I heard that the IQ test story going round in emails is a hoax but when I originally heard the story it was on a reliable news network (BBC Radio 5 Live) so I think even if it is exagerated it is [partly at least] true.
Results 1 to 20 of 20
I scream myself raw,
my throat is sore,
from the effort to say,
what i lose every day.
You slash at me with barbs,
tear at me and my garbs,
and in the end i do bleed,
taken from me my seed.
I and everyone you abuse,
will one day hear the news,
of your vilest crimes,
told by my pathetic rhymes.
Then that day will they know,
of the suffering you do sow,
and then shall descend a hush,
as all stare at you in horror, George Bush.
Interesting fact, since the creation of the IQ test every American President has been tested. As you would expect, they tend to the intelligent, after all, only the devious evil genius can rise to such a stinking pile as American Society. In fact, by the IQ test definition all but 2 president's have been 'geniuses'.
The 2 exceptions you ask?
1. George Bush Senior, at 98 (100 being average)
2. George Bush Junior at 96.
interesting, eh?
I heard that the IQ test story going round in emails is a hoax but when I originally heard the story it was on a reliable news network (BBC Radio 5 Live) so I think even if it is exagerated it is [partly at least] true.
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11
well, i suppose it may not be true, but we can never be sure anything is true, no source is wholly reliable.
I, however, am willing to be biased and beleive this to be true anyway
oh, on another note, Reagan would not have tested as a genius during much of his time as president, tho he would of at the beggining, reason being he had altzheimer's, a disease of the brain. He would porobably have scored less than George&George for most of the time :/
Another interesting tid-bit. The IQ test is created based on several biases. It is not even considered accurate or credible by most sociologists anymore.
Ask not what your country can do for you, or what you can do for your country. Ask what you can do for one another.
It's a good point.
Is it possible to define a measure for intelligence?
well, to be frank, philosophically speaking, it isn't.
It is a concept too abstract to be truly measured, like morality.
isn't the IQ test a measurement of how you compare against other people?
it doesn't measure YOUR exact "smartness," just how much and what you know compared to others.
am i right? i don't know.
\"One murder makes a villain...millions a hero. Numbers sanctify, my friend.\" -Charlie Chaplin
In any case, it's certainly not indicative of one's ability to preside over anything. Just look at Jimmy Carter, who (I believe) had the highest IQ of any President.
\"Everybodys interests are not naturally opposed to everybody elses...I dont see any argument that states how one person\'s interests must be maltreated by a society of freely associating equals.\"
-pea¢eniKKKed
pce, i don't know exactly how it works. However, even if it tests how you do comparitive to other people, it has to test your comparitive abilities on certain things, and each person has a varying ability on different things, someone could be a mathematical genius who cant spell, or a poetical master who cant put 1+1 together. Therefore an IQ test would have to be biased towards certain sets of skills, simply because opinion of which skills are indicitave of actual intelligence is too varied.
me think my IQ is 97. me took awhile ago. at some site.
me stop talking now.
This is <span style=\'color:red\'>my</span> rifle. There are many like it but this one is <span style=\'color:red\'>mine</span>.
Since the day I was born I had a wonderful dream
To make people hurt to make people scream
I wanna fight you but you don't dare
I spit on your face and you just stare
I beat you down and the cops don't care
Stab you in the chest
Right through the flesh
Shove the knife in deep
Cause life is cheap
Like hookers from Budapest
There isn't one type of IQ test - there are many. The original ones were based on general knowledge and obviously, were poor indicators of 'intelligence' (however you want to define it). For example, original IQ tests in the US were culturally biased towards white middle class Americans and so African Americans scored poorly on them (how convenient).
Modern IQ tests are much better (though not perfect of course) as they test reasoning, problem-solving, lateral thinking, spatial thinking. So long as you are literate, you should get a fair idea of how well your mind functions (in a clinical, technical way).
It cannot but be supportive, socialist, communist or whatever you want to call it. Does nature, and the human species with it, have much time left to survive in the absence of such change? Very little time. Who will be the builders of that new world? The
I for one find the IQ definition of a genius at 140 unsatisfactory (this is MENSA's definition). Surely a genius is someone who has a particular and amazing talent in one field? for example, you could get a musical genius who cant put 2 and 2 together...
Another point, they say your IQ doesnt stabilize until you reach 18, so if you are below that age and score low, then there is LITERALLY no need to be disheartened...
as for me, i got 147, which annoyed me. I didnt beleive i was intelligent, as in low school years i never got good marks, but then, i was also lazy. When it came to external exams tho, i did really well, in my AS's i got 4 A's.
Intelligence is so rare that when we find an example of it we call it genius... at any rate, it is a valueless, subjective term.
CB, there are different modern tests with different scales. The number you score is only meaningful to others if we know the name of the particular test and what measurement scale it uses.
For example, to qualify for Mensa you have to score in the top 2% on an IQ test. This means on the Cattell B test you need 148, on the Culture Free test you need 133, the Ravens Advanced Matrices you need 148 - Ravens Standard Matrices you need 131 and on the Wechsler Scales you need 132 - info from Mensa.
Sounds like you should try out at any rate!
It cannot but be supportive, socialist, communist or whatever you want to call it. Does nature, and the human species with it, have much time left to survive in the absence of such change? Very little time. Who will be the builders of that new world? The
bah, no way am i going to try and join that epitome of elitism....
I agree it seems elitist but Mensa has a strict policy of no political or other agendas. Much of what Mensa is about is being able to enjoy the company of other highly intelligent persons - even if it's just to have somewhere to go where people will get your jokes. The highly intelligent often find life extremely lonely.
It cannot but be supportive, socialist, communist or whatever you want to call it. Does nature, and the human species with it, have much time left to survive in the absence of such change? Very little time. Who will be the builders of that new world? The
"Each man, finally, outside his proffesional activity, carries on some form of intellectual activity, that is, he is a 'philosopher', an artist, a man of tatse, he participates in a particular conception of the world, has a conscious line of moral conduct, and therefore contributes to sustain a conception of the world or to modify it, that is, to bring into being new modes of thought"
Antonio Gramsci, from his Prison Notebooks.
Intellect is where you find it my friend, some of my best discussions have been with those labelled by the system as morons.
Yea...and IQ tests are never really accurate because some people find them boring and end up scoring low because of them.
I'm one of those people. IQ tests=zzzzzzzzzz and that equals low IQ.
CommieBastard...
In arguing for why Mensa may not be as elitist as you think, I was not suggesting that I subscribed to some rigid definition of intelligence and certainly not that 'intelligence' is the criteria by which one should choose friends. I was merely playing devil's advocate because you dismissed them out of hand.
I can just as easily argue in line with what you are saying - it's elitist and exclusionary and draws artificial distinctions between people based on particular measures that don't account for different types of intelligence and other characteristics that may be far more important than naked intelligence. But I don't believe it's that simple.
It cannot but be supportive, socialist, communist or whatever you want to call it. Does nature, and the human species with it, have much time left to survive in the absence of such change? Very little time. Who will be the builders of that new world? The
did i say it was that simple? no i was pointing out that it cannot simply be said to be unbiased....
*really doesnt recall having ever said it was a simple matter of it being exclusory etc*
Sociologists have proven that most IQ tests are biased culturally. In other words, for lack of a better terminology, they are geared toward white, anglo-saxon, protestants. This theory is taught and accepted nowadays simply because of the overwhelming evidence in it's favor. On the other hand, in the last ten years, they have been working hard to correct this mistake and may have come up with some better tests.
Ask not what your country can do for you, or what you can do for your country. Ask what you can do for one another.
You didn't say that.
My comment that I don't believe it's that simple was meant to be read as is - not directed at you at all.
It cannot but be supportive, socialist, communist or whatever you want to call it. Does nature, and the human species with it, have much time left to survive in the absence of such change? Very little time. Who will be the builders of that new world? The
