Tim Cook wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> I believe that IQ tests are a flawed concept.
>>
>> I agree.  Any meaningful test needs to have a much more specific focus.
> 
> I, for one, don't agree.  What's wrong with the concept of a generalised 
> test to determine an individuals approximate level of mental development?

Absolutely nothing.  However, there's nothing "approximate" about saying 
"Your IQ is 174, and his is 168, ergo you are smarter."

An approximation would be fine.

> And the US Navy's nuclear submarines being able to be completely 
> remote-controlled if you send them the right access codes (since it was 
> in some movie).

The only movie I know of that showed that was Star Trek II ;)

>  And the US having low-yield nukes (specifically nukes) 
> that don't produce radiation, or if they do, it decays within days, 
> instead of a century or so.

Neutron bombs.  They kill off the population, and leave the real estate 
intact.

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message