On April 4, 2016, Chimera posted on Trek Core in an article on intelligence tests and commented on other posts, but they have been left out. The original posts have been moved from an affiliate.
Chimera82405
Constellation-Class Starship
Senior Member
729 posts
Location:Bay Area
Posted
Saturday at 10:19 AM (edited)
Intelligence
may manifest in ways that are as immeasurable as faith or conscience. IQ tests
prove nothing. They just pigeonhole social and intellectual groups and make it
easier for high ranking theorists, educated guessers, to make people in little
boxes with labels on them. IQ tests are flawed and do not prove someone is
lesser or more human.
As
someone said above, environment is a big factor, as well as social class,
status and any restrictions on that class that might happen. A poor starving family
in the ghetto is not going to get the same education, social status, social
dynamic or benefits a city dwelling middle class family, or a high rise
penthouse rich one might get. That has a major impact on the so called
intelligence tests.
Einstein
probably scored poorly on social tests, but he was brilliant in other areas.
Then there were people like Newton or Copernicus that didn't go out much, but
were great too.
Social
work status is not a testable class as there can be people who cannot handle a
high stress work place, and ergo test badly, but put them in an office with a
computer and they could be the next Steve Jobs or something.
The
brain size test from long ago was an excuse to show that racist people were
somehow right in their distorted beliefs, which they were not. One of the most
pronemat physicist of our time is Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and another Michio Kaku.
Even
in the 1980s, 30 years ago, they didn't ask children what they were thinking or
feeling, but just put them in special classes when they acted out. They never
asked what was the root cause of their behavior. Many a 1990s raised child was
on medication for just being a kid with issues. It was very strange.
They
were not more or less intelligent, but socially they probably were not scoring
very high. Some of them might have gone on to become doctors, given some
caregiver that helped them to go beyond the social box they had been placed in.
We
must all achieve our potential, but not like the thoroughbred being broken,
(Star Trek 09), but like the nurturing of the mind.
Being
under educated makes people ignorant of the world, not dumb. You can find
education in living too and meeting wise people, and having good hobbies and
activities.
Maybe
the genius can lie in the details. You might have a tradesman that rises in the
ranks to become the best at her trade. She can literally envision a building
plan and get the materials, and build it,
Then
there could be a highly educated person who can't find work because socially he
or she is not meeting up to some outdated social job skills tests, that don't
work. That person might even have multiple degrees in interesting fields.
So
there should not be an IQ test because it makes people seem like they have to
measure up to some outdated standard. It should be more like a social and
intelligence ability test, factoring in various advantages and abilities, and
exploring and reducing weaknesses, not mocking people for being different
somehow. Learning difference is not a disadvantage, ergo Spock left the science
academy in Trek 09. It is a different one.
Most
of the great thinkers had some kind of disability. Interesting.
Andy
Warhol was a genius at painting weird things, but other things, he was not so
good at.
Edited
Saturday at 10:25 AM by Chimera82405
Chimera82405
Constellation-Class Starship
Senior Member
729 posts
Location:Bay Area
Posted
Saturday at 6:41 PM
Okay,
IQ tests are not all faulty. Maybe some of them work out. Yeah, there was too
much editorial psycho-babble in my post earlier, and there are no absolutes.
The point was that giving people labels tends to isolate them. It might not
always happen.
I
saw also attempting to make it seem more like Star Trek themed, with pop psychology
elements Spock surely would have mentioned.
I
am not a psychologist, as you can tell. I make characters that are, but that's
not the same thing.
The
heredity angle I didn't get at, but now I will. Sure there are some people who
are born into riches, or born into acting, or some of the social class. They
might become like their parents. Upbringing is also a key. If you have
inspiring parents, you might have a lot more potential than if your parents
weren't there.
Genetics
though might not play a role in that case, as social class is playing the role.
Is
there such a thing as physical intelligence, the fittest somehow are smarter,
because I doubt that there is a connection? No, the brutish might not lead to
the smartest. Is intelligence in the brain only? It seems a great deal of it is
in the brain.
The
old Turing test for intelligence in artificial life could be applied to humans,
and it would be interesting testing a physically fit focus group, a smarter
than usual one, and a not so bright one and see something.
It
still would not prove fitter, healthier, and greater in genes equates to
greater mind power. An example of mental power would be Dr. Hawking, who is
able to communicate only through his computer, but is a brilliant mind, and one
of the greatest physicists of the modern age. Genetically he has a disability,
probably inherited, but that doesn't mean he cannot do something great.
A
friend of mine once told me that two bully jocks could have a smart kid, or two
smart people could have an extremely dumb kid. The luck of the draw.
Probably
in ancient times when humans were foraging for food it had something more to do
with the stronger willed hunter types bringing food to fuel the tribe, but even
then they probably had intellectuals who planned out that hunt.
Society,
as one of you said, is not merely the high society, but everyone. Also that
Goofy looking smiling dog icon is great. Ha. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment