151–160 of 171 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And connecting the two dots too loudly makes you into a monster.
Well drawing strict conclusions in a field that's still highly debated by researchers does, yes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is not a reasoned argument against the parent's argument. FYI the parent comment was not reasoned argument either. The notion of relation between education and IQ is questionable. >It's actually a pretty decent explanation. No it is not at all. Since it requires rigorous calculation and estimation of how much immigrants have come, what is their average IQ, how much drop we see in population and so many question…
> FYI the parent comment was not reasoned argument either. The notion of relation between education and IQ is questionable. Questionable based on ethical considerations is not the same as non-rational. It's a very logical thing to consider. A mechanism for example would be that people with higher IQ also tend to succeed in completing more higher education degrees. The inverse is also possible, and it's also a perfect…
This is the difference between you and me. Before putting an argument forward I would evaluate it or at least calculate it a little bit!
>It seems that your concerns are more tied to a priori axioms and emotional resistance than actual methodological issues in the questions.
Why would you say that? The only thing i wanted was a little bit evidence and calculation! And it is funny in your nonsense world I am the emotional one here!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They could also look at how IQ changes over a lifespan It doesn’t because it’s a bell curve. You literally can’t figure out your score until you already know the distribution.
Nonsense. If I administer an IQ test to 1000 people in their 20s, and then retested them in their 60s, I'd be performing a classic within-subject test, where I could easily assess whether test performance increases, decreases, or doesn't significantly change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me take a guess. Comparatively low immigration rate. Hardly accept any refugees (28 individuals accepted by Japan in 2016). Be able to support yourself or be (quite literally) kicked out. High barriers to citizenship.
Are you serious? Let me ask you how many of immigrants are grad students or prople with high tech jobs? Is it one of the stupidest thing to say drop in IQ is connected to immigrants! It is greatly disappointing to see this kind of nonsense in HN which is kind of home for many hackers and programmers. Hearing these kind of stupid ideas in C-Span? Who cares? But HN, that shows how low our societies has become.
Take a look at this:
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
If we are speaking of the U.S.A (and Germany, Sweden, France) then most immigrants are people coming from locations far from the top of the list; therefore, if these immigrants (their kids too, IQ is a heritable trait) are partaking in such tests, the average will decrease, do you not believe so yourself?
Perhaps you can pinpoint the flaw in this hypothesis.
Or maybe it's because, somewhat depressingly, IQ is highly hereditary, as research has shown for decades and new gene research is currently confirming, and people with lower IQs tend to have more children.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s telling that critics of the film never have an argument more coherent than “your dumb!”.
It's telling that some people believe that: (a) elevating a Hollywood comedy into some sort of social study / prophecy status is "smart", (b) calling the majority of people on earth idiots (which the parent did) is also OK, but that only "idiots" would call them out for doing so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Have seen any scientific IQ test other than fakes ones on internet? ... IQ test has nothing to do with linguistics ability ... The most widely used IQ test has explicit verbal testing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Adult_Intelligence_...
Why you think you should answer when you don’t have answer? Verbal testing is different than spatial ability testing? Do you see the logic? Verbal testing is separate skills. And spatial skills are different too. >The most Completely false.
> Verbal testing is different than spatial ability testing? Do you see the logic? Verbal testing is separate skills. And spatial skills are different too.
Because I do have the answer. The article asserts that average IQ is falling. It does not indicate that only, e.g., spacial ability is falling. Given that verbal is a direct component in its own right (as well as a factor in other areas due to comprehension and communication), it is reasonable to state that verbal is likely a factor in the falling average IQ.
> Completely false.
It's not completely false. WAIS is extremely widely used. It's not simply the most frequently used IQ test[1]. It's one of the most frequently used clinical assessments in general.
You're just asserting things you want to be true. If you disagree that WAIS is the most common clinical IQ test, then provide some info on what you believe is more common. Otherwise your claims are clearly without merit.
[1] http://www.pearsonclinical.com/psychology/news/2008/wechsler...
I've seen some things mentioned here that utterly baffle me, and confirm my bias that IQ is good for understanding but has little relation to wisdom or 'overstanding'.
I am very worried about what will happen if we start doing rash things like mass removal of autistic embryos from the gene pool. I've seen it suggested too often, compared to the amount of people I imagine are actually deeply informed enough about both to speak on such things. It's strange to me that such an idea is not automatically considered risky, or obviously married with unintended consequences.
On the surface of it, you might increase the median IQ by a few points. But you'd also miss out on the next Newton, Turing, Einstein, Kant, Cavendish, etc etc (I've plenty of other speculatives). There's no free lunch. Shaking the Tree of Life and hoping something tasty falls out sounds very unwise to me. As far as I'm concerned the major problem for humans is not their absolute IQ levels - it's arrogance relative to engineering capabilities.
Lastly: if we ever make it through climate change and out the other side with powerful AGI, I guess high IQ won't be as central compared to EQ or creativity, except as something that roughly correlates with both.
Edited for clarity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why you think you should answer when you don’t have answer? Verbal testing is different than spatial ability testing? Do you see the logic? Verbal testing is separate skills. And spatial skills are different too. >The most Completely false.
> Why you think you should answer when you don’t have answer? > Verbal testing is different than spatial ability testing? Do you see the logic? Verbal testing is separate skills. And spatial skills are different too. Because I do have the answer. The article asserts that average IQ is falling. It does not indicate that only, e.g., spacial ability is falling. Given that verbal is a direct component in its own right (a…
You gave your answer here:
>You're just asserting things you want to be true.
Article states the IQ has been dropped. We don’t knew which part, we don’t know why, we don’t now how much.
You are just saying “immigrants have problem with language” -> “immigration causes this drop”. This is total nonsense. We don’t know. Maybe there is the change is related to influence of smartphone and etc. has you calculated how much immigrants we accepted? How much our IQ has been dropped? Does the math makes sense with these numbers or there should be other factors?
We don’t know. Do you understand what “we don’t know” means?
I think the best answer is what you gave to yourself.
>You're just asserting things you want to be true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why you think you should answer when you don’t have answer? > Verbal testing is different than spatial ability testing? Do you see the logic? Verbal testing is separate skills. And spatial skills are different too. Because I do have the answer. The article asserts that average IQ is falling. It does not indicate that only, e.g., spacial ability is falling. Given that verbal is a direct component in its own right (a…
>It does not indicate that only, e.g., spacial ability is falling. Given that verbal is a direct component in its own right (as well as a factor in other areas due to comprehension and communication), it is reasonable to state that verbal is likely a factor in the falling average IQ. You gave your answer here: >You're just asserting things you want to be true. Article states the IQ has been dropped. We don’t knew whi…
I never said anything like that. My comments have addressed nothing except your claim that linguistic skills are irrelevant in IQ tests, a claim which you've clearly based on nothing.
> This is total nonsense. We don’t know. Maybe there is...
No one said that this is the cause. Someone proposed it as a potential reason. Someone else proposed that if so, the language barrier might be the issue. These are just hypotheses. They might be right. They might be wrong. They might be contributing along with many factors. The fact that "we don't know" doesn't mean it's unreasonable to discuss, though.
> Do you understand what “we don’t know” means?
You should ease up on the condescension toward others. You're clearly not even reading comments at this point. You're just ranting and your arrogance is unwarranted. I don't know why you're so upset that someone would suggest that immigration might impact a nation's measured IQ, but if you can't engage civilly, maybe you shouldn't engage.
(By the way, it did not escape my attention that you again failed to provide any sources that back up your claims about IQ tests. You seem to demand a much higher standard of evidence from others than you demand of yourself.)