Atheists Better Educated? NEVER!

[KimmyCharmeleon]

No it isn't.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

The problem comes right away with defining what intelligence is. You also have the problem of different meanings of intelligence across cultures.

 

[Tim]

No it isn't.

The problem comes right away with defining what intelligence is. You also have the problem of different meanings of intelligence across cultures.

What are you talking about? Defining intelligence? Seriously???

Although people cannot see intelligence, it can be measured. Psychologists measure intelligence using several methods such as the Stanford-Binet scale, the Wechsler Intelligence scales, and the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. These tests measure abilities such as information processing, memory, reasoning, and problem solving. Tasks that measure these abilities include identifying the missing part in a picture, repeating numbers, or defining vocabulary words. These tests also measure a child's ability to respond in an acceptable way to different social situations.

​

 

[Dana]

Who the fuck defines intelligence? Unless you're noticeably slow, who the fuck is anyone to tell anyone how intelligent one is. Intelligence comes in different forms, it's not just school smarts, and book smarts.

 

[Tim]

Who the fuck defines intelligence? Unless you're noticeably slow, who the fuck is anyone to tell anyone how intelligent one is. Intelligence comes in different forms, it's not just school smarts, and book smarts.

Intelligence doesn't have anything to do with book smarts or school smarts.

:willy_nilly:

Doesn't anyone here know what the fuck intelligence is? Holy shit, it's like having a conversation with a room full of kids that didn't even bother to read the chapter we're discussing in class today...

 

[Peter Parka]

I'm pretty sure most people have heard of an IQ test. Its not about what knowledge you have but how good you are at using your brain.

 

[cam elle toe]

Who the fuck defines intelligence? Unless you're noticeably slow, who the fuck is anyone to tell anyone how intelligent one is. Intelligence comes in different forms, it's not just school smarts, and book smarts.

I have to agree with you a bit there. I've met some supposedly super intelligent people that have absolutely no common sense or "life skills" to speak of.

 

[Tim]

I have to agree with you a bit there. I've met some supposedly super intelligent people that have absolutely no common sense or "life skills" to speak of.

:willy_nilly:

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

I studied this in first year psych. Definitions of intelligence have changed vastly over time since before the first intelligence test in 1905:
- 1869, Galton thought intelligence was concerned with nature and nurture, heritance and genes, and environments (gifted children won't reach their potential in a boring environment).
- 1905, Alfred Binet devised one of the first intelligence tests which included 'global' items such as physical, mathematical and written.
- 1921, Lewis Terman revised the Binet test, and used the Intelligence Quotient (IQ times 100). It involved the use of abstract thinking.
- 1927, Charles Spearman thought intelligence as a general factor and using a factor analysis to see how factors correlate; he found that those who did well on one item did well on certain others.
- 1938, Louis Thurstone didn't agree with the general factors idea, but believed in primary mental abilities - critical abilities. These include reasoning, word fluency, speed, verbal comprehension, numerical calculation, visualisation and memory.
- 1953, Skinner simply said intelligence was behaviour.

- 1958, Wechsler defined intelligence as acting in a good manner; behaviour with a purpose; rationality. He raised the issue of the environment again in relation to intelligence, and the notion of 'applying knowledge'. Tests developed were WIPPSI and WISC, revised and still in use. WISC has been revised 4 times by the way, in order to try and overcome the cultural bias associated with it.
- 1963, Cattell said intelligence is fluid and crystalised - fluid is general abilities, memory, analysis; while crystalised is influence of culture, environment or schooling. Fluid is processing information, problem solving, speed, memory. Crystalised is accumulated knowledge, good judgment, experience.
- other researchers may look at aptitude tests, tests which measure the performance for a skill.
- 1967, Guilford stated intelligence was much more complex, conceptualising intelligence as a model; the structure of the intellect.

- 1990, Hunt looked at intelligence as domain-specific such as music, science, maths, psychological.
- 1995, Goleman looks at it as emotional intelligence.
- Perkins saw intelligence as episodic memory and reflection
- Howard Gardiner postulated the theory of multiple intelligence.
- Robert Sternberg agreed with previous theories, with emphasis on nurturing and the environment, and thought of triarchic intelligence.
- Gardiner said it is how you are smart, not how smart you are. He worked with brain-damaged adults and studied the cultural inputs to intelligence. He formed nine types which are both autonomous and independent. Everybody possesses them to varying degrees: linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, facial, bodily kinesthetic, naturalistic, impersonal, intrapersonal, empathetic.

He sees intelligence and thinking as inseparable. He also noted three intelligence points:
Compoential: process, plan, monitor, acquire information.
Experiential: try new things, apply, transfer, experience.
Contextual: cultural, environmental, situations, adapt, change.
He devised a thinking skills program also for young students and businesses.

Now, as you can see, in science, there are problems with definitions. One thing you must always do if you are going to measure something is define what it is - an operational definition. These definitions are not global, there is not one definition of intelligence - intelligence is multi-faceted. And even more so between indigenous cultures. For example, Torres Strait Islanders measure intelligence by obedience with cultural values, who they define as family members and so on (I know because I did one of these tests in class). And when you think about how many different tribes/clans there are of indigenous people in the world, a standardised global intelligence test is not possible unless you want there to be cultural bias in it.

Even translating the English WISC to a language like Spanish would make the test prejudiced because the Spanish language is different to English (they don't have as many descriptive words or something like that).
Not also can it discriminate across culture, it can discriminate between classes and race. Example, Black people tend to do worse, even if they are native speakers of the language.

The point is - there are different types of intelligence. It can be defined by behaviours, verbal ability, practical problem solving, social competence and interrelations or culture. SO, I DO agree that the tests we have today are only good for measuring the intelligence the IQ test sets out to measure, whether it's mathematics or word fluency or spatial reasoning, BUT only for White people of the West who are native speakers of English and have received a decent education. If it wants to measure someone else like an Aboriginal person, it will be prejudiced and that's what you have to keep in mind when measuring people - everyone has a different definition of intelligence, especially culture to bloody culture.

 

[Dana]

:willy_nilly:

The apocalypse cometh :24:

I studied this in first year psych. Definitions of intelligence have changed vastly over time since before the first intelligence test in 1905:
- 1869, Galton thought intelligence was concerned with nature and nurture, heritance and genes, and environments (gifted children won't reach their potential in a boring environment).
- 1905, Alfred Binet devised one of the first intelligence tests which included 'global' items such as physical, mathematical and written.
- 1921, Lewis Terman revised the Binet test, and used the Intelligence Quotient (IQ times 100). It involved the use of abstract thinking.
- 1927, Charles Spearman thought intelligence as a general factor and using a factor analysis to see how factors correlate; he found that those who did well on one item did well on certain others.
- 1938, Louis Thurstone didn't agree with the general factors idea, but believed in primary mental abilities - critical abilities. These include reasoning, word fluency, speed, verbal comprehension, numerical calculation, visualisation and memory.
- 1953, Skinner simply said intelligence was behaviour.
- 1958, Wechsler defined intelligence as acting in a good manner; behaviour with a purpose; rationality. He raised the issue of the environment again in relation to intelligence, and the notion of 'applying knowledge'. Tests developed were WIPPSI and WISC, revised and still in use. WISC has been revised 4 times by the way, in order to try and overcome the cultural bias associated with it.
- 1963, Cattell said intelligence is fluid and crystalised - fluid is general abilities, memory, analysis; while crystalised is influence of culture, environment or schooling. Fluid is processing information, problem solving, speed, memory. Crystalised is accumulated knowledge, good judgment, experience.
- other researchers may look at aptitude tests, tests which measure the performance for a skill.
- 1967, Guilford stated intelligence was much more complex, conceptualising intelligence as a model; the structure of the intellect.
- 1990, Hunt looked at intelligence as domain-specific such as music, science, maths, psychological.
- 1995, Goleman looks at it a emotional intelligence.
- Perkins saw intelligence as episodic memory and reflection
- Howard Gardiner postulated the theory of multiple intelligence.
- Robert Sternberg agreed with previous theories, with emphasis on nurturing and the environment, and thought of triarchic intelligence.
- Gardiner said it is how you are smart, not how mart you are. He worked with brain-damaged adults and studied the cultural inputs to intelligence. He formed nine types which are both autonomous and independent. Everybody possesses them to varying degrees: linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, facial, bodily kinesthetic, naturalistic, impersonal, intrapersonal, empathetic.
He sees intelligence and thinking as inseparable. He also noted three intelligence points:
Compoential: process, plan, monitor, acquire information.
Experiential: try new things, apply, transfer, experience.
Contextual: cultural, environmental, situations, adapt, change.
He devised a thinking skills program also for young students and businesses.

Now, as you can see, in science, there are problems with definitions. One thing you must always do if you are going to measure something is define what it is - an operational definition. These definitions are not global, there is not one definition of intelligence - intelligence is multi-faceted. And even more so between indigenous cultures. For example, Torres Strait Islanders measure intelligence by obedience with cultural values, who they define as family members and so on (I know because I did one of these tests in class). And when you think about how many different tribes/clans there are of indigenous people in the world, a standardised global intelligence is not possible unless you want there to be cultural bias in it.
Even translating the English WISC to a language like Spanish would make the test prejudiced because the Spanish language is different to English (they don't have as many descriptive words or something like that).
Not also can it discriminate across culture, it can discriminate between classes and race. Example, Black people tend to do worse, even if they are native speakers of the language.

The point is - there are different types of intelligence. It can be defined by behaviours, verbal ability, practical problem solving, social competence and interrelations or culture. SO, I DO agree that the tests we have today are only good for measuring the intelligence the IQ test sets out to measure, whether it's mathematics or word fluency or spatial reasoning, BUT only for White people of the West who are native speakers of English and have received a decent education. If it wants to measure someone else like an Aboriginal person, it will be prejudiced and that's what you have to keep in mind when measuring people - everyone has a different definition of intelligence, especially culture to bloody culture.

Excuse me if i don't read all that because... well I don't want to...

 

[Dana]

Oh and of course intelligence has changed over time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that. We as a society know a lot more about what's around us.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

That's okay, I tried breaking it up so it's easier.
Basically I just stated the changes of the definition of intelligence over time and why it is biased, why we can't have standardised tests, why we can't have a global definition, etc

 

[Dana]

Intelligence changes because knowledge changes. If we gain more insight into things our minds expand.

 

[cam elle toe]

:willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly:

A lot of "intelligent" people have no social skills either, and can be quite impatient, rude, intolerant and condescending.


In my opinion, it doenst matterIf you are "Mensa" intelligent...., your still as thick as a brick if you cant boil an egg....change a tyre, or do basic things that require common sense.


So, are we talking IQ test scores, or overall intelligence/common sense/smartness.:dunno

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

(At Dana) True. As I said in my other long post earlier in this thread too, older generations such as those before the Baby Boomers, and other certain communities in Soviet Russia didn't use abstract thinking at all, it was either alien to them or just not needed in that day. But nowadays we use it a lot.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

:willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly:

A lot of "intelligent" people have no social skills either, and can be quite impatient, rude, intolerant and condescending.


In my opinion, it doenst matterIf you are "Mensa" intelligent...., your still as thick as a brick if you cant boil an egg....change a tyre, or do basic things that require common sense.


So, are we talking IQ test scores, or overall intelligence/common sense/smartness.:dunno

That's funny actually, I read in the paper the other week that women these days are bad at doing all the stuff older generation females can do, like hem a dress or sew, stuff like that.

 

[Tim]

Oh and of course intelligence has changed over time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that. We as a society know a lot more about what's around us.

Intelligence has nothing to do with what you know, it's your ability to learn. You can read every volume of the encyclopedia Britannica and you will not be anymore intelligent.

 

[cam elle toe]

That's funny actually, I read in the paper the other week that women these days are bad at doing all the stuff older generation females can do, like hem a dress or sew, stuff like that.

That doesnt surprise me. But I think thats more to do with the fact that we are a throw away society now, and rather than say darn a sock...we just buy new. (or we got our mums to do it, like I did)
That...and plain old laziness.

I can knit and sew...cooking on the other hand

 

[dkwrtw]

Intelligence has nothing to do with what you know, it's your ability to learn. You can read every volume of the encyclopedia Britannica and you will not be anymore intelligent.

lol that reminds me of my dad, he's constantly watching the science channel, thinking it will make him smarter or something but he is not comprehending ANYTHING he's watching.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

Intelligence to me is both knowledge and skills.