Let's measure intelligence in 2016

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I thought long and hard about it (for 30seconds)
And I've figured out what constitutes intelligence.
Why should you give a shit? Well, because as you know iq tests don't measure *all* aspects of intelligence. This may be because researchers have not found a way to understand what other elements constitutes intelligence or it may be because they don't know how to measure the other elements, this may be because of various reasons, one being that they have a vague idea of the other aspects of intelligence and hence find it difficult to measure it.

So, let's get to the point, I've figured out all aspects of intelligence and I've sub categorized them as :
*Pattern analysis
*Memory management
*Closeness to answer(Precision)

So I'll start of by explaining these sub categories,
Pattern analysis - Basically, this is the aspect that iq tests are capable of measuring. Pattern analysis is the ability to extract information from underlying patterns.
When they ask us to fill out the blank of 1,5,10,__
What they're actually asking us to do is to analyse the number sequence, find a pattern in it and fill in with your output. All great scientists will have exceptional pattern analysis and memory management (which I'll talk about in a few seconds), as you might know great scientists are those that can connect seemingly unrelated data, this feels unrelated to us and related to them because our pattern analysis are light years away from theirs. Since iq tests are capable of covering this aspect of intelligence I won't waste any more time with it, so I'll jump right to the next thing on the list :
Memory management :
Let's face it, humans have terrible memory management, this however doesn't mean that there have not been humans in our history that possessed exceptional memory management. Pattern analysis require that variables are stored in the memory so that they can be analyzed,if more variables can be hold onto memory at a given time that means more patterns can be sought out. Programmers have great pattern analysis but *not so bad* Memory management those few that do have a good memory management goes to become great programmers or computer scientists. Doctors on the other hand possesses exceptional memory management and not so bad pattern analysis and those of them with a good pattern analysis goes to become great doctors or diagnosticians like Dr House. Physicists on the other hand have a good pattern analysis and a good memory management,exceptional physicists like Einstein have great pattern analysis and great memory, average physicists have good memory management and a slightly less dominant pattern analysis.
This is an aspect that iq tests fail to evaluate. In my opinion unless and until iq tests evaluate how good the m memory management is of someone they wont be able to evaluate net intelligence.

And the last on the list,
Closeness to answer or precision :
Ever wondered how iq tests are incapable of evaluating artistic intelligence? You may spot an exceptional sketcher but his iq will be very low. Well the simple answer is what makes them great artists is not a great pattern analysis but a great precision and as we now realize iq test measure *only* Pattern analysis. If you had as awesome as a pattern analysis as that of mine you'd have figured out that all artists create paintings which are a representation of something they had seen in their life and not something that is *Truly* original . Even seemingly confusing paintings represent something. Mona Lisa was great because the precision/Closeness to answer involved in that painting was exceptional.
In all of the three aspects this one is the hardest to measure. If you showed a scientist and an artist a potato and asked them how much potatoes would fit in a sack the artist will have the most precise answers on average given that the scientist doesn't use any scientific methods and they are both essentially guessing. So basically artists are better when it comes to guessing answers which is why the majority of them don't fare well in iq tests as iq tests are about giving an exact answer. This is what makes measuring this type of intelligence extremely difficult since you can't ask them questions that have an exact answer like 3 or 4 but answers like 'from a range of 1 to 5'.


That is all. If iq tests are able to implement tests to test these aspects of human intelligence then they will have a more precise net intelligence score. However all these aspects combined to a single test is a no brainer because humans don't generally have all these traits maxed out, ideally professions would require people with great pattern analysis, memory management and precision but since people like that come one every century the net intelligence wouldn't be of much use. But if these seperate attributes are tested using seperate tests then it'll help us to figure out what profession is best suited for someone.
For example someone with good memory management and a not so bad pattern analysis can be a really good doctor, someone with a great memory management and average pattern analysis and precision can be a history major,someone with a good pattern analysis,average precision and above average memory management will shine most as a philosophical major etc.

I plan to make an example questionnaire for this new iq test or the new pool the great test as I'd like to call it and test it. As of now this is just an idea,I'll keep you guys updated of my results.

[robvalue]

The problem with IQ tests is they get less accurate with age, if age is used as a quotient.

For example, my IQ these days would probably show that I'm thick as shit, whereas I'm actually dumb as fuck.

This is an interesting topic though. What exactly intelligence is, and how it could be measured, is fascinating. Of course, there will always be some measure of subjectivity in setting up the criteria. It's not something you can accurately and objectively reduce to a single number.

[Ben Davis]

Good thinking, you're getting close to the best understanding that psychologists have at the moment. You should also factor in emotional and adversity intelligence. Both are critical in evaluating how we apply our thought processes in the real world.

People with a mature understanding of 'intelligence' know that IQ tests are about as reliable as Myers-Briggs tests: they're one-dimensional and provide results which have limited practical application.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I had not thought about emotional intelligence. I'll give it some thought, figure out if I can figure out a way to figure out what it's all about. Thanks for reminding me of that!

Also I figured out all the above by myself

[Ben Davis]

Nicely done. Then you should do some reading and save yourself the effort of having to rethink a lot of what's already been thought. You're clearly self-starting with an interest in original thinking on this subject so you can make better use of your time that way.

[Minimalist]

I use a very quick and easy IQ measurement.

Do you believe in supernatural bullshit?  If yes, you're a fucking moron.  If no, you're smart.

Generally it works pretty well as an indicator.

[The Atheist]

I use a very quick and easy IQ measurement.

Do you believe in supernatural bullshit?  If yes, you're a fucking moron.  If no, you're smart.

Generally it works pretty well as an indicator.

I don't know about that. When I was a card-carrying member of mensa (yes, the have actual cards because they're lame), we had people from all walks of life, including believers and non-believers.

Unfortunately, mensa is a club where people with egos can sniff their own farts and nothing more.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Are you including temporal sequence learning?

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Are you including temporal sequence learning?

.....should I?

[I_am_not_mafia]

Are you including temporal sequence learning?

.....should I?

If you want to include the type of intelligence that can catch a ball, plan moves ahead, predict something occurring, recall a tune or learn a dance step then yes.

In terms of AI I'd argue that this is what makes an autonomous agent intelligent rather than a stimulus / response unit.