Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Alain wrote:
> > Invisible nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/12 04:25:
> >> Alain wrote:
> >>> Invisible nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/08 04:34:
> >>>> ...I'm beginning to think POV-Ray attracts crazy people... o_O
> >>> Not at all! Just peoples that are more curious than the norm ;) thus,
> >>> good learners and thinkerers. Probably, also, who have an IQ higher
> >>> than average.
> >>
> >> Well, maybe you guys do. Mine is only 103... :-(
> > It's above average ;)
> > An IQ of 100 is average by definition. Anything >100 is above average.
>
> I guess the critical question is the SD...





IMO

Stephen

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 12:14:13 -0000, Stephen <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com>  
did spake, saying:

> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Alain wrote:
>> > Invisible nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/12 04:25:
>> >> Alain wrote:
>> >>> Invisible nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/08 04:34:
>> >>>> ...I'm beginning to think POV-Ray attracts crazy people... o_O
>> >>> Not at all! Just peoples that are more curious than the norm ;)  
>> thus,
>> >>> good learners and thinkerers. Probably, also, who have an IQ higher
>> >>> than average.
>> >>
>> >> Well, maybe you guys do. Mine is only 103... :-(
>> > It's above average ;)
>> > An IQ of 100 is average by definition. Anything >100 is above average.
>>
>> I guess the critical question is the SD...
>
>
> The critical question is, “What is IQ and why so people believe it can  
> be of use?”

Because it allows people to measure something unmeasurable then compare it  
to other people's results.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:




Well, it is self-evident that some people are much more intelligent than 
others. IQ is one attempt to measure this in some kind of objective way 
(with varying degrees of success).

Post a reply to this message

>> I have, on occasion, sent in reports like that, and had Microsoft reply 
>> with how to fix it. So obviously someone was paying attention to it.
>
> Woah. Micro$oft talking to a paying customer... that's almost unheard of. 
> o_O
>
> You must be very special...

Go to microsoft.co.uk and click on Support, then Help & Support home, 
Contact Us then "contact a support professional by phone or email".  I used 
it once at work because of some insane issue with Visual C++ .net, I was 
prepared to pay for the call, but as it turned out to be a bug they didn't 
charge me and sent me a pre-release update so I could work around the 
problem :-)

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:24:31 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Stephen wrote:
>
>> The critical question is, “What is IQ and why so people believe it can  
>> be of
>> use?”
>
> Well, it is self-evident that some people are much more intelligent than  
> others.

While it is self-evident that some people are more intelligent than  
others, it is also self-evident that some people are dumber then others;  
what is not commonly understood is that these facts often involves the  
same people merely at different times and in different situations.

> IQ is one attempt to measure this in some kind of objective way (with  
> varying degrees of success).

Although that simply shifts the question to the next level of "So why are  
bothering to measure this?"

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:

> While it is self-evident that some people are more intelligent than 
> others, it is also self-evident that some people are dumber then others; 
> what is not commonly understood is that these facts often involves the 
> same people merely at different times and in different situations.

Well, the guys at XKCD know about it at least:

http://www.xkcd.com/231/

>> IQ is one attempt to measure this in some kind of objective way (with 
>> varying degrees of success).
> 
> Although that simply shifts the question to the next level of "So why 
> are bothering to measure this?"

Well, if you're going to put it that way... why are we bothering to be 
live? It's not like there's any point to it...

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:59:35 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>> While it is self-evident that some people are more intelligent than  
>> others, it is also self-evident that some people are dumber then  
>> others; what is not commonly understood is that these facts often  
>> involves the same people merely at different times and in different  
>> situations.
>
> Well, the guys at XKCD know about it at least:
>
> http://www.xkcd.com/231/

Indeed

>>> IQ is one attempt to measure this in some kind of objective way (with  
>>> varying degrees of success).
>>  Although that simply shifts the question to the next level of "So why  
>> are bothering to measure this?"
>
> Well, if you're going to put it that way... why are we bothering to be  
> live? It's not like there's any point to it...

Correct, but in the case of IQ it's an artifical measurement system. So  
what was the basis of creating it? What, if any, problem was it designed  
to solve?

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

"Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> And lo on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:59:35 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
> spake, saying:
>

> > Well, if you're going to put it that way... why are we bothering to be
> > live? It's not like there's any point to it...


people get some enjoyment out of it. Mind you sometime it can suck :(

> Correct, but in the case of IQ it's an artifical measurement system. So
> what was the basis of creating it? What, if any, problem was it designed
> to solve?
>



it is not portable between societies. As it was developed in the West it has a
bias towards western society.

well in the tests and want to promote their belief that they are special. Also

you) that I would not send out to buy a loaf of bread without a note.

failed in our education system but succeed in life (a much harder test IMO)

interviews.


Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I guess the critical question is the SD...

I believe the SD is *supposed* to be 10, but that's more vague memory or 
heresay than me actually knowing.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:28:37 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>  
did spake, saying:

> Invisible wrote:
>> I guess the critical question is the SD...
>
> I believe the SD is *supposed* to be 10, but that's more vague memory or  
> heresay than me actually knowing.

Similarly I vaguely recall the need for renormalisation every decade with  
the average being about 3 points. So an IQ of 100 ten years later is only  
worth 97, wow you've suddenly got dumber and didn't even realise it :-P

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message