The Science of Human Intelligence

[Ludwig Beethoven]

Hi,

I am a Psychology student right now and we are currently studying human intelligence. I thought I would share with you two articles my Professor recently gave our class:

The General Intelligence Factor

Despite some popular assertions, a single factor for intelligence, called g, can be measured with IQ tests and does predict success in life --- Linda S. Gottfredson.

No subject in psychology has provoked more intense public controversy than the study of human intelligence. From its beginning, research on how and why people differ in overall mental ability has fallen prey to political and social agendas that obscure or distort even the most well-established scientific findings. Journalists, too, often present a view of intelligence research that is exactly the opposite of what most intelligence experts believe. For these and other reasons, public understanding of intelligence falls far short of public concern about it. The IQ experts discussing their work in the public arena can feel as though they have fallen down the rabbit hole into Alice's Wonderland.

The debate over intelligence and intelligence testing focuses on the question of whether it is useful or meaningful to evaluate people according to a single major dimension of cognitive competence. Is there indeed a general mental ability we commonly call "intelligence," and is it important in the practical affairs of life? The answer, based on decades of intelligence research, is an unequivocal yes. No matter their form or content, tests of mental skills invariably point to the existence of a global factor that permeates all aspects of cognition. And this factor seems to have considerable influence on a person's practical quality of life. Intelligence as measured by IQ tests is the single most effective predictor known of individual performance at school and on the job. It also predicts many other aspects of well-being, including a person's chances of divorcing, dropping out of high school, being unemployed or having illegitimate children.

The complete article is at:

home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/apa.htm#SA

and

From Mainstream Science on Intelligence, published in The Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1994, and signed by 52 professors, all experts in intelligence and allied fields:

Since the publication of "The Bell Curve," many commentators have offered opinions about human intelligence that misstate current scientific evidence. Some conclusions [25 listed below] dismissed in the media as discredited are actually firmly supported.

This statement outlines conclusions regarded as mainstream among researchers on intelligence, in particular, on the nature, origins, and practical consequences of individual and group differences in intelligence. Its aim is to promote more reasoned discussion of the vexing phenomenon that the research has revealed in recent decades. The following conclusions are fully described in the major textbooks, professional journals and encyclopedias in intelligence.

The complete article is at http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/wsj.htm
home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/wsj.htm

Please let me know what you think about the validity of defining and measuring human intelligence.

Regards.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I'm not sure what bizarre agenda you're running, but if you are studying psychology academically then you will certainly be taught the wider controversy that IQ is at best contentious, and at worse, completely worthless.

There have been various studies (if I remember right) claiming that there are wider dimensions of something that may be interpretated as expressions of "intelligence" - but far too often an IQ test fails to address them, falling instead into simple recall of "general knowledge".

At the end of the day, IQ measures nothing except the experimenters presumptions.

I know I haven't given references - you should be able to take those out of your own classes. And, yeah, I studied psychology at university.

 

[Ludwig Beethoven]

I'm not sure what bizarre agenda you're running

I am confused by your comments. Can you please re-state them? Thank you.

but if you are studying psychology academically then you will certainly be taught the wider controversy that IQ is at best contentious, and at worse, completely worthless.

My college professor says IQ is the best measure of intelligence we have and does a great job of predicting success in a technologically advanced nation. He was born in China and says that in his country, IQ tests is the most important psychological test used for jobs, whether in the public or private sector.

There have been various studies (if I remember right) claiming that there are wider dimensions of something that may be interpretated as expressions of "intelligence" - but far too often an IQ test fails to address them, falling instead into simple recall of "general knowledge".

Yes, my Professor mentioned the "Multiple Intelligence Theory" of Howard Gardner, The "Triarchic Theory of Intelligence" of Robert Sternberg, and the "Emotional Intelligence Theory." He says that there is no scientific backing for any of these tests and that they are merely pop-culture tests simply meant to amuse common folk. He says that the United States government uses IQ tests to place people in various positions in the military and that IQ tests are so valid that the United States Court/Judicial system uses these tests to access the intellectual capabilities of criminals and other people.

Regards,

David Lopez

 

[Brian G Turner]

If your professor is extremely biased, then that's hardly going to be fair on the alternatives, is it?

Claiming there's no scientific backing for the others hardly offers scientific backing for IQ - the simple fact is that the closer you try and define intelligence, the more subjective and difficult the task becomes - let alone measure the expression of the subjective definition. In fact, there's an argument that the majority of what is termed taught under the term "psychology" is not scientific anyway.

As for the US military & judiciary using IQ tests - that proves nothing. They both also routinely use lie detector testing, even thought it is a scientifically demonstrably flawed technique.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Actually I studied Psychology in college too, but I'm jumping in simply because I'm the jumpy sort.

You'll notice that these statements about absolute measures of intelligence are self contradictory from the start. They begin by positing an absolute, reliable scale and then start defining the context more narrowly: 'predicting success in a technologically advanced nation', and defining aspects of well-being such as 'a person's chances of divorcing, dropping out of high school, being unemployed or having illegitimate children.' all of which, presumably are negative things which a person with a high IQ will not indulge in.

Do I need to list the number of bright people who have made a real contribution to society and humanity who have, however, divorced, dropped out of college, been unemployed or had illegitimate children? Also, even given that we live in a technocratic world, when did success in a technologically advanced nation become the be-all of intelligence?

Psychology seeks to understand the human mind, a noble task. But in reality, it seems to bog itself down in statistical averages, in percieved common aspirations and contexts that have a place for everything but humanity itself.

If I was a college administrator or an employer, I would probably find some IQ tests useful to me in finding suitable candidates. Outside the trick cyclist's laboratory, in the vastly complex arena of real human life in its fullest sense...there are so many forms of intelligence, it would be presumptous to assume that any one measure suffices.

Just my 2 Paise.

 

[littlemissattitude]

Ludwig...I'm sorry if I seem to be rude by saying this, but I think that by and large IQ testing is a load of crap. It has been my experience - extensive experience that began when I was 7 years old and was forced to take a battery of intelligence tests because I was bored in school and the teachers didn't know what else to do with me - that they are mainly used, in the schools at least, to label children and box them in, into preconceived categories that may actually have nothing to do with the individual and what he or she is capable of and interested in at all.

Just as one example, I had teachers in high school who refused to answer my questions because, as one math teacher said, "I've seen your IQ scores, and you can figure it out for yourself." Well, I had tried to figure it out for myself, the concepts I was asking about made absolutely no sense to me, and I needed help. I wouldn't have asked for the help otherwise...I hate asking for help. Just because I have what was classified as a "high" IQ, did not mean that I could automatically "get" every subject. This sort of stereotyping, however, happened to me repeatedly in my elementary school, junior high, and high school years. It wasn't fair to me, and it isn't fair to the other students it happens to - whether they are stereotyped because they scored high on an IQ test or whether they are stereotyped because they scored low on such a test.

Again, sorry. But I've got some real-world experience with this, not just the theoretical discussions that go on in the classroom and in the psychology lab.

 

[Eldo]

Hi,

I am a Psychology student right now and we are currently studying human intelligence. I thought I would share with you two articles my Professor recently gave our class:

The General Intelligence Factor

Despite some popular assertions, a single factor for intelligence, called g, can be measured with IQ tests and does predict success in life --- Linda S. Gottfredson.

No subject in psychology has provoked more intense public controversy than the study of human intelligence. From its beginning, research on how and why people differ in overall mental ability has fallen prey to political and social agendas that obscure or distort even the most well-established scientific findings. Journalists, too, often present a view of intelligence research that is exactly the opposite of what most intelligence experts believe. For these and other reasons, public understanding of intelligence falls far short of public concern about it. The IQ experts discussing their work in the public arena can feel as though they have fallen down the rabbit hole into Alice's Wonderland.

The debate over intelligence and intelligence testing focuses on the question of whether it is useful or meaningful to evaluate people according to a single major dimension of cognitive competence. Is there indeed a general mental ability we commonly call "intelligence," and is it important in the practical affairs of life? The answer, based on decades of intelligence research, is an unequivocal yes. No matter their form or content, tests of mental skills invariably point to the existence of a global factor that permeates all aspects of cognition. And this factor seems to have considerable influence on a person's practical quality of life. Intelligence as measured by IQ tests is the single most effective predictor known of individual performance at school and on the job. It also predicts many other aspects of well-being, including a person's chances of divorcing, dropping out of high school, being unemployed or having illegitimate children.

The complete article is at:

home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/apa.htm#SA

and

From Mainstream Science on Intelligence, published in The Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1994, and signed by 52 professors, all experts in intelligence and allied fields:

Since the publication of "The Bell Curve," many commentators have offered opinions about human intelligence that misstate current scientific evidence. Some conclusions [25 listed below] dismissed in the media as discredited are actually firmly supported.

This statement outlines conclusions regarded as mainstream among researchers on intelligence, in particular, on the nature, origins, and practical consequences of individual and group differences in intelligence. Its aim is to promote more reasoned discussion of the vexing phenomenon that the research has revealed in recent decades. The following conclusions are fully described in the major textbooks, professional journals and encyclopedias in intelligence.

The complete article is at http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/wsj.htm
home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/wsj.htm

Please let me know what you think about the validity of defining and measuring human intelligence.

Regards.

Hello Ludwig

Have you all forgotten what most regard as a cliche but what I regard as the truth, that the true genius's are all mad. Find an academic or an artist, a scientist or philosopher and the greatest of all are or were insane. Whoops! I think I've opened up a new door. Great! This is one of my favourite subjects.

Intelligence is not education, or IQ this is rubbish. Intelligence is a combination of high levels of the neurotransmitter Dopamine being produced in the brain which stimulates psychoses into being and most or all of the following attributes - common sense, interests, originality, determination, persistance, motivation, the will to learn, change and adapt, and a zest for life.