| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-09, 08:42 in Something about cheese! (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #41 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem The Flynn effect indicates a *massive* increase in IQ, and IQ in and of itself is not an absolute number. Therefore, saying IQ determines success is the same as saying good grades determine success. Yes, people with good grades in general will succeed better in life, but the correlation is the other way around. Education brings better IQ, and I have never met a person whose grades could not be improved by studying. And no, this is not a PC thing, this has been proven by a ton of scientific studies. A high IQ does give you a certain advantage statistically but is not causative. It's like saying a poor person or a person of darker skin will never reach success because the odds are stacked against them. Posted by sureanem If you have done 20 problems like this the answer is easy - Realise (14-x)² = 16 --> 14 - x = 4 --> x = 10. If you have done none of these, the answer is hard. And you need to know what (14-x)² even means. And therein lies the rub. Whatever problem you are faced with, your experience dictates what you find easy and not. Two persons of equal intelligence but where one studied 4x as much as the other will lead to the person studying more achieving much better on the test. It's all about preparation. Regarding the loans bit, yes I exaggerated, but my American associates do have to pay around $1000+ a month minimum due to their bad deals on loans. So this is real world experience. And if you want to know what a loan costs you per month, see for instance https://studentloanhero.com/calculators/student-loan-payment-calculator/. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-09, 22:10 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #42 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem So, in other words you agree with my point that IQ = Knowledge. Great! :) |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-10, 08:15 in Something about cheese! (revision 2)
|
|
Post: #43 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem See, that's where Science does not agree with you. Genes are a fickle thing. Two sets of genes will produce an offspring that may or may not have beneficial traits. Two smart people could end up with a retarded kid with an IQ of 65, for instance. In fact, two black people can give birth to a white child; and two white people can give birth to a black one. It is not common, but it happens. If your statement is true, that IQ is in the genes alone, this means we should see a wide scattering of IQ all across the social classes. Just like genetic diseases, that strike both highborn and lowborn alike and indiscriminately. Do we really, though? Conclusion: Your statement is fatally flawed. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-10, 12:11 in Something about cheese! (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #44 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem If a good IQ score is genetically inclined, then it would have a similar spread as genetic diseases. It doesn't. Instead, there is a very clear correlation that the lesser the Socioeconomic Status (SES), the lower the IQ of that person. Furthermore, studies of infants being adopted from poor SES to high SES parents, compared to high SES natural borns, have shown that the adopted kids had a similar IQ to it's foster siblings and/or high SES friends. So, studies have been made and shows that while some genetic may play a part, it's minor and most of it is about SES. I do not know how much clearer this can be said, you are simply in the wrong here. :) |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-10, 15:03 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #45 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Sigh... So, what you are saying is that it is basically impossible or a very low chance that a person with high IQ is born from a lower class. I tried to ascertain this was the case, and it is. Well, if you choose to believe that classist/racist garbage, it's up to you. Just do be aware it *is* based on a flawed reasoning that there does exist human races and that some races are better suited for certain work than others. In other words, classical social darwinism. And coming from a worker background to taking a Master and soon Ph.D. in engineering, I am living proof of the opposite. It's pointless to say anything more. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-10, 19:27 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #46 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
The only thing that proves is that low SES correlates to low education. Which is hardly news. A ton of scientific studies have proven IQ correlates to low education. A ton of scientific studies have proven IQ is affected by so much more than just genes, and environment plays a very large part in how your IQ is shaped. These are cold, hard, scientific facts. The studies you link to are not contradicting this. Hence, IQ depends on your training, not the other way around. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-10, 22:14 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #47 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Because I got better things to do with my life. :) If you're interested, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Race_and_intelligence_controversy is a good starting point that links to a *lot* of interesting data. Just to dig in and read yourself. Of course Wikipedia is never a definitive answer to anything, but it does cite sources, and a lot of them. Of particular note is Spearman's Hypothesis. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-12, 19:22 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #48 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
and appears very likely not to say proven considering identical twins reared apart display similar levels of it, and the adopted's do not correlate well to their adoptive parents. At what age though? We know the first six years of a child shapes that childs intelligence. Therefore, it needs to have been *one egg* twins separated at birth and placed in a low SES, medium SES and high SES at random. Anything else would contaminate the result. If you can point to a study that has done just that, fine. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-13, 08:08 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #49 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Ok, I have to give you this one. IQ is largely genetic, and it is hereditary to 50+%. So says science. So says facts. Case closed. BUT. I am not willing to concede the point that IQ plays a large part of your educational bias. There SES is a much larger factor. It's not the engine of the car but what you do with it that matters most. Also, let's not forget that the lower your SES, the higher the chance for abuse - And a person who would otherwise have a high IQ may not have it due to childhood trauma. The question is complex. But everyone can learn, say, fundamental Calculus should they want to. Some will just take more time to learn it. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-14, 09:01 in Something about cheese! (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #50 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem No. SES is a function of education, period. And education today is pretty much "Hey snake, sloth, dog, monkey and fish, climb that tree over there! Fastest one gets the best grade!" then we call the fastest one smart, except had the competition been water based the fish would have won over them all. I have worked with a ton of math students and helped many students that failed three math exams and then succeeded. It's not that their intelligence was faulty, it's that they had not a strong base form. After I sat and reviewed the basics and told them where to strengthen their game, most did pass Calculus the exam after. Without lowering any standards. These were students motivated to learn though. Not everyone is motivated. Posted by sureanem I stand by that statement. Everyone motivated enough. Even people suffering from dyscalcia. Even mentally disabled people. But not everyone will do it on the first try. And not everyone will need to. But everyone motivated enough can do it. You see, society tends to think about retarded people as dumb. Most are not. Most have cognitive disability in one region but are otherwise functional, or they may have developed a specific way of thinking that doesn't fit for the cookie cutter class. I can agree in extreme cases, a person will not be able to - such as a person in the late stages of Dementia for instance. But everyone of a sound and healthy mind, and most who doesn't have one, too. I know this because I've witnessed it first hand. If they are motivated enough. Because, you see... Statistics doesn't tell the whole picture. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-14, 09:06 in Upcoming game announcements/news
|
|
Post: #51 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by KingMike When I saw that on the Nintendo Direct I had a mindsploding nerdgasm :D Now I just wish for a remake of the Soul Blazer trilogy... |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-14, 13:42 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #52 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem Now you're the one playing dumb. :) Here's another video explaining it. Fact of the matter is, SES is a function of education. BUT. Education is a function of, among other things, SES. And sure a person way behind in the race will need time to catch up. But here is the thing; education keeps explaining stuff in one way, but we all learn differently. Math can be explained in a thousand different ways, and a mentally disabled can get math if put in the context of something they understand. Yet we teach only in a couple different ways. And here's the thing I do not understand... Most people with an IQ of 100 in 1960 would have no problem learning Calculus. Their score would be around 80 today. Why can a person with 100 IQ of yesteryear not learn calculus today, according to your argument? |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-15, 09:58 in Something about cheese! (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #53 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
So what you're telling me is that there's no difference if a child does not have time to do their homework or not, because they have to help raise their siblings. Since IQ is the big predetermining factor, no matter how much time you put into something you will always succeed if you have a high IQ. Why you could play video games all day long, head to the tests and ace every one of them if your IQ is higher than 190. Sorry, don't buy it. At all. Please interview a social worker about the problems in the lowest quartile of the SES, truly horrifying. Second, if you use a test that tests on similar things as an IQ test then of course IQ will have a strong correlation. It's a given. And, no. A person with 100 IQ 1960 would have an IQ score of 80 today. And even further back, 70. Posted by https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/are-you-smarter-than-your-grandfather-probably-not-150402883/ Since IQ is constant, according to you, people in the 1960s were borderline retarded by today standards. Again, if a person with an IQ of 80 today could do Calculus in 1960, why can they not do that today? What has changed? |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-15, 20:28 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #54 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Posted by sureanem No. Let me spell it out for you. Your claims: 1. IQ is genetic. 2. Education is a function of IQ. If this is true, then a threshold should exist, at which someone must have a certain IQ to be able to master calculus. Yes? And Calculus is pretty much the same today as it was 100 years ago, yes? Now: 1. According to Flynn, the IQ score of 60 years prior was measured at a lower scale than it is today. 2. Let's say the threshold for a person to comprehend calculus was 100. 3. So a person exactly at 100, who would score 80 today, would get calculus today. 4. But according to today standards, he should not be able to attain such a high level of math! How is this possible? Posted by sureanem Sure, and why not let the peasants eat cake instead of bread, too. Doesn't quite work that way in real life. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-16, 15:53 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #55 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Time is a scarce resource, too. In fact, one of the most scarce we have. Did a quick google search, three links that seems to disprove your claims: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190204085926.htm https://www.edubloxtutor.com/high-iq-and-success/ https://thinkgrowth.org/why-some-of-the-most-successful-people-arent-that-smart-4857fa33b696 And also from that third link: For example, you might see a world analogy problem on an IQ test, like: “Kitten is to Cat as Puppy is to _____.” To solve this problem correctly, you’d need to understand the relationship between a kitten and a cat, and then apply that relationship to that of a puppy and a dog. If you do not happen to know what a dog or a puppy is... Well, you would fail on this test. This could be from a number of reasons, ranging from being six years old and not a native english speaker (because of spanish immigrant people) for instance. Furthermore, it is possible to improve your intelligence according to a study done in 2008. https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/04/25/0801268105.abstract Nothing you have shown me has disproven this. The only thing you have shown is that there is a correlation between high IQ and high income. I bet you still believe the African nations are still stuck in the 1800s, too. :) |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-16, 22:41 in Something about cheese! (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #56 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Oh, and I just found this. Game over. :)Posted by https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/you-can-increase-your-intelligence-5-ways-to-maximize-your-cognitive-potential/ Another recent study on the subject: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150210083649.htm So, yeah. Intelligence *can* be taught, but it is not easy to do so, as proven by getting a bunch of autistic children from 90 to 110 in intelligence. Case closed. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-17, 08:51 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #57 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Another way to disprove the hypothesis: Take any middle school class from any "bad" district. Tell the parents these are gifted children, and put *all* of them in a special school where this class has four tutors that challenge them. The students spend an entire year in this school, stay at dorms, and function the same. I can guarantee you, this middle school class at the end of the year will outperform their peers by a long shot. Every single one of them. According to you though, this should be impossible. It's not. It's only impossible, because we as a society do not have endless resources. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-17, 14:24 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #58 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
Sorry, you completely missed what my experiment was about. I was not saying, take a number of "gifted" people and do a study about them. I was saying, take any class from the 4th quartile of grades (e.g. worst performers), and give them one year with a team of 4-6 teachers. They live the entire week in school, get to see their parents on weekends. No homework on weekends, too - all studies done with once they get to spend time home. Tell these kids, all of these kids, that they are gifted and have a natural talent for... Something. Drawing. Math. Woodcarving. Whatever you desire. I would say math because math is the most useful skill from my perspective, but what exactly is not important. I can guarantee you this entire class would go from fourth to second quartile after six months, possibly even get to first quartile after a year. Of course, this would be a significant amount of resources spent on a single class. This experiment would net around a quarter million, when all is said and done. And education simply doesn't have this kind of money to spend on everyone. In fact, this has been done a few times, take a look at schools that went from bottom feeders to decent to even competing at the top. Most bottom dwellers just need some support, and they can achieve great things. |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-17, 19:17 in Something about cheese! (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #59 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
So. This either disprove your theory that intelligence cannot be taught, or that education is a function of IQ. Which one is it, mister? Katt, or Nina? |
| wertigon |
Posted on 19-06-18, 07:44 in Something about cheese!
|
|
Post: #60 of 205
Since: 11-24-18 Last post: 156 days Last view: 27 days |
The problem with your reasoning is that we are not talking about a hypothetical scenario. What I am describing has already been done, several times. I know because I was part of one of these classes. However, they have not been performed in a formal setting from what I can see. We managed to raise our class from fourth quartile in my country to upper second quartile in about 10 months. And with far less resources than I was describing, too. Our teacher got some inspiration and changed a few things, laid down a few ground rules and inspired us to do better. How could he do that if your claims are correct? It's a direct contradiction. My only conclusion is that you argue for a flat world when real world experience points to the world being at the very least, curved. |
