What is the scientific consensus on IQ?

What is the scientific consensus on IQ?

My penis is 6 inches and I'm very satisfied.

It's a tool to roughly estimate one's efficiency in understanding and solving problems in science.
However, many people use it to estimate one's actual skills, knowledge or absolute limits in what he can ever archive. That's not how it works.

1. There are multiple types of IQ tests
2. They're all over the place
3. Some are controversial
4. Even the generally accepted tests are fallacious as they give equal weight to inductive, abductive and deductive reasoning

Why did you have to make the lurkers uncomfortable?

not like you would know

nice quads

thanks bae

Animals are more competent at certain tasks than the average human, and yet you wouldn't say that an animal is smarter than even a dumb human.

Just shows how far IQ tests have to go before being credible.

>1. There are multiple types of IQ tests
True. Raven's Progressive Matrices are the most objective and culture fair tests in my opinion.
>2. They're all over the place
Yeah, because they are quite good.
>3. Some are controversial
Many depends on language skills and are "normalized" in a way to prevent them from showing differences in race and gender. That's why I think RPMs are good.
>4. Even the generally accepted tests are fallacious as they give equal weight to inductive, abductive and deductive reasoning
Why fallacious? These skills correspond with one's efficiency in understanding and solving problems in science.

IQ are so common because they are credible. As I said they don't show how skilled or competent you are. There are other tests to test that.

IQ is cancer. It's just another modern tool that enables people that achieved nothing to act smug and superior. IQ really reflects the modern world perfectly. You have done nothing of worth but still you're given certain tools to feel above others. What a great way to further enhance the current mentality of the population that is already stagnating since you can easily obtain all standards of living there is no need to evolve further.

Scientifically it just resembles a very small part of the thousands of components that make up your brain. All we know is that it's perfectly possible to enhance your IQ score trough practice. A test is already deluded trough the unique experiences one may had even without specific practice.

This. See Goodhart's Law.

How can you use IQ to make yourself superior? No one cares about your IQ and if you'll start bragging about it without having any achievements people will only think low about you. Even putting it on your CV reduces your chances to get a job.
The fact that some people use some tool incorrectly doesn't invalidate it's actual usefulness.

What exactly is useful about knowing your IQ? For what can it be used beyond social bragging?

Deciding on a career.

Like most psychological tools, it's not useful for you personally.
I personally was tested two times during diagnostics of Prosopagnosia and Dyslexia because the results were related. I'm not an expert so I can't say how is it related, but it took part of diagnostics.

Well if you score 90 on an iq test its probably a good way to dissuade you from going thousands of dollars into debt for law school, for example.

You shouldn't limit yourself because of the result of IQ test.
High IQ just means you might learn things quickly, but it's not like someone with 90 IQ can never accomplish what 120 IQ has done. Hard work, experience and dedication means much more than just potential to archive something big.

Maybe you should end your dream of becoming a high ranking scientist at the top of your field but not going trough with something as simple as law school is ridiculous.

You need potential and dedication to achieve anything big.

>Hard work, experience and dedication means much more than just potential to archive something big.
but that's bullshit. no dullard is going to study 14 hours a day to be a mediocre physicist.

I think you underestimate how dull somebody with an iq of 90 actually is. Majority of them just hardly graduate high school.

Terrible advice. You shouldn't aim to be the dumbest in a field.

I'm not too keen on the notion of IQ, but I don't think you're understanding what scoring below average actually is apt to correlate with in the real world. It's not just an abstract number, it does represent some aspects of how well hard, underlying machinery works.

Not all of that machinery is fixed, and it can be reprogrammed. But if someone is outputting those sorts of results to begin with, it doesn't bode well for their innate capacity to expand and make use of themselves.

It's really better if people just stop having an opinion on this. That way you don't delude people who can't make it into smashing their head against a all until they sink well below baseline and despair. Likewise, you don't create a climate where their trying at all is suppressed.

Well, maybe I just only interact with relatively intelligent people. I guess university might be unreachable for someone with 90IQ.
All I wanted to say is that you shouldn't give up because of the result of an IQ test. If it's something that interests you and you actually feel encouraged to do it, you might success. Of course some intelligence is still required so retard will never success no matter how hard he tries.

But the tests are still subject to external factors.

Somebody with dyslexia might have trouble learning from reading but are a wizard when learning from audio.

Sometimes useful but usually misused information to fill an agenda or stroke egos.

I was given a professional IQ test while people were talking in the room, my brain was full of histamine, I was hungry, and was sleep deprived. I still scored above average. (The test was given because I apparently wasn't generating the correct outputs, and they wanted to figure out if I had some selective mental deficit, or something. In actuality I was just miserable and didn't care.)

I understand what you're saying about the greater spectrum of factors and how they play into some numerical representation. Intelligence is relative, etc. But refer back to my post. People who are getting 80 and 90 on IQ tests (which test specific subsystems and how they relate) is apt to have problems. Most people are not rainman. Even most people with agenesis of the corpus callosum, are not rainman. So again, it strongly correlates.

Placement. The army and colleges use test of smarts to filter out the lower tails of the population.