because my parents properly trained me not to. I didn't pay attention to things because I wasn't interested in them, not because of any mental disorder. The problem today is that good parenting has gone by the wayside. So kids get bored in school and stop paying attention to the teacher and start acting up. This is not a mental disorder, it's just a simple lack of discipline.
Aside from negligence on the parent's side I can also blame the schools for being antiquated and boring in their teaching methods. I'm in constant dismay at the fact that we have so much wonderful technology that could make learning so much fun, but schools mostly still rely on outdated books and the old fashion method of "read all this crap today and then take a test on it tomorrow to see if you memorized it".
I respectfully disagree with you.
I don't feel that I have a lack of discipline, I was spanked by my teachers and my parents, I was punished in all sorts of interesting manners. nothing worked.
Frankly I don't see how you can claim its not a disorder without siting any data or expertise, you are welcome to your opinion, I'm sure if I did not have the problems I have I would agree with you.
However in a double blind study, if you have a kid who has problems, and the only thing different you add to the mix is a few milligrams of ritilan, or whatever the current flavor of the week is, and the child changes dramatically, and the children on the placebos don't, how can you claim that nothing is going on?
last bit, My ex girlfriends kid was on some type of ADD meds, not ritilan, but something similar, I don't recall it's name. Everytime the kid forgot to take his pill in the morning, the teacher would call and ask if he had forgotten it.
and not because he was a zombie or behaved better on the drug, but because he couldn't focus without it.
Clearly not all children on drugs are ADD. and clearly it's over perscribed, and clearly there are many bad parents out there who just don't care, and clearly there needs to be a better way to diagnose it. but just because it's over perscribed, doesn't mean that there is nothing there.
what do you do when you've tried everything and nothing works?
how many kids do you have?
I don't feel that I have a lack of discipline, I was spanked by my teachers and my parents, I was punished in all sorts of interesting manners. nothing worked.
Frankly I don't see how you can claim its not a disorder without siting any data or expertise, you are welcome to your opinion, I'm sure if I did not have the problems I have I would agree with you.
However in a double blind study, if you have a kid who has problems, and the only thing different you add to the mix is a few milligrams of ritilan, or whatever the current flavor of the week is, and the child changes dramatically, and the children on the placebos don't, how can you claim that nothing is going on?
last bit, My ex girlfriends kid was on some type of ADD meds, not ritilan, but something similar, I don't recall it's name. Everytime the kid forgot to take his pill in the morning, the teacher would call and ask if he had forgotten it.
and not because he was a zombie or behaved better on the drug, but because he couldn't focus without it.
Clearly not all children on drugs are ADD. and clearly it's over perscribed, and clearly there are many bad parents out there who just don't care, and clearly there needs to be a better way to diagnose it. but just because it's over perscribed, doesn't mean that there is nothing there.
what do you do when you've tried everything and nothing works?
how many kids do you have?
i have ADD, my brain functions by working on tangents, its the only way i can visualize something, i can concentrate, but at the same time im always thinking on related paths, i have also come to realize that i think in pictures rather than through reasoning as most people do, this was initially a severe detremint in my early education, but as i learned to work with it, being able to visualize the atom, and 'see' the electrons in thier different paths, moving in waves, while atoms rotated around each other and vibrated as though on springs, is not difficult at all for me, but also while im thinking about this, im also thinking about electric charges, you know, 1/r^2 etc etc,
basically ADD is less of a handicap than a tool if you can just keep a direction to your thoughts
and as for IQ, the numbers are less important than the type of thinker it will tell you to be, online IQ tests dont give you much, but a real paper IQ test will give you a multi-page evaluation of how you figured your way through problems, and in what method you think best, thats the important piece
basically ADD is less of a handicap than a tool if you can just keep a direction to your thoughts
and as for IQ, the numbers are less important than the type of thinker it will tell you to be, online IQ tests dont give you much, but a real paper IQ test will give you a multi-page evaluation of how you figured your way through problems, and in what method you think best, thats the important piece
Matt,
I wasn't meaning to suggest that spanking was the answer to everything. The fact that discipline (whatever method) didn't work on you probably means that whoever was disciplining you either didn't use it effectively or wasn't using an appropriate method that you would respond to.
And no, I have no citations or evidence to say that it is not a real disorder -- I think anybody would have a hard time finding that because people (especially doctors and pharmaceutical companies) WANT it to be a real disorder. So you will find all sorts of weak experiments that point to A.D.D. as a real disorder, but not very much towards disproving it. It is entirely my opinion that is it not a real disorder, and I have no facts to base it on other than my own experiences. I was diagnosed with the same thing and put on various drugs, which affected me in various ways but not with the results I wanted. It was only through my own self-awareness that I discovered my problem was not a chemical imbalance or a made-up disorder like doctors suggested, rather it was just a lack of mental discipline.
Everybody has trouble concentrating sometimes, especially on activites that we don't feel are important or activities that others are forcing us to do. I have to do stuff all day that I don't want to do (my job), I can waste time and fart around, or I can buckle down and get it done. It's just a matter of having the discipline to do the latter. It's just self-efficacy.
Ok so you've just shown that psycho-active drugs effect the brain... that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, since that is what they are supposed to do! I could go smoke a bunch of pot and it would effect my brain too....
Ok so you've just shown that psycho-active drugs effect the brain... that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, since that is what they are supposed to do! I could go smoke a bunch of pot and it would effect my brain too....
what do you do when you've tried everything and nothing works?
two words: Jerry Springer
haha, I knew you'd ask me that. I have no children, but I was one once! Some people say I still am.
I have trouble concentrating all the time, even on activities that I feel are important and fun. I stop reading a book I am engrossed in mid sentence because I suddenly feel the need to do something else. I'm a programmer, I can be in the middle of a project and fully in the zone and suddenly feel an overwhelming need to check a few websites.
this stuff happens all the time, I won't even begin to tell you what a struggle it is for me to hold onto a coherent thought for any length of time. let alone 2 or 3.
but I guess I'm just lazy huh?
so lets see, I can't concentrate, I take some psychoactive drug (a stimulant actually) and suddenly I can.... and this proves that I have no disorder?
I think the fact that it didn't work for you proves that you were not ADD. the same way as I think the fact that it does work for some proves that they are.
your logic is like saying people don't have allergies because you don't sneeze when your around a cat. and there's a difference between saying "I don't think ADD is a real disorder" and saying "Oh, and for the record, A.D.D. is NOT a real disorder"
For the record it's clear that you have no credentials from which to speak from and are frankly talking out of your rear end. In this particular case I'm going to trust the findings of the American Medical Association and the National Institute of Mental Health over your uneducated opinion.
I'm going to have to go with Matt on this one as well. His experiences sound very similar to mine. I know I'm younger than him, so ADD might have been known when I was in school, but I didn't hear about it till I was in high school. Likely my parents wouldn't have been able to afford to take me to a doctor to figure out what was going on.
Fortunately I still managed good grades, because my parents were very strict about my homework practices when I was young. Had to be finished first thing after school, before I did anything else. Which, also fortunately, led my teachers to say that I didn't pay attention in class because I was bored because I was "bright", rather than just lazy and undisciplined.
At any rate, I have always had problems with concentration as well. And, like Matt, it doesn't matter whether what I enjoy what I'm doing, I'll get sidetracked. I've always loved reading. But I can't count the number of times I was reading a really interesting science book, or even a fiction book I really enjoyed, and all of a sudden I realized that for the past 3 pages, I hadn't actually been reading. Rather I was just following the words with my eyes and thinking about completely different things.
I have the same problems at work meetings now as I had in school. I need to have one of two things in order to properly absorb what's going on: Either it has to be written down, so I can go back and re-read parts where my mind wandered, or I have to be actively participating in some sort of discussion.
You're obviously entitled to your opinion. But I think there's an inherent difference in the way your mind works. No matter how much I want to stay on task and finish what I'm doing, I can't stop the sidetracks from happening. It's not an active choice. I do not hesitate to make the active choice to get back on task once I've noticed I'm off. But that's just it. I get off track without even noticing. It just happens, without a choice involved. I've personally found it well near impossible to altogether prevent the mental sidetracks from happening at all.
No matter what, my mind will fling itself off on tangents. Especially when I'm discussing or learning something that really interests me. It constantly spins off thinking about the consequences of some interesting fact, or the possibilities that a combination of points can lead to. I do have a little control over it. I can get a lot of work done because I can usually redirect myself after a short burst of distraction. But it'll only be a short time before my mind goes flying off again. It's a constant effort to redirect short tangents back on track. Which means that, as I am also a programmer and hence my work involves a lot of thought, a long day of such mental effort actually physically exhausts me.
*Sigh* This is also why my posts tend to be long, disjointed, and sometimes repeat themselves.
I wasn't meaning to suggest that spanking was the answer to everything. The fact that discipline (whatever method) didn't work on you probably means that whoever was disciplining you either didn't use it effectively or wasn't using an appropriate method that you would respond to.
And no, I have no citations or evidence to say that it is not a real disorder -- I think anybody would have a hard time finding that because people (especially doctors and pharmaceutical companies) WANT it to be a real disorder. So you will find all sorts of weak experiments that point to A.D.D. as a real disorder, but not very much towards disproving it. It is entirely my opinion that is it not a real disorder, and I have no facts to base it on other than my own experiences. I was diagnosed with the same thing and put on various drugs, which affected me in various ways but not with the results I wanted. It was only through my own self-awareness that I discovered my problem was not a chemical imbalance or a made-up disorder like doctors suggested, rather it was just a lack of mental discipline.
Everybody has trouble concentrating sometimes, especially on activites that we don't feel are important or activities that others are forcing us to do. I have to do stuff all day that I don't want to do (my job), I can waste time and fart around, or I can buckle down and get it done. It's just a matter of having the discipline to do the latter. It's just self-efficacy.
QUOTE
However in a double blind study, if you have a kid who has problems, and the only thing different you add to the mix is a few milligrams of ritilan, or whatever the current flavor of the week is, and the child changes dramatically, and the children on the placebos don't, how can you claim that nothing is going on?
Ok so you've just shown that psycho-active drugs effect the brain... that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, since that is what they are supposed to do! I could go smoke a bunch of pot and it would effect my brain too....
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| However in a double blind study, if you have a kid who has problems, and the only thing different you add to the mix is a few milligrams of ritilan, or whatever the current flavor of the week is, and the child changes dramatically, and the children on the placebos don't, how can you claim that nothing is going on? |
Ok so you've just shown that psycho-active drugs effect the brain... that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, since that is what they are supposed to do! I could go smoke a bunch of pot and it would effect my brain too....
what do you do when you've tried everything and nothing works?
two words: Jerry Springer
QUOTE
how many kids do you have?
haha, I knew you'd ask me that. I have no children, but I was one once! Some people say I still am.
Saying that ADD is not a real disorder is a slap in the face of all that suffer from it. You might as well claim that autism is not real, that spanking will cure the dyslexic, and grounding will cure Alzheimer's.
You are not only being foolish, but also cruel.
The fact that not every diagnosis of ADD is correct does not mean that every diagnosis of ADD is incorrect. That is a non sequitur (Latin for it does not follow). Your logic is flawed.
You are not only being foolish, but also cruel.
The fact that not every diagnosis of ADD is correct does not mean that every diagnosis of ADD is incorrect. That is a non sequitur (Latin for it does not follow). Your logic is flawed.
how can ADD be a disorder, our brains function diferent, just because i dont think the same as you doesnt make me inferior
while advances in science have put thousands of drugs on our shelves, psyciatrists(i never can spell big words) wave assements over our heads and have power over our lives, i dont trust these assements one bit
while advances in science have put thousands of drugs on our shelves, psyciatrists(i never can spell big words) wave assements over our heads and have power over our lives, i dont trust these assements one bit
QUOTE
Everybody has trouble concentrating sometimes, especially on activites that we don't feel are important or activities that others are forcing us to do. I have to do stuff all day that I don't want to do (my job), I can waste time and fart around, or I can buckle down and get it done. It's just a matter of having the discipline to do the latter. It's just self-efficacy.
I have trouble concentrating all the time, even on activities that I feel are important and fun. I stop reading a book I am engrossed in mid sentence because I suddenly feel the need to do something else. I'm a programmer, I can be in the middle of a project and fully in the zone and suddenly feel an overwhelming need to check a few websites.
this stuff happens all the time, I won't even begin to tell you what a struggle it is for me to hold onto a coherent thought for any length of time. let alone 2 or 3.
but I guess I'm just lazy huh?
so lets see, I can't concentrate, I take some psychoactive drug (a stimulant actually) and suddenly I can.... and this proves that I have no disorder?
I think the fact that it didn't work for you proves that you were not ADD. the same way as I think the fact that it does work for some proves that they are.
your logic is like saying people don't have allergies because you don't sneeze when your around a cat. and there's a difference between saying "I don't think ADD is a real disorder" and saying "Oh, and for the record, A.D.D. is NOT a real disorder"
For the record it's clear that you have no credentials from which to speak from and are frankly talking out of your rear end. In this particular case I'm going to trust the findings of the American Medical Association and the National Institute of Mental Health over your uneducated opinion.
QUOTE
Everybody has trouble concentrating sometimes, especially on activites that we don't feel are important or activities that others are forcing us to do. I have to do stuff all day that I don't want to do (my job), I can waste time and fart around, or I can buckle down and get it done. It's just a matter of having the discipline to do the latter. It's just self-efficacy.
I'm going to have to go with Matt on this one as well. His experiences sound very similar to mine. I know I'm younger than him, so ADD might have been known when I was in school, but I didn't hear about it till I was in high school. Likely my parents wouldn't have been able to afford to take me to a doctor to figure out what was going on.
Fortunately I still managed good grades, because my parents were very strict about my homework practices when I was young. Had to be finished first thing after school, before I did anything else. Which, also fortunately, led my teachers to say that I didn't pay attention in class because I was bored because I was "bright", rather than just lazy and undisciplined.
At any rate, I have always had problems with concentration as well. And, like Matt, it doesn't matter whether what I enjoy what I'm doing, I'll get sidetracked. I've always loved reading. But I can't count the number of times I was reading a really interesting science book, or even a fiction book I really enjoyed, and all of a sudden I realized that for the past 3 pages, I hadn't actually been reading. Rather I was just following the words with my eyes and thinking about completely different things.
I have the same problems at work meetings now as I had in school. I need to have one of two things in order to properly absorb what's going on: Either it has to be written down, so I can go back and re-read parts where my mind wandered, or I have to be actively participating in some sort of discussion.
You're obviously entitled to your opinion. But I think there's an inherent difference in the way your mind works. No matter how much I want to stay on task and finish what I'm doing, I can't stop the sidetracks from happening. It's not an active choice. I do not hesitate to make the active choice to get back on task once I've noticed I'm off. But that's just it. I get off track without even noticing. It just happens, without a choice involved. I've personally found it well near impossible to altogether prevent the mental sidetracks from happening at all.
No matter what, my mind will fling itself off on tangents. Especially when I'm discussing or learning something that really interests me. It constantly spins off thinking about the consequences of some interesting fact, or the possibilities that a combination of points can lead to. I do have a little control over it. I can get a lot of work done because I can usually redirect myself after a short burst of distraction. But it'll only be a short time before my mind goes flying off again. It's a constant effort to redirect short tangents back on track. Which means that, as I am also a programmer and hence my work involves a lot of thought, a long day of such mental effort actually physically exhausts me.
*Sigh* This is also why my posts tend to be long, disjointed, and sometimes repeat themselves.
as I was reading this post, the song Angie was playing over and over in my mind, toward the end, I stopped reading and started wondering if you also constantly have some song going over in your head, though my eyes continued to follow the thread, I had to go back and read the last two paragraphs 2 times, and I still don't think I got them. while doing that the song got louder and louder and while looking at the words, all I comprehended was the lyrics I was hearing.
though meetings are the same for me. I can be looking right at someone and not hear anythign they said. which is why I sit politely and listen to people, and then ask them to email me what they just said, or I'll have a side one on one meeting where I get all the details I need.
I didn't hear about ADD until a few years after I dropped out of college. I found a book called "you mean I'm not stupid Lazy or Crazy?" the first two chapters of it are pretty good.
But it's been my experience that not everyone has these problems. And considering I have above average will power, I refuse to beleive that it's just a lack of discipline.
though meetings are the same for me. I can be looking right at someone and not hear anythign they said. which is why I sit politely and listen to people, and then ask them to email me what they just said, or I'll have a side one on one meeting where I get all the details I need.
I didn't hear about ADD until a few years after I dropped out of college. I found a book called "you mean I'm not stupid Lazy or Crazy?" the first two chapters of it are pretty good.
But it's been my experience that not everyone has these problems. And considering I have above average will power, I refuse to beleive that it's just a lack of discipline.
Matt,
Firstly, I'm not sure if it was clear, but the "you" later in my last post was actually referring to the poster "amnesia". See what I mean about disjointed?
Anyway, I don't constantly have some song in my head. But it does happen fairly often. Sometimes it is very distracting, but sometimes it actually seems to allow me to focus better. Like maybe it is occupying the part of my mind that normally would cause me to get sidetracked.
I feel your pain, man. This is exactly how it is for me.
I feel your pain, man. This is exactly how it is for me.
But it's been my experience that not everyone has these problems. And considering I have above average will power, I refuse to beleive that it's just a lack of discipline.
Same for me. My will power is one of the things that helped my get through college. I pick things up very easily, but not quickly... If that makes any sense. I may only need to read something once to get it and remember it, but I'm a very slow reader because I get distracted so easily. This meant that I had to give up recreational reading, and video games, and my own side programming projects, and going out on school nights, all in order to have the time I needed to get through my schoolwork. It took a lot of will power to give those up.
But it also helped to get together with my very dedicated and focused friends to do homework. Even if we didn't have the same classes, they served as a reminder of the task at hand that made it a little easier to get back on track. But even so, if we were in a public place, I'd end up wasting time people-watching, or listening to other people's conversations rather than comprehending what I was reading. Not because it was interesting. Just because it was there and available for my mind to hop over to.
Without my will power, and my focused friends, I wouldn't have made it through.
Same here.
I took one of those cheap online tests once, not so much for the actual score, but to see what "type" of intelligence I supposedly had. I thought that was more useful and interesting, and easier to determine. The result they gave me made sense.
Unfortunately, when I took a similar test at a different place, it gave me different results for both numeric score and "type" of intelligence. And that result made pretty good sense too. So I'm still not sure of a numerical score or what type of intelligence I have. But I guess I don't care. What I have is enough to get me through life. And if my experiences working in retail are any indication, it seems to be more than the average American. So I'm okay with the relative uncertainty.
Of course, if you are either arrogant or sadistic, you can try and take the Mensa Workout Test and then brag about your result here. It has a fair variation of math, verbal, and spatial questions. And as a bonus, they let you know what your chances are of getting into their arrogant little elitist society.
I'll let you all decide if I am arrogent or sadistic.
Firstly, I'm not sure if it was clear, but the "you" later in my last post was actually referring to the poster "amnesia". See what I mean about disjointed?
Anyway, I don't constantly have some song in my head. But it does happen fairly often. Sometimes it is very distracting, but sometimes it actually seems to allow me to focus better. Like maybe it is occupying the part of my mind that normally would cause me to get sidetracked.
QUOTE
I can be looking right at someone and not hear anythign they said. which is why I sit politely and listen to people, and then ask them to email me what they just said, or I'll have a side one on one meeting where I get all the details I need.
I feel your pain, man. This is exactly how it is for me.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I can be looking right at someone and not hear anythign they said. which is why I sit politely and listen to people, and then ask them to email me what they just said, or I'll have a side one on one meeting where I get all the details I need. |
I feel your pain, man. This is exactly how it is for me.
But it's been my experience that not everyone has these problems. And considering I have above average will power, I refuse to beleive that it's just a lack of discipline.
Same for me. My will power is one of the things that helped my get through college. I pick things up very easily, but not quickly... If that makes any sense. I may only need to read something once to get it and remember it, but I'm a very slow reader because I get distracted so easily. This meant that I had to give up recreational reading, and video games, and my own side programming projects, and going out on school nights, all in order to have the time I needed to get through my schoolwork. It took a lot of will power to give those up.
But it also helped to get together with my very dedicated and focused friends to do homework. Even if we didn't have the same classes, they served as a reminder of the task at hand that made it a little easier to get back on track. But even so, if we were in a public place, I'd end up wasting time people-watching, or listening to other people's conversations rather than comprehending what I was reading. Not because it was interesting. Just because it was there and available for my mind to hop over to.
Without my will power, and my focused friends, I wouldn't have made it through.
Matt, WaterBreath, I agree with you, though from the opposite side. I have an ADD kid I work with every week, and without medication he can't focus on anything.
In contrast I can only focus on one thing at a time. (However, that does not mean I am not easily distracted off a subject to a more interesting one.) With a single strong focus I do one thing at a time, but do it very good. (This is why post are usually short and straight to a point.) Unfortunately my will power is not as strong as yours, and I barely managed to get through school.
I have a hard time relating to this ADD kid, but patience and discipline (not punishment) on my part, and some medication on his part make things work fairly well.
As far as IQ, I don't really care to know where I stand. It would only make me feel depressed or arrogant- things I really don't need.
In contrast I can only focus on one thing at a time. (However, that does not mean I am not easily distracted off a subject to a more interesting one.) With a single strong focus I do one thing at a time, but do it very good. (This is why post are usually short and straight to a point.) Unfortunately my will power is not as strong as yours, and I barely managed to get through school.
I have a hard time relating to this ADD kid, but patience and discipline (not punishment) on my part, and some medication on his part make things work fairly well.
As far as IQ, I don't really care to know where I stand. It would only make me feel depressed or arrogant- things I really don't need.
QUOTE
As far as IQ, I don't really care to know where I stand. It would only make me feel depressed or arrogant- things I really don't need.
Same here.
I took one of those cheap online tests once, not so much for the actual score, but to see what "type" of intelligence I supposedly had. I thought that was more useful and interesting, and easier to determine. The result they gave me made sense.
Unfortunately, when I took a similar test at a different place, it gave me different results for both numeric score and "type" of intelligence. And that result made pretty good sense too. So I'm still not sure of a numerical score or what type of intelligence I have. But I guess I don't care. What I have is enough to get me through life. And if my experiences working in retail are any indication, it seems to be more than the average American. So I'm okay with the relative uncertainty.
Of course, if you are either arrogant or sadistic, you can try and take the Mensa Workout Test and then brag about your result here. It has a fair variation of math, verbal, and spatial questions. And as a bonus, they let you know what your chances are of getting into their arrogant little elitist society.
QUOTE
Your score was 25 out of 30. That is an excellent score, you would have a very strong chance of passing the Mensa test and joining Mensa.
I'll let you all decide if I am arrogent or sadistic.
there is no one I.Q. test that can measure everyone's actual intelegence quotient, simply because the number of questions that would be needed is far more than are on the tests. and because they have to cover manny diffrent areas, more than just math, which i have seen most are heavely math based.. i cant remember, i just said. 100 to 116. *shrug* i dont really know what mine was. could be 128? i think i got that on one of the average iQtests? who knows.
When I was six a psycologist administered an I.Q. test and said I had an I.Q. of 185. I haven't taken an official test since then though, so I'm not sure if it's accurate. If it has changed, it's probably gone down.
so when you were 6, you had the intelligence of an 11 year old.
Does that make me special or at least validate my existence?
it depends, do you still have the intelligence of an 11 year old?
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.