Naked Science Forum

General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: DoctorBeaver on 27/05/2005 14:34:40

Title: Utter rubbish!
Post by: DoctorBeaver on 27/05/2005 14:34:40
"Eth, your IQ score is 183
Recommend this test to a friend
Show a friend your result
Guess your friends' results
Eth, your IQ score is significantly above average. Congratulations! You have a wide range of exceptional skills which are much stronger than those of the average population. You are also skilled at answering the types of questions that are asked in a classic IQ test. The test analyses your strengths and weaknesses based on your mathematical, linguistic, visual-spatial and logical skills. Even though you have high scores in all of those areas, we are able to analyse your results to discover the areas in which you have the strongest abilities.

You've got a very experiential way of learning and a strong mathematical mind. You're able to whittle even the most complex situation down to comprehensible component parts. In short, you have mastered the art and science of precision. That's what makes you a Precision Processor.

For you, life is a series of equations. Your brain is naturally predisposed to intense mathematical acuity, and your understanding of numerical problems is unparalleled. It's second nature for you to cut to the heart of an issue, so that you can discover quick solutions to problems while others get bogged down in unnecessary details. One precision processor that comes to mind is the Greek philosopher-mathematician, Pythagoras. Pythagoras had a mind for numbers and, as such, could come up with previously unknown theories like his method for calculating the sides of a right triangle (a2+b2=c2). You too, can use numbers to translate aspects of the world around you -- something that doesn't come easily to everyone. Your quick mathematical mind will allow you to communicate a variety of ideas to other people, so don't keep it to yourself."

The above is the result from an online IQ test I took. What piffle! "Quick mathematical mind"? "Your brain is naturally predisposed to intense mathematical acuity, and your understanding of numerical problems is unparalleled"? They're having a laugh. Anything more complicated than 2+2 brings me out in a cold sweat!
I don't hold much store by IQ tests anyway and that 1 has made me even more cynical about their usefulness [|)]
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: simeonie on 27/05/2005 21:12:26
right that was extremely random. Well you must be pretty good at maths or just good at seeing things logical or whatever. But ya know. 183 is very high. How old are you? Mind was 164 and i am 14 but when I got that I was 13. Does your age make a difference?

-__- my website!!!!
has forums too!
Think about it! lolz
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: chimera on 27/05/2005 21:19:00
Yes, it does make a lot of difference. It's part of the calculation, so if your scores one year later remains exactly the same as last year, your higher age will result in a lower IQ to roll out of the test, at least in the calculation they use for non-adults, I must add. Look for Stanford-Binet calculation in google...

(never mind the title of the link. it probably has some deeper significance somewhere...)

The living are the dead on holiday.  -- Maurice de Maeterlinck (1862-1949)
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: DoctorBeaver on 28/05/2005 16:07:01
Simon - I'm totally rubbish at maths. That's what made me laugh so much about that result. I'm 52 and I must say I'm rather disappointed at my score. Last time I took an IQ test (when I started my PhD 3 years ago) I scored 196. I blame the Mezcal!
164 at 14 is very good.
Do I remember your saying that you're taking your GCSEs at the moment? If so, I wish you the very best of luck with them
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: chimera on 28/05/2005 20:28:25
Also one thing that's good to know, although noone really has an explanation for it: every ten years or so they have to adjust the scores so everybody on average still gets 100 points, or the scores would only go up and up. That does not necessarily mean everybody is getting smarter, but it does mean we are getting better at making IQ tests. This is probably caused by exposure to such tests from young age these days, and the extra fostering of certain skills in schools.

The living are the dead on holiday.  -- Maurice de Maeterlinck (1862-1949)
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: DoctorBeaver on 28/05/2005 20:35:59
Rob - exactly. IQ tests in general tend to measure one's ability to do IQ tests
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: chimera on 28/05/2005 21:20:22
Originally posted by DoctorBeaver

Rob - exactly. IQ tests in general tend to measure one's ability to do IQ tests

A somewhat charged statement, some would say. It is true ofcourse, but in general it is equally undeniable IQ tests are a way of telling who will do well at school - but since the schools use these tests, and foster that kind of problem-solving, you could indeed contend it's a highly circular affair.

My personal extra ingredients into IQ testing would be the addition of 'hidden testing' to erase effects of both preparation and exam anxiety, and a greater emphasis on improvisation, and fostering the ability to 'recreate' solution models from scratch, given only a few basic clues.

Also a much better 'lateral' or 'thinking outside the box' type of intelligence is very important, although not so very highly regarded by hiring officials these days, since a generally critical mind tends to be just that, and not the easiest to 'motivate' with a load of 'corporate' nonsense.

And a few basic tricks to go into every kids trickbag: you can get out of any maze by just holding one wall on entering and not letting go, and just follow it to the end. It'll still be the same wall, if you see what I mean. That's buildings for you. Not the fastest way, but you cannot get lost.

Stuff like that.
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: DoctorBeaver on 28/05/2005 22:53:35
My personal extra ingredients into IQ testing would be the addition of 'hidden testing' to erase effects of both preparation and exam anxiety, and a greater emphasis on improvisation, and fostering the ability to 'recreate' solution models from scratch, given only a few basic clues.

I totally agree. I would like to see, rather than multiple choice answers in pattern or number sequence questions, the person come up with the answer themselves and give their reasoning for having arrived at that conclusion. I think that would say a lot more about the person & their ability to "think outside of the box".
There have been a few instances where I could see valid reasons for more than 1 of the options offered. Having to just tick 1 option gives the examiner no indication that you were able to see an answer that maybe the question-setter missed. That, to my mind, is worth a lot.
I believe that the ability to think coherently, or make inspirational leaps, in ways most people can't is a mark of genius. As a very simple example, take the story of the Gordion knot. I can't remember how many people were supposed to have attempted to unravel it. What did Alexander do? He whacked it with his sword & cut through it. Job done! He refused to be constrained by the accepted conventions & went straight to the heart of the problem.
It's exactly that kind of mental process that IQ tests do not test.
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: Ultima on 29/05/2005 01:16:30
I agree to, I’ve never taken an IQ test in my life! I don't think how much quota is important, it's how you apply yourself and if you use it at all. One of my friends from 6th form was remarkable at Maths he got like 100% in exams without trying, really amazing... but then he bombed out just because he didn't enjoy school work and didn’t do any of the required coursework. I doubt he is that good anymore, does this mean he is more intelligent? Plus something like Maths is nearly all about practice as is playing music to some extent. I'm not very interested in pure mathematics. I did hardly any homework for maths throughout school and it showed in my results. But I enjoyed Physics and Mechanics and did well in those because I practiced, and used them. I still use stuff I learnt from Mechanics today when writing computer games and graphics. Sure IQ gives you an idea of someone’s potential but it shouldn’t label someone as genius or not. I imagine that people with a level of autism, or dyslexia do absolutely crap on conventional IQ tests, but by no means does that imply they don’t have a high level of intelligence quota.

I’ve taken similar tests that were based on logic puzzles and vocabulary of learnt words. These were used to predict my A-Level and GCSE grades. The tests were called YELIS and ALICE, they were complete crap based on what students from previous years got. One predicted me having an 85% chance of a U (no grade) in I.T. what did I get an A* with 100% in one of the papers. Whoa whoever devised that test was on the ball. When applying to do A-Levels the school used the tests from GCSE to “gauge” how well we had done in our GCSE’s before the results had come out.

One IQ test I find fascinating is when you try to perceive a wire frame cube as the two forms/directions it could be in, quickly flashing between the two in your mind. Apparently if you can do this quickly you are more intelligent.
Well guess what I did this online and tapped the keyboard as fast as I could to say that I had transformed the cube in my mind. I got to the top of the rankings as a super genius for all to see… I think I could train a duck to peck the keyboard fast. There is no way from most of the conventional tests to tell how someone is accomplishing something, utterly abstract thought and process applied in inventive ways is the mark of a genius not jumping through hoops.

Someone mentioned corporate nonsense, it's so true... I'm suposed to learn a load of buzz words and set out designs and methods to do computer science. I find them restrictive to say the least. I had to design a program for a team of nine people to implement. I  did it, and all they could ask me was what "design pattern" does this follow so they could put it in the documentation. It turns out I had used a hacked version of "Model View Controller Pattern" by chance! oh wow isn't that great. Now no one will care that I had spent time thinking through a suitable design specific to the task, since they have a label to go ahhhh MVC of course... Un original conformist thought is treasured! I much prefer to come up with my own way of doing things, fair enough most of the time they are how someone else has done it, and they have put a name to it... but still if all anyone did was reuse old ideas there would be no innovation.

wOw the world spins?
Title: Re: Utter rubbish!
Post by: DoctorBeaver on 29/05/2005 01:42:44
Matt - you're absolutely spot on. Intelligence is nigh-on impossible to define or quantify so how the hell can it be measured? Yeah, certain tests will disclose certain abilities in certain areas: but that's not what IQ tests are allegedly supposed to do.
Your comment about autism was particularly interesting. I remember at my secondary school there was a kid who was completely thick, or so we thought. We couldn't understand how he'd got to a county grammar school. Then I happened to be in the same physics class as him. This guy was unbelievable. He was teaching our teachers about physics when he was 12 years old!
So, what does "genius" mean? Until the word can be defined is it wrong to label people as such? As in many things I can give instances of people whom I believe fit the bill (Da Vinci, Galileo, Newton, Heisenberg, Jimi Hendrix, Frank Zappa (genius doesn't have to be intellect-based), but as for a definition? Uh-uh, that's way beyond my limited powers of thought.
You may wonder why I left out the person whom most people would probably consider the most genius of geniuses (oh, dreadful grammar) of the last 100 years - to whit, Einstein. I have to say that I have my doubts as to whether he really was a genius. Yes, he certainly came up with some amazing ideas: but most of it was based on work done by other people. Without Riemann, for instance, what would he have achieved? His only true inspirational insight was that C is constant no matter how it's observed. OK, a lot of the physicists who come here will probably want to kick the sh1t out of me for saying that but i think I'm right.
I'm now going to dig a very large hole in my garden & hibernate until next year coz I just know I'm going to get untold grief for this post! [V]