Estimation of Intelligence

[A_Nony_Mouse]

In your opinion, is it possible to get an idea of a person's intelligence based on their threads and comments on AF?

Define intelligence.

That which is measured by an IQ test.

To cut off the usual response, higher scores generally correlate with greater success in careers. It has been nearly two decades since the book came out. Must it be rehashed?

[Cato]

Define intelligence.

That which is measured by an IQ test.

No, an IQ test measures the intelligence quotient of an individual. IQ is a 20th century invention. The word and meaning of intelligence predates IQ by about 500 years.

So, it's rather ridiculous to claim the definition of intelligence is 'that which is measured by an IQ test'.

[catfish]

"That which is measured by an IQ test" is actually how stupid a person is... Just sayin...

[A_Nony_Mouse]

That which is measured by an IQ test.

No, an IQ test measures the intelligence quotient of an individual. IQ is a 20th century invention. The word and meaning of intelligence predates IQ by about 500 years.

So, it's rather ridiculous to claim the definition of intelligence is 'that which is measured by an IQ test'.

Are you suggesting protons and electrons did not exist until recently?

Or are you suggesting the world records in sports are not those measured?

---

"That which is measured by an IQ test" is actually how stupid a person is... Just sayin...

One must live in an odd sort of place where where the village idiot scores higher than the village wise man.

It is a thing we can observe in people. It is a characteristic of their personalities. The idea of trying to measure it was in fact a 20th c. idea but was a subset of the idea of trying to measure the intangibles, the stick a number to everything idea.

Thus it is as reasonable to measure the reflexes of people and scale them as the speed of response as it is to measure the speed with which people solve problems. As problem solving is the most common type of IQ test you can declare IQ test is the rate at which problems can be solved. However as there are other types of IQ tests that is not a generally correct answer.

[pocaracas]

I always thought that people were all equally intelligent... more or less.... what changes is the amount of information they've acquired throughout their lives.
Of course, if you don't use that information... you forget it... and then it's not available for reasoning.
But, given the same information, all people should reason more or less the same way.

[A_Nony_Mouse]

I always thought that people were all equally intelligent... more or less.... what changes is the amount of information they've acquired throughout their lives.

Were that the case IQ would increase with age. In fact it is remarkably stable from childhood to old age.

Of course, if you don't use that information... you forget it... and then it's not available for reasoning.
But, given the same information, all people should reason more or less the same way.

For the sake of argument assume all people know the addition tables. That is mutually shared information. There are always differences as to how quickly addition problems are solved. The longer the numbers the easier it is to discriminate.

As speed of reflexes and IQ generally have a positive correlation the same discriminate will appear even if everyone uses calculators.

[Darth]

Give it a shot. You've had the good fortune to have me on these forums for quite a while now, over 800 posts, each one chock full of wisdom so go on, guess my IQ. I wish to know how intelligent people on these forums perceive me to be.

[pocaracas]

I always thought that people were all equally intelligent... more or less.... what changes is the amount of information they've acquired throughout their lives.

Were that the case IQ would increase with age. In fact it is remarkably stable from childhood to old age.

Could be because people forget some things?...
Overall, you only have so many things you can remember. some new information drives out the old?
I don't know, this is just speculation on my part... I've never seen any study on the matter.

Of course, if you don't use that information... you forget it... and then it's not available for reasoning.
But, given the same information, all people should reason more or less the same way.

For the sake of argument assume all people know the addition tables. That is mutually shared information. There are always differences as to how quickly addition problems are solved. The longer the numbers the easier it is to discriminate.

As speed of reflexes and IQ generally have a positive correlation the same discriminate will appear even if everyone uses calculators.

Practice makes perfect... The same rule that applies for muscles, also applies for the brain.
I'm not good at math, because I'm naturally pre-disposed to it.... I just practiced a lot... even so, sometimes, I do the biggest blunders imaginable!

[Mister Agenda]

Generally if a person's IQ differs from yours in 12-15 point increments, you can get a general sense that you are smarter than them or they are smarter than you from a long conversation. Someone with an IQ 30 points or more below yours may require you to 'dumb down' your speech in order for them to understand your points; while someone more than 30 points of IQ over yours may have to simplify the way they express themselves in order for you to follow what they're saying. Smaller differences are very difficult to detect without testing. A psychologist with some focus in IQ testing may be able to estimate within 10 points from a conversation.

Caveat: this assumes all speakers have the same native language.

Yes, IQ is what IQ tests measure, but someone with a 70 IQ still has challenging intellectual limitations that will limit what careers are possible and someone with an IQ of 130 is noticeably better than average at learning and reasoning.

[John V]

IIRC vocabulary correlates well with IQ, so, sure, you could use posts to estimate intelligence.