Quote:
Originally Posted by RecondoJoe
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Imagine being a liberal and prescribing to the idea that IQs are meaningful. The entire system was literally designed to denigrate POC. Without using Google, most of the people who throw around the term "IQ" have no idea what IQ even stands for. I love these types of people in real-life. They brag about how smart they are, and yet go completely silent when you ask them what IQ stands for since they are so smart.
A smart person would not brag about having a high IQ. They would begin to do research on the term and discover if it's important. Only a dumb person would accept being told they are smart based on a system and terminology they don't even understand.
|
Intelligence quotient is a measure of how quickly one identifies, applies, and synthesizes newly encountered patterns/materials. It's not a measure of what one knows, although the brevity of one's knowledge base is also indicative of their IQ. (I.e. if you "learn" faster, and apply the same time/effort toward "learning" compared to someone who learns slower, you will exponentially "outlearn" them as time goes on, this have a larger knowledge base from which to draw from)
The only matter in which one can dismiss IQ assessment, is in the event that the assessed is absolutely averse to learning/participating in general, and then is assessed on retention and ability to synthesize new material. This is the argument against why low IQ demographics are scoring low, and it is quite overstated, as pattern recognition tests are the primary method used in assessing IQ these days, yet still show the same disparities.
06-02-2021, 07:51 PM
Hybrid Mode
