41–50 of 261 posts
I once was sort of compelled to take a Myers-Briggs test and I found it utterly flawed. So much of one’s personality depends on the contact and environment, yet Myers-Briggs wants to force you into one type.
Making things way too simple. But maybe simple is what was sought here rather than really resolving personality.
Granted this isn't a peer reviewed paper, but still, a blog that gives personality scores for historical people like presidents can't be based on data. If IQ is important, maybe it's just that intelligent people know how to take personality tests.
(IQ is a fuzzy, poorly-measured "quality" that doesn't have a whole lot of meaning other than some interpretation of taking a particular test.)
I think a lot of this analysis is tautological -- meaning that when you boil it down, you're just saying that things are as you have defined them to be. For instance, take a Big Five trait such as agreeableness. How do we know that a person is agreeable? Because we define agreeableness in a certain way and then measure the degree to which someone conforms to the definition. If that measurement includes questions such…
The scary thing is a lot of commercial "people analytics" systems marketed to HR departments, lenders, and government agencies are little more than dressed up relationship tests from 1980s magazines.
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/talks/MIT-STS-AI-snake...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Perhaps their abilities are "unlocked" to the fullest My impression is conscientious people work within the system and don't toe the line. edit: disclosure, I am highly unconscientious, didn't finish uni etc.
“Toe the line” is pretty much a synonym to work within the system.
Thanks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Interestingly, those people don't seem to do particularly well in the SAT. Perhaps their abilities are "unlocked" to the fullest only after they get into college and get a chance to make independent decisions. Or maybe the SAT is just a shitty test.
For whom? The real problem is that not all valuable paths can come to the same bottleneck. Med student? Well, the SAT might be a good indicator of how successful you'll be at completing a medical program in the US. Same thing for law. Are you the creative type? Then the SAT probably won't be as indicative of your future success.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Toe the line” is pretty much a synonym to work within the system.
Ah, right! Not a native speaker, got that wrong-way-round and double-up. Thanks.
Don’t get me started on “flammable vs inflammable” vs “accurate vs inaccurate” ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, right! Not a native speaker, got that wrong-way-round and double-up. Thanks.
No problem. I am a native speaker and it seems a weird expression to me as well (so much that I had to look it up to be sure). I’d expect it to mean what your original usage was. Don’t get me started on “flammable vs inflammable” vs “accurate vs inaccurate” ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For whom? The real problem is that not all valuable paths can come to the same bottleneck. Med student? Well, the SAT might be a good indicator of how successful you'll be at completing a medical program in the US. Same thing for law. Are you the creative type? Then the SAT probably won't be as indicative of your future success.
I have around a 148 IQ but scored only 1060 on the SAT. Clearly those two measures are not linked. This has not prevented me from earning a 4 year degree or becoming a software developer. I find writing software to be easy while many of my peers seem to struggle. In reflection personality and practice are all that have mattered. IQ isn’t a significant consideration of comfort/confidence in writing software, a skill.
That's rather impressive, but I would double-check those numbers.
For example, which IQ test? Was it recently updated? IQ tests are adjusted by as many as 10 points every 10 years [1]. Have you double verified with another test? How did you prepare for each?
Granted this isn't a peer reviewed paper, but still, a blog that gives personality scores for historical people like presidents can't be based on data. If IQ is important, maybe it's just that intelligent people know how to take personality tests.
> If IQ is important, maybe it's just that intelligent people know how to take personality tests. What even is intelligence? I know that IQ is what IQ tests measure, but what is intelligence? People say my dog is intelligent, but only in response to her displays of obedience to my commands, I've noticed. I silently translate their comment about intelligence to mean "your dog is obedient." Does an IQ test measure what…
to me, intelligence is simply the ability to discern (useful) connections between phenomena, basically being able to accurately inter-/extra-polate from observation through time and space, or alternatively, the ability to predict the future (for relatively finite values of future). it's kinda like the derivative of knowledge, and wit is the derivative of intelligence.
an IQ test measures a very narrow slice of that. it doesn't encompass humor, art, or sports/dance (dynamic/kinetic ability) for instance.
with dogs (or other pets), the intelligent part is their ability to parse your alien communications into desired responses, similar to learning a foreign language without an instructor, an interpreter, or a reference available.
I think a lot of this analysis is tautological -- meaning that when you boil it down, you're just saying that things are as you have defined them to be. For instance, take a Big Five trait such as agreeableness. How do we know that a person is agreeable? Because we define agreeableness in a certain way and then measure the degree to which someone conforms to the definition. If that measurement includes questions such…
Of course, there are limitations to this kind of approach and there's been a lot of research and refining done on top of this—not being an expert, I'm not familiar with it—but the core of the Big Five model is observational, not tautological.