Is There One Intelligence and Can it be Measured?
-
There seem to be a lot of different ideas of what intelligence is. Some define intelligence with respect to ability, others with respect to potential. Some include knowledge as a major component, while others define it as ability to tackle new problems. Many insist speed is a of paramount importance, yet others champion depth of thought. It might be said that one's capacity to remember in the short term is a clear indicator, but it might be argued that is just a common trait among the intelligent and is neither necessary for it nor ensures it. Even more difficult than defining it is measuring it. Must there be a time limit? Should the test taker be given a dictionary or other reference material? Should complicated terms be avoided? And what of complicated mathematical concepts (e.g., what if the test taker has never heard of "prime number"?)? Maybe specific domains (science, math, language, philosophy, and so on) are the only thing which can be accurately measured. Or maybe greater intelligence can't be achieved without knowledge of many domains. In my estimation, intelligence can't easily be measured. If one is to measure how a person can solve problems novel to them, you must first measure their knowledge of the domain. If they have inadequate knowledge of the domain, an advanced problem within that domain would probably be beyond them if they don't know enough to interpret the problem correctly. And if they are so familiar with a domain that they already are familiar with problem solving strategies for most problems in that domain, any problem given to them will not require novel solutions. I think the best that can be readily done is to measure how much ability a person has achieved of their potential. You can test them in the areas they are familiar with to see how far they've come in their life so far. The more abstract the problems, the more generally applicable they can be. What do you think? Is there such a thing as a single type of intelligence (rather than, say, mathematical intelligence), and is it possible to measure? Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
-
There seem to be a lot of different ideas of what intelligence is. Some define intelligence with respect to ability, others with respect to potential. Some include knowledge as a major component, while others define it as ability to tackle new problems. Many insist speed is a of paramount importance, yet others champion depth of thought. It might be said that one's capacity to remember in the short term is a clear indicator, but it might be argued that is just a common trait among the intelligent and is neither necessary for it nor ensures it. Even more difficult than defining it is measuring it. Must there be a time limit? Should the test taker be given a dictionary or other reference material? Should complicated terms be avoided? And what of complicated mathematical concepts (e.g., what if the test taker has never heard of "prime number"?)? Maybe specific domains (science, math, language, philosophy, and so on) are the only thing which can be accurately measured. Or maybe greater intelligence can't be achieved without knowledge of many domains. In my estimation, intelligence can't easily be measured. If one is to measure how a person can solve problems novel to them, you must first measure their knowledge of the domain. If they have inadequate knowledge of the domain, an advanced problem within that domain would probably be beyond them if they don't know enough to interpret the problem correctly. And if they are so familiar with a domain that they already are familiar with problem solving strategies for most problems in that domain, any problem given to them will not require novel solutions. I think the best that can be readily done is to measure how much ability a person has achieved of their potential. You can test them in the areas they are familiar with to see how far they've come in their life so far. The more abstract the problems, the more generally applicable they can be. What do you think? Is there such a thing as a single type of intelligence (rather than, say, mathematical intelligence), and is it possible to measure? Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
AspDotNetDev wrote:
Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
Take four ‘IQ’ tests – let’s say one each week – and it’s pretty likely your score for the last test will be significantly better than the score you got for the first. I think it’s pretty unlikely that your intelligence has improved as much over the same time span.
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
-
AspDotNetDev wrote:
Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
Take four ‘IQ’ tests – let’s say one each week – and it’s pretty likely your score for the last test will be significantly better than the score you got for the first. I think it’s pretty unlikely that your intelligence has improved as much over the same time span.
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
Presumably there would be a limit. So maybe one should keep taking the test (each with a different set of questions) until the difference between two scores is no greater than, say 5 points. Or maybe you just keep taking the test so long as you can afford the fee. :rolleyes:
-
There seem to be a lot of different ideas of what intelligence is. Some define intelligence with respect to ability, others with respect to potential. Some include knowledge as a major component, while others define it as ability to tackle new problems. Many insist speed is a of paramount importance, yet others champion depth of thought. It might be said that one's capacity to remember in the short term is a clear indicator, but it might be argued that is just a common trait among the intelligent and is neither necessary for it nor ensures it. Even more difficult than defining it is measuring it. Must there be a time limit? Should the test taker be given a dictionary or other reference material? Should complicated terms be avoided? And what of complicated mathematical concepts (e.g., what if the test taker has never heard of "prime number"?)? Maybe specific domains (science, math, language, philosophy, and so on) are the only thing which can be accurately measured. Or maybe greater intelligence can't be achieved without knowledge of many domains. In my estimation, intelligence can't easily be measured. If one is to measure how a person can solve problems novel to them, you must first measure their knowledge of the domain. If they have inadequate knowledge of the domain, an advanced problem within that domain would probably be beyond them if they don't know enough to interpret the problem correctly. And if they are so familiar with a domain that they already are familiar with problem solving strategies for most problems in that domain, any problem given to them will not require novel solutions. I think the best that can be readily done is to measure how much ability a person has achieved of their potential. You can test them in the areas they are familiar with to see how far they've come in their life so far. The more abstract the problems, the more generally applicable they can be. What do you think? Is there such a thing as a single type of intelligence (rather than, say, mathematical intelligence), and is it possible to measure? Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
Any test is going to have an accuracy, and somebody how is very smart may not score well because just because there is going to be a bell curve associated with true intellegence and the test. The problem with the IQ test in the past has been that it was designed to be somewhat accurate for WASP. Then there is a lot of variation in people's skills. There are people know for having perfect memory, and those that can solve complex equations in their heads. That is a special skill, and the IQ test is not designed to capture specific abilities.
-
Any test is going to have an accuracy, and somebody how is very smart may not score well because just because there is going to be a bell curve associated with true intellegence and the test. The problem with the IQ test in the past has been that it was designed to be somewhat accurate for WASP. Then there is a lot of variation in people's skills. There are people know for having perfect memory, and those that can solve complex equations in their heads. That is a special skill, and the IQ test is not designed to capture specific abilities.
Clifford Nelson wrote:
WASP
What is WASP?
Clifford Nelson wrote:
those that can solve complex equations in their heads
I can do that. 1 + 1i + 2 + 2i = 3 + 3i Did that all in my head. ;P
-
There seem to be a lot of different ideas of what intelligence is. Some define intelligence with respect to ability, others with respect to potential. Some include knowledge as a major component, while others define it as ability to tackle new problems. Many insist speed is a of paramount importance, yet others champion depth of thought. It might be said that one's capacity to remember in the short term is a clear indicator, but it might be argued that is just a common trait among the intelligent and is neither necessary for it nor ensures it. Even more difficult than defining it is measuring it. Must there be a time limit? Should the test taker be given a dictionary or other reference material? Should complicated terms be avoided? And what of complicated mathematical concepts (e.g., what if the test taker has never heard of "prime number"?)? Maybe specific domains (science, math, language, philosophy, and so on) are the only thing which can be accurately measured. Or maybe greater intelligence can't be achieved without knowledge of many domains. In my estimation, intelligence can't easily be measured. If one is to measure how a person can solve problems novel to them, you must first measure their knowledge of the domain. If they have inadequate knowledge of the domain, an advanced problem within that domain would probably be beyond them if they don't know enough to interpret the problem correctly. And if they are so familiar with a domain that they already are familiar with problem solving strategies for most problems in that domain, any problem given to them will not require novel solutions. I think the best that can be readily done is to measure how much ability a person has achieved of their potential. You can test them in the areas they are familiar with to see how far they've come in their life so far. The more abstract the problems, the more generally applicable they can be. What do you think? Is there such a thing as a single type of intelligence (rather than, say, mathematical intelligence), and is it possible to measure? Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
"Intelligence" is just a word. An ill defined one, at that. Intelligence tests have their value - as a comparative. Give 1000 people a test, and compare their marks, and you can apply some conclusions. But they aren't really measuring intelligence, as nobody has really quantified intelligence.
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
"Intelligence" is just a word. An ill defined one, at that. Intelligence tests have their value - as a comparative. Give 1000 people a test, and compare their marks, and you can apply some conclusions. But they aren't really measuring intelligence, as nobody has really quantified intelligence.
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
In that case, how would you better define intelligence?
-
Clifford Nelson wrote:
WASP
What is WASP?
Clifford Nelson wrote:
those that can solve complex equations in their heads
I can do that. 1 + 1i + 2 + 2i = 3 + 3i Did that all in my head. ;P
Wasp == White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Probably should also include Male. One of the American biases.
-
In that case, how would you better define intelligence?
I don't think I'd really want to. What's the point? It may be useful to be able to measure a persons likely ability to perform some task - say, is it likely this person could learn to program - but surely a better measure would be to devise a test aimed at measuring just that - rather than some generic intelligence test.
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
In that case, how would you better define intelligence?
Since I doubt that we understand what is intellegence, we really cannot measure it. Especially if we are trying to put a number to it. There are just too many variables. Even if we would identify all the variables, we would have a hard time measuring them, and to determine how to rate the importance of each variable would be another challange. How is to say that one aspect of intellegence is more important than another.
-
Presumably there would be a limit. So maybe one should keep taking the test (each with a different set of questions) until the difference between two scores is no greater than, say 5 points. Or maybe you just keep taking the test so long as you can afford the fee. :rolleyes:
AspDotNetDev wrote:
Presumably there would be a limit
Obviously :laugh:
AspDotNetDev wrote:
keep taking the test so long as you can afford the fee.
Most people don't take one, and most of those who do take only one. You did after all ask:Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence? As far as I know they haven't figured out what exactly intelligence is, or at least it can be said that they are disagreeing - so how can it be measured. I think an 'IQ' test shows one thing only, and that's how good you are at 'IQ' tests.
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
-
There seem to be a lot of different ideas of what intelligence is. Some define intelligence with respect to ability, others with respect to potential. Some include knowledge as a major component, while others define it as ability to tackle new problems. Many insist speed is a of paramount importance, yet others champion depth of thought. It might be said that one's capacity to remember in the short term is a clear indicator, but it might be argued that is just a common trait among the intelligent and is neither necessary for it nor ensures it. Even more difficult than defining it is measuring it. Must there be a time limit? Should the test taker be given a dictionary or other reference material? Should complicated terms be avoided? And what of complicated mathematical concepts (e.g., what if the test taker has never heard of "prime number"?)? Maybe specific domains (science, math, language, philosophy, and so on) are the only thing which can be accurately measured. Or maybe greater intelligence can't be achieved without knowledge of many domains. In my estimation, intelligence can't easily be measured. If one is to measure how a person can solve problems novel to them, you must first measure their knowledge of the domain. If they have inadequate knowledge of the domain, an advanced problem within that domain would probably be beyond them if they don't know enough to interpret the problem correctly. And if they are so familiar with a domain that they already are familiar with problem solving strategies for most problems in that domain, any problem given to them will not require novel solutions. I think the best that can be readily done is to measure how much ability a person has achieved of their potential. You can test them in the areas they are familiar with to see how far they've come in their life so far. The more abstract the problems, the more generally applicable they can be. What do you think? Is there such a thing as a single type of intelligence (rather than, say, mathematical intelligence), and is it possible to measure? Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
Yes, there is one overriding intelligence and it can be measured: Don't piss off my wife!! Even the dog knows that.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
-
Clifford Nelson wrote:
WASP
What is WASP?
Clifford Nelson wrote:
those that can solve complex equations in their heads
I can do that. 1 + 1i + 2 + 2i = 3 + 3i Did that all in my head. ;P
AspDotNetDev wrote:
Did that all in my head. ;-P
:thumbsup: Some would say that that statement shows another kind of intelligence, valuable in and of itself :-D
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
-
AspDotNetDev wrote:
Did that all in my head. ;-P
:thumbsup: Some would say that that statement shows another kind of intelligence, valuable in and of itself :-D
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
My parents never found my wit and sarcasm very impressive. Though, they didn't seem to appreciate intelligence at all. They always said "smart ass" like it was a bad thing. :rolleyes:
-
Yes, there is one overriding intelligence and it can be measured: Don't piss off my wife!! Even the dog knows that.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
-
My parents never found my wit and sarcasm very impressive. Though, they didn't seem to appreciate intelligence at all. They always said "smart ass" like it was a bad thing. :rolleyes:
AspDotNetDev wrote:
They always said "smart ass" like it was a bad thing
Or perhaps they were just pretty sure your teacher wouldn't appreciate it... ;)
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
-
Yeah, and sometimes smarter than me!! :(( ;P
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
-
There seem to be a lot of different ideas of what intelligence is. Some define intelligence with respect to ability, others with respect to potential. Some include knowledge as a major component, while others define it as ability to tackle new problems. Many insist speed is a of paramount importance, yet others champion depth of thought. It might be said that one's capacity to remember in the short term is a clear indicator, but it might be argued that is just a common trait among the intelligent and is neither necessary for it nor ensures it. Even more difficult than defining it is measuring it. Must there be a time limit? Should the test taker be given a dictionary or other reference material? Should complicated terms be avoided? And what of complicated mathematical concepts (e.g., what if the test taker has never heard of "prime number"?)? Maybe specific domains (science, math, language, philosophy, and so on) are the only thing which can be accurately measured. Or maybe greater intelligence can't be achieved without knowledge of many domains. In my estimation, intelligence can't easily be measured. If one is to measure how a person can solve problems novel to them, you must first measure their knowledge of the domain. If they have inadequate knowledge of the domain, an advanced problem within that domain would probably be beyond them if they don't know enough to interpret the problem correctly. And if they are so familiar with a domain that they already are familiar with problem solving strategies for most problems in that domain, any problem given to them will not require novel solutions. I think the best that can be readily done is to measure how much ability a person has achieved of their potential. You can test them in the areas they are familiar with to see how far they've come in their life so far. The more abstract the problems, the more generally applicable they can be. What do you think? Is there such a thing as a single type of intelligence (rather than, say, mathematical intelligence), and is it possible to measure? Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
I think intelligence is overrated, enthusiasm and research is underrated!
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.
-
Clifford Nelson wrote:
WASP
What is WASP?
Clifford Nelson wrote:
those that can solve complex equations in their heads
I can do that. 1 + 1i + 2 + 2i = 3 + 3i Did that all in my head. ;P
Your ability do solve complex equations is nothing but imaginary.
-
AspDotNetDev wrote:
Have you come across an IQ test which you think accurately measures intelligence?
Take four ‘IQ’ tests – let’s say one each week – and it’s pretty likely your score for the last test will be significantly better than the score you got for the first. I think it’s pretty unlikely that your intelligence has improved as much over the same time span.
Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile
Espen Harlinn wrote:
Take four ‘IQ’ tests – let’s say one each week – and it’s pretty likely your score for the last test will be significantly better than the score you got for the first.
I know people to whom that this approach won't help even with driving theory test*, let alone IQ test.
* - until recently, driving theory test here was complete joke:
for more then 30 years there were only 6 combinations of questions,
IIRC each combination had ~20 questions
and still there were people who manage to fail it more then 10 times.