High IQ Societies

[debussy symbolism]

There is no such thing as "flunking" an IQ test. You get a score and that's it, there is no pass or fail. Also, don't confuse accomplishment with intelligence. I would be impressed by someone who has climbed Mt Everest but I wouldn't consider them to be intelligent for doing so. There are many highly successful businessmen with low to average IQ’s. Again, high achievers but I wouldn’t consider them to be intelligent just because of that. I don’t understand why people insist there needs to be a connection between Achievement/Success/Accomplishment and IQ. Why does there need to be any justification for a High IQ? An IQ test is simply a measurement of an individual’s problem solving ability compared to the general population. That’s all, pure and simple. If you sleep better at nigh not knowing your IQ then that’s fine by me.

By "flunking" I meant passing the test with limited success due to either lack of care for the test or a poor concentration, and not due to limited intelligence. I am sorry if I wasn't clear.

I am not confusing accomplishment with intelligence, I am stating that pure intelligence is useless if it is not applied. Climbing Mt. Everest shows an enormous physical accomplishment, but doesn't necessarily have to do with mental accomplishment. I was referring to mental accomplishemnts when referring to intelligence and accomplishment. In order for you to be successful at something like business you may achieve that success either via luck or intellect. Luck will not hold you forever, and if the business man is strong in business for a long time, it is then due to his reasoning capacities and not luck, hence, no matter what the IQ test reveals, he is obviously intelligent.

Okay, you could say that the IQ test is just a test measuring problem solving ability. In fact, I agree with you. It is just that. It doesn't at ALL measure intelligence. However there is a correlation between higher IQ test scores and achievement, but to me that correlation is very weak, as many persons with high IQs aren't successful at anything, and many with relatively low IQs are. I am not saying that those with high IQs are less capable, I am saying that to me, problem solving capacity doesn't necessarily correlate with general intelligence and overall success.

Why would I be bothered at night not knowing about my problem solving efficiency? Would me knowing my "score" have an impact on how I think?

[rc]

I don’t understand why people insist there needs to be a connection between Achievement/Success/Accomplishment and IQ. Why does there need to be any justification for a High IQ? An IQ test is simply a measurement of an individual’s problem solving ability compared to the general population.

Don't you think someone with good problem solving abilities would by nature of that virtue be accomplishing things? (whatever the goal may be)

Someone whose head if full of knowledge/ideas/logic but doesn't act on them isn't solving many problems.

[debussy symbolism]

Don't you think someone with good problem solving abilities would by nature of that virtue be accomplishing things? (whatever the goal may be)

Someone whose head if full of knowledge/ideas/logic but doesn't act on them isn't solving many problems.

Someone with good problem solving abilities would not necessarily be motivated to accomplish anything. In fact, those gifted with problem solving abilities are often lazy because it comes to them naturally, and they don't have to work as hard. When however a harder problem arises and they are unable to solve it immediately, they are discouraged and walk away from it. Good solving abilities doesn't mean that a person will accomplish things, it just means that a person will have an easier time doing them. A hard working person however that isn't as good with those abilities will not give up as easy, and will eventually come up with a solution.

Knowledge and ideas aren't restricted by logic in my opinion. You can be very logical but still have no information on anything and have no ideas of any kind.

[rc]

...Then that person hasn't quite solved the fundamental problem of their own apathy.

[debussy symbolism]

...Then that person hasn't quite solved the fundamental problem of their own apathy.

I am so glad you mentioned "apathy," because that is indeed a key, or at least part of the key to success. There are loads of extremely intelligent people that have no desire to cultivate their talent and hone their skills, but choose to act rather like the loads of "normal" people and ultimately get nowhere. An "average" person however that pursues a goal will get somewhere. Having passion for something is just as or even more necessary to have aside with ability.

[jlh]

At the root level, intelligence can be seen as a relationship with the speed at which the neurons fire through the brain.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WNP-4KBX4KC-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2006&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=a8512325caba36fccd25a0c3605408c5

[pianolearner]

I am so glad you mentioned "apathy," because that is indeed a key, or at least part of the key to success. There are loads of extremely intelligent people that have no desire to cultivate their talent and hone their skills, but choose to act rather like the loads of "normal" people and ultimately get nowhere. An "average" person however that pursues a goal will get somewhere. Having passion for something is just as or even more necessary to have aside with ability.

debussy, you really are confusing me now. You keep making references to "loads of extremely intelligent people " that have achieved nothing and "average [people] however that pursues a goal will get somewhere". How are you defining intelligence in this case? As I see it, by your definition of intelligence there should be no such thing as an intelligent person that achieves nothing. You are using intelligence to describe perseverance and ambition. I already explained in another post that given enough time, most people should be able to answer ALL questions on an IQ test correctly. That is perseverance isn't it? I keep trying to explain this but people either choose to ignore it or they don’t understand it. Intelligent people arrive at the correct solution quicker than average people, that’s what an IQ test measures. Do you understand this concept?

As for accomplishment, that can be down to opportunity and luck. A person born into poverty may never have the opportunity to accomplish anything, is it fair to say they are unintelligent?

What makes a person a good piano player? Is it their timing, technique and musicality or is simply based on the number of CD’s they have sold and the certificates hanging on their wall? What if it were possible to design a Piano IQ and standardise it such that the average piano player scores 100 and concert pianists score 140+.  Imagine someone who practices everyday, refining and perfecting technique, adding to their repertoire but has no interest or ambition to record CD’s or perform in concert. Out of interest they decide to take a Piano IQ test and score 150. Would you say they are unworthy of such a score?

[pianolearner]

...Then that person hasn't quite solved the fundamental problem of their own apathy.

Apathy is irrelevant when talking about intelligence and it's measurement.

[pianolearner]

At the root level, intelligence can be seen as a relationship with the speed at which the neurons fire through the brain.

An interesting article. At least it discusses Intelligence at a scientific and biological level rather than at the emotional level that some here prefer to do.

[rc]

Apathy is irrelevant when talking about intelligence and it's measurement.

Yeah, I'm off on a tangent...  But I stand by it, an intellectual is stunted who hasn't yet decided to put their mind to a purpose, a reason for their reason.  What good is a quick mind that's never put to use?

Any accomplishment worthwhile doesn't have much to do with luck.

If a pianist is very famous and sells a lot of CD's, that may be a testament to the intelligence of their manager or whoever markets it.

In the end, I've met too many people who could talk smart, win arguements, pass tests, but acted stupid and were miserable because for some reason they couldn't apply that intelligence to anything worthwhile.  I trust actions more than words.

[debussy symbolism]

debussy, you really are confusing me now. You keep making references to "loads of extremely intelligent people " that have achieved nothing and "average [people] however that pursues a goal will get somewhere". How are you defining intelligence in this case? As I see it, by your definition of intelligence there should be no such thing as an intelligent person that achieves nothing. You are using intelligence to describe perseverance and ambition. I already explained in another post that given enough time, most people should be able to answer ALL questions on an IQ test correctly. That is perseverance isn't it? I keep trying to explain this but people either choose to ignore it or they don’t understand it. Intelligent people arrive at the correct solution quicker than average people, that’s what an IQ test measures. Do you understand this concept?

I am not disagreeing with you on the definition of "ingelligence." Intelligence is simply the capacity and speed of solving logical problems, and yes, apathy or perserverance doesn't at all apply to it. I am stating however, and this is where I think confusion arises, that intelligence by itself is nothing in relevance to achieving goals. It needs to be backed by by passion and concentration. No, I am not confusing intelligence with ambition. I am merely stating that there needs to be a combination of two for achievement. A person with intelligence only but no ambition will get nowhere, just as a person with ambition but no intelligence will get somewhere, but slower than the person with intelligence should the person with intelligence have ambition. Yes, a person with perserverance should be able to answer the question with time, but due to lack of intelligence, he will have a harder and slower time doing it. I don't disagree with you there, I am just stating that the person's computing power alone doesn't attribute to his or her intelligence, given that intelligence isn't restricted to logic alone, which IQ tests are meant to test. That is why to me IQ tests are meaningless in terms of measuring intelligence.

As for accomplishment, that can be down to opportunity and luck. A person born into poverty may never have the opportunity to accomplish anything, is it fair to say they are unintelligent?

What makes a person a good piano player? Is it their timing, technique and musicality or is simply based on the number of CD’s they have sold and the certificates hanging on their wall? What if it were possible to design a Piano IQ and standardise it such that the average piano player scores 100 and concert pianists score 140+.  Imagine someone who practices everyday, refining and perfecting technique, adding to their repertoire but has no interest or ambition to record CD’s or perform in concert. Out of interest they decide to take a Piano IQ test and score 150. Would you say they are unworthy of such a score?

A person born into poor circumstance will have a lesser chance of succeeding, but a person with high intelligence will have an easier time succeeding. However, if the person with the intellgence has no will to succeed, he won't.

A score that measures creativity would be as ambiguous as creativity itself. The thing about IQ tests is that at some level, logic can be tested, even if the results are only assumptions. Creativity however cannot be tested. Is Beethoven's creative outlet better or worse than lets say Chopin's? It is a stupid question that cannot be answered and shouldn't be answered. There is no basis for such testing and even if there were, I am sure any such answer they could provide would be entirely fallacious. I am saying this with confidence because I am even saying that the tests that test logic(IQ tests) are fallacious. Also you can't test piano IQ due to the following reason. You are always advancing, and should you score lower, you will score higher later due to more experience.

Furthermore, I detest all measuring tests such as IQs because they are just another form of segregation. Those that score higher will naturally adore the test and will view those with lower scores as inferior. The assumption that those with lower scores are in any way inferior even in intelligince is wrong in my opinion. It just means that those with higher scores have higher logic capacity compared to those with lower scores, and as it is already established, logic alone doesn't contirbute to the overall human intellect and mind.