What is Joe Biden's measured IQ?

But it isn't without logic. Population indicates reproductive success, the ultimate criterion of Darwinian superiority.

But running speed is not what separates us from the animals. Intelligence is. There is no getting away from that fact -- though many people obviously want to.

And except at the very top of the distribution, our societies reward intelligence much more reliably than running speed. Which is one reason scientists are so interested in measuring it.

 

See how the average state IQ tends to increase as you go north?

I'm Canadian.

 

No, that's just another of your objectively false opinions. American law schools use the LSAT, which is an IQ test as proved, repeat, PROVED by the fact that Mensa accepts it for admission. Many universities in many countries use scores from tests like the SAT, MCAT, GMAT, GRE, etc., which are all highly g-loaded -- i.e., correlate so well with IQ that they might as well be IQ tests.

Right: it is considered too politically sensitive because of the emotional fragility of anti-IQ know-nothings. Snowflake comes to mind.

 

That would accurately describe your understanding of IQ testing methodology:

See? Are you perhaps under an erroneous impression that psychologists in, say, China administer English-language IQ tests??

So, in what you are no doubt pleased to call your "mind," if someone in Russia, Japan, Germany, India, etc. goes to a professional psychologist for an IQ test to help them with career or educational decisions, the psychologist will administer an English IQ test???

 

If a statis

Did you somehow think you were disputing someone's position, or, perhaps, have the delusion that you were making a point?

 

So, you offer nothing of substance that debunks any concerning IQ, per se. Not surprising, but try just browsing through the two books I provided links to. You might be surprised.

Afterthought: opinions, all by themselves, are like buttholes... everyone has one....

 

One other note... no one is saying that colleges use IQ tests as the basis for admissions. Please, let's all try to stay somewhere within a few MILES of the topic.

So, Joe Biden went to college. He graduated from college. Good for him, and -- as an aside -- he probably has an IQ of approximately 120. Is everybody happy?

 

I'm laffin' ovuh heuh!!

 

Why am I opposed to the use of the IQ? Let me count the ways.


Foremost, I suppose, is the fact that we are getting the IQ from the same folks who have given us insane asylums, shock therapy, lobotomies, forced sterilizations, secretive drugging studies, and Ritalin. Not to mention that schools are designed to encourage passivity and obedience, designed to turn out compliant workers. Intelligence and creativity only allowed, as much as they serve the “machine”. The machine being the benefit of the wealthy. The wealthy fund the arts, not average people.


Science, from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), is often regarded as America’s premier peer reviewed science journal. It is where I get most of my science news. That and Scientific American. I am sure that I have read articles showing that IQ is often related to motivation. A child who is motivated to do well on tests, to do well in life, will score higher than one who is not, given the same level of native intelligence. In Jewish culture there is the pressure to do well in school to get into a good college and become a professional, like a doctor or lawyer. It is a characteristic that is also common in some Asian communities. Thus, an IQ test, any test, is taken seriously and one’s all is given. Yet a poor minority child is likely to grow up and work as his father or mother did before them. That is, a low wage, low skill occupation, like housekeeping and manual labor. There is little incentive to do well on a test, to do well in school, when one is never going to use higher intelligence.


There have been studies that have shown that paying one from $10-20 to take an IQ test will cause one to score higher, on average, than those who are not paid, as much as one standard deviation (15pts). Other studies have shown, by way of observing the test takers, that those who are more enthusiastic tend to do well, and those who would rather be somewhere else tend to not do so well. Most people have an IQ of within one deviation, that is 85 to 115. Most jobs, stores, advertising, newspapers and news shows are geared towards that range. That is, when one considers motivation, there is likely little difference between the native intelligence of one with an IQ of 85 and one with 115.


There is also the phenomenon of one getting better the more times one takes a test. That is, the more times a person takes a type of test, even if the questions change, the better the person gets at taking that type of test. Was not the crisis of the ACT and SAT a few decades back, when it was discovered that test takers coached beforehand, on average, tended to score significantly better than those who were not? Another example of the advantages the wealthy are given. If one gets in the habit of taking IQ type of tests, for instance the pattern recognition questions. The more one does these types of puzzles, the better one gets at it.


Then there is the criticism of IQ test is that they present problems with well defined solutions. Where one is either right or wrong, with no deviation. Yet the real world does not work that way. In school, math problems tend to have nice easy solutions. Yet often, in the real world, there are often no predetermined right or wrong answers. The math does not always give precise answers, but rather a range of possible answers. IQ does not measure creativity or even take it into account, or what is often called emotional, or street intelligence.


If one looks at technology companies, one notices a pattern. Those at the top, the CEO’s, the executives, while generally more intelligent than the general population, tend to take a back seat to the intelligence of the engineers and scientists who work for them. So, while, in general, the more intelligent a person is the better they will do in life, intelligence also tends to have a limiting effect at the very top.

 

I think it pretty much dunks IQ that NO ONE USES IT FOR ANYTHING OF IMPORTANCE, Unless you think social clubs are important. No one is drinking industrial cleaner either for covid. Are you going to claim that idea wasn’t debunked ?

Conservatives are the motherland of bad ideas.

 

I'm of Swedish descent. My sister and I went through school with mostly A's, my brothers struggled with C's and D's. Somewhere, the genetic hypothesis breaks down.

 

If only scientists made as much money as professional athletes.

 

If they did, the money would distract them from their theorizing and research. Creativity seldom survives too much comfort.

 

Seriously ? You’ve been all over the map with nothing to back you up but a sad sack you chose to listen to from a message board in Quora . Amazing.

I know Yale is beneath you genius types, but here goes.
https://som.yale.edu/news/2009/11/why-high-iq-doesnt-mean-youre-smart

 

Oh, well here's an easy one for you -- compare and contrast the Ronald Reagan years with those of Jimmy Carter. If you were ALIVE in the 1980's, you would surely know what I mean. Bad Conservative ideas...? We haven't had it nearly so good ever since....

But, don't give up on ol' Joe just yet... with his IQ of about 120, he may be able to enact several of the worse policies anyone has dreamed of going back even BEFORE Obama, and that would be saying a HELL of a lot!

 

By what factors do you measure IQ, inability to balance a budget or allowing criminality to run ramped ?
Let’s see who was brighter.
Reagan couldn’t add.
....he incurred substantial deficits for each year of his presidency. As a result, debt also increased each year. Reagan's budgets tripled the national debt from $998 billion at the end of Carter's last budget to $2.9 trillion at the end of Reagan's last budget. Sources for Table: Deficit: Office of Management and Budget.

Reagan ushered in criminality like no other since Nixon.
http://historyrocket.com/American-H...-Convictions-Of-Ronald-Reagan-Presidency.html

Well, there you are. Regan was a flunky managing money and people. Would you like to included his recessions ?

Jimmy Carter.
Jimmy Carter - Education

1. • 
     United States Naval Academy
   • 
     Georgia Institute of Technology
   • 
     Georgia Southwestern State University
   • 
     
     
   • Reagan....Eureka college.

 

The only thing I find amazing here is your eagerness to disgrace yourself by repeating such bald falsehoods.

Defining "smart" to mean something other than "intelligent" is not much of a trick.

 

I know you have yet to show anything other then from a message board.

Take that up with Yale.

 

You are aware, I hope, that siblings average 50% genetic commonality relative to their parents' non-commonality? I.e., if their parents have 10K gene differences, siblings will average 5K. Identical twins reared apart are far more alike in IQ than fraternal twins reared together. That pretty much establishes the genetic basis of IQ. Given that human beings evolved from our less intelligent forebears, it is absurd to claim a lack of genetic basis for differences in intelligence.

 

Again, you simply repeat a bald falsehood that only heaps additional disgrace upon you.

I have better things to do.

 

True: look at JK Rowling.

 

Only a handful of athletes make good money just by running fast. Most need a broad constellation of physical and mental talents like hand-eye coordination and the ability to judge tactical conditions and opportunities.

 

A few do, if they manage to get a valuable patent.

 

No. Insane asylums, shock therapy, lobotomies, forced sterilizations, secretive drugging studies, and Ritalin do NOT belong to the Psychology sub-specialty Psychometrics. You seem to be mixing up Psychiatry and Psychology.

You are sure that you have read articles? That doesn't cut it. Show me the references and links.

Who is saying that motivation is not a factor? Like I said before, professional psychologists are supposed to pass judgment on the motivation factor and ascertain if the results are valid or not, and IQ tests are often given as a component of a battery that does have motivation and effort scales.

No, sorry, that's not true of IQ tests which have a high test/retest reliability. The score doesn't change in any significant way. Links to these studies demonstrating the above have been included in this thread. Scroll up and you'll find them.

IQ tests are not meant to measure creativity (there are other tests for that) and street intelligence is a soft concept. We are talking sciences, here.

So what? Intelligence is not all that is needed for success, but still, there is nothing wrong with measuring intelligence.
You are intelligent and successful.
Your son is intelligent and successful.
The idiotic principals who tried to held the two of you back are evil, likely dumb (does the envy), and not successful.

 

Like what ?