How smart do you think you are?

GLaDOS · 12-07-2013 03:15PM

I'm very smrt, at least an 8

tim3000 · 12-07-2013 03:16PM

9

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Yep, that's true. They suffer from an insecure delusion.

I think if anyone gets an IQ less than 95, they should be forced to go back to school.

I have heard it said that I.Q. tests are just a measure of how good you are at taking I.Q. tests.

If you ask me lot of being intelligent is being curious about the world. I would rank myself as a seven or an eight. I am knowledgeable in a few distinct areas.

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:16PM

9

tim3000 wrote: »

in a few distinct areas.

What's so distinct about them, what are they? :eek:

Akrasia · 12-07-2013 03:18PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

People who believe that you can improve your IQ by going back to school tend to be even less intelligent.

That's an interesting point actually. IQ is supposed to measure intelligence, but you can do better in IQ tests by practising them, does this mean you're more intelligent? Probably not, but that raises the question, what is intelligence anyway?

IQ scores have been going up steadily and they keep having to make the tests harder and fiddling with the marking scheme to maintain the scale the way it was designed. (the Median IQ score is supposed to be 100, ie, for every 100 people who take the same test, 50 people should score equal or less than 100 and 50 should score equal or greater than 100

Are people genuinely getting more intelligent? or are we just getting better at taking IQ tests?

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 12-07-2013 03:19PM

I don't like smarties, I prefer wine gums

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:19PM

9

Akrasia wrote: »

Are people genuinely getting more intelligent? or are we just getting better at taking IQ tests?

Is that one of your assignment questions?

I don't like smarties, I prefer wine gums

If only that was funny, I would have laughed otherwise.

**Vai** · 12-07-2013 03:20PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

IQ is a faulty measure of intelligence, that's well known.

1 to 10 polls on the internet are legendary for their accuracy though

Amirani · 12-07-2013 03:21PM

2

tim3000 wrote: »

If you ask me lot of being intelligent is being curious about the world.

That's what Einstein said. I'd be inclined to agree.

Knowledge is essentially impossible to measure on an objective basis.

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:21PM

9

**Vai** wrote: »

1 to 10 polls on the internet are legendary for their accuracy though

1 in 10 polls commit murder!

12-07-2013 03:21PM

It's not something I could even try to quantify for myself, because it's something I know I've gotten wrong in the past. When I was younger I thought I was pretty clever, but now I work with a lot of really clever people and my shortcomings are shown up in stark relief.

I think our impression of our own cleverness might tend to be comparative - compared to my prior social circle, I thought I was quite clever. Compared to my current one, I'm thick as a plank.

I do think the older I get the more realistic my assessment of myself is. Most 18 year olds will probably rate themselves as being very intelligent, regardless of the reality.

1ZRed · 12-07-2013 03:22PM

9

wretcheddomain wrote: »

So you couldn't give a f*** but yet you decided to vote? :rolleyes:

Yeah, as in I couldn't give a f*ck either way, so I voted anyway. Problem?

Amirani · 12-07-2013 03:22PM

2

Akrasia wrote: »

Are people genuinely getting more intelligent? or are we just getting better at taking IQ tests?

Both I reckon.

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:23PM

9

Akrasia wrote: »

but that raises the question, what is intelligence anyway?

I'm surprised you care enough to ask this question judging from your signature.

Oregano_State · 12-07-2013 03:23PM

2

Akrasia wrote: »

The Dunning Kruger effect is apparent here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

So far, 38.46% of voters have given themselves 10 out of ten.

Who are ye coddin', lads?

Akrasia · 12-07-2013 03:24PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Is that one of your assignment questions?

Yeah, I'm doing a course where all the coursework consists entirely of rhetorical questions.
You fail the course by providing a direct answer and are given top marks if you just ponder them for a bit.

Amirani · 12-07-2013 03:25PM

2

Candie wrote: »

I do think the older I get the more realistic my assessment of myself is. Most 18 year olds will probably rate themselves as being very intelligent, regardless of the reality.

The irony of that is that it's a sign of intelligence to have a good level of self-awareness and not over-estimate how smart one's self is. Most young people tend not to be very smart in that regard.

Mr.Prodston · 12-07-2013 03:26PM

Akrasia wrote: »

Yeah, I'm doing a course where all the coursework consists entirely of rhetorical questions.
You fail the course by providing a direct answer and are given top marks if you just ponder them for a bit.

Ah yes I did Introduction to Philosophy as well :pac:

Oregano_State · 12-07-2013 03:27PM

2

NiallSparky wrote: »

Both I reckon.

Intelligence as I understand it, is an ability, nothing more. It may change over millenia (we are more intelligent than the apes we descended from etc.), but I sincerely doubt it has changed measurably in the period of time IQ tests have been around.

We're getting more educated.

Akrasia · 12-07-2013 03:28PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I'm surprised you care enough to ask this question judging from your signature.

What do you think my signature means?

12-07-2013 03:29PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

The irony of that is that it's a sign of intelligence to have a good level of self-awareness and not over-estimate how smart one's self is. Most young people tend not to be very smart in that regard.

It would be interesting to get an age group with the answers to see how pronounced the Dunning-Kruger effect is with under 25's, and how it diminishes with experience.

BigGrayKettle · 12-07-2013 03:29PM

Im defffo a ten al ye aijets are tick

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:32PM

9

Akrasia wrote: »

What do you think my signature means?

I interpreted it the way a hysterical American ignoramus would say it, as opposed to an ordinary human being who realises ignorance is currently ruling the world.

12-07-2013 03:33PM

I'm smart enough to know the poll is worthless

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:35PM

9

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm smart enough to know the poll is worthless

Can you not appreciate the aesthetic value it adds to the thread?

Akrasia · 12-07-2013 03:36PM

Oregano_State wrote: »

Intelligence as I understand it, is an ability, nothing more. It may change over millenia (we are more intelligent than the apes we descended from etc.), but I sincerely doubt it has changed measurably in the period of time IQ tests have been around.

We're getting more educated.

Daniel Dennett the philosopher asks an interesting question, Did we evolve intelligence and then figure out how to use tools, or do the tools we use cause us to evolve intelligence?

We have had the same brain architecture for a hundred thousand years.

It's only in the last few millenia that we started seriously using complex thinking tools like language, engineering, writing, maths, books, printing presses, radio, tv, internet etc. Once these tools are developed by our ancestors, they become available for all of to start using them and they open up new ways of using our physical brains to accomplish far more complex tasks

Thoughts and ideas are tools, just like hammers and wheels. 2 hundred years ago, if you stopped people on the street and asked them to tell you what the concept of 'percentage' meant, you'd find that most people could not answer you. The fact that almost everyone now has the concept of 'percentage' in our brain, it allows us to think about the world in a more complex and precise way, and this allows us to understand things better.
Does that mean we're more intelligent?
It probably does.

12-07-2013 03:37PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Can you not appreciate the aesthetic value it adds to the thread?

when you put it like that, no

wretcheddomain · 12-07-2013 03:37PM

9

Akrasia wrote: »

Daniel Dennett the philosopher asks an interesting question, Did evolve intelligence

Even I don't know how to approach that question.

In seriousness though, I think intelligence would be akin to a mansion with hundreds of locked doors. We need tools to open the doors, and through our social evolution, we've managed to open quite a lot of doors which has expanded our ability. The use of logic played a huge role especially with respect to science so I would agree that we need tools to first realise what we are capable of. The advent of science and reason shone a huge light on things we never would have previously contemplated and now things 'make sense' as opposed to sticking to religious dogma and irrationality.

Akrasia · 12-07-2013 03:40PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Even I don't know how to approach that question.

Apologies, when i type I edit and rephrase as I go and sometimes the little words like 'we' and 'do' get left on the cutting room floor.

12-07-2013 03:42PM

Akrasia wrote: »

Daniel Dennett the philosopher asks an interesting question, Did evolve intelligence and then figure out how to use tools, or do the tools we use cause us to evolve intelligence?

I *love* Dan Dennett.

It's a great question and one that can't be definitively answered as it's likely to be much more nuanced than one or the other.

I think the reality is likely that intelligence evolves from a symbiotic relationship between action and thought, as in many ways the mind is like a muscle, the more it's used the more effective and 'stronger' it is.

daithi1970 · 12-07-2013 03:44PM

shure arent all people stupid? that's what a previous thread said:pac:

How smart do you think you are?

Comments