What is the best way to measure Intelligence?

by common sense

No, "Common" sense produces a society in line with the lowest common denominator.

Common sense says "The shortest distance between two points is a straight line"

Uncommon sense says "Let's figure out flight and build airplanes"

IQ = Penis length in cm x 10

I expect more out of Germans. Sad.

mayhap 'measures' muddles mental ministrations,
'how does one esteem intelligence?', perchance?

We were as smart during the roman empire as we are now.
We just have steal and silicon now.

No need for a test because it will not be %100 accurate and nether is a lie detector test.

Why?

Because it depends on what type of intelligence you focus on.

Some people are jacks of all trades(Know a little of everything)
Some know Hollywood with all its grand distractions. And the same goes for sports.
Some know science.
Some know engineering.

So i suppose you could measure the intelligence of one aspect of understanding. But what dose that prove? That someone knows more about a particular subject than the other.

And then there is the theory that there is an unlimited source of information that anyone can tap into if they know how to find it and plug in(Sort of like the internet). So if this where the case, Then your knowledge of anything in this world would be just a thought away.

I personally like that theory the most^. I humbly know that i know nothing and will continue to carry on no matter what challenge's may lay ahead.

So with that said...Forgitaboutit.

Last Edited by DoubleHelix on 04/05/2012 01:46 PM

The answer to my question cannot be "No Answer" because we, as a society, need to have a certain guideline or test. Yes, philosophically there are many ways to be intelligent. The Village Idiot may be a savant with the gear-works of watches and clocks.

Nevertheless, we wouldn't send that guy to Harvard based on that intelligence. There's a fundamental intelligence which can and should be measured.

I.Q. is one test to measure this and come up with a figure.

What are the others in use?

The best way depends entirely on your intent for the results of the test. This makes your question truly one without an absolute answer. Even when you qualify that the results be used for this or that, those results are not 100% accurate. Consequently, "the best way" is the way that satisfies the test giver.

tape measure your brian

It's irrelevant.

If you can be president of the US and be George W. Bush at the same time, what possible consideration does someone's intelligence quotient have?

"Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

Ask a person what he voted.
If he says anything else than "votes suck and don't change shit" he's a brainwashed stupid sheep.

Hahaha...He's such a doorknob.

To answer your question OP - Everyone at the age of 9 should be asked "what kind of tard are you?", and take a test corresponding to their answer.

OP,

Standardized tests are only good at measuring things within a couple of standard deviations. IQ is a good metric for the middle 98% but not good at distinguishing among the top or bottom 1%. I'm several standard deviations above the norm on standardized testing, but most people who share that property with me seem like complete retards.

Train ability is a most potent tool. In 1975 I scored a 135 on the Army entrance exam. Signed the contract and went to work. Later to find out that at that score, I could have gone from basic to officers training. If you can learn things quickly you are smart. If not, then you have no common sense or IQ. LOL
Me, well I wasn't obviously that smart, because I didn't ask the right questions. My 2 year contract was in artillery. LOLZ

Similar story...I don't know my exact score on ASVAB (ASFAB? Can't recall)... but was told I aced it. At that time (1990) the Recruitment process was "Okay, when did you want to go?" and then "Here's what we have at that time..." rather than "What do you want to do? Here's when it's available."

So, the best thing that popped up was Medic, and I went that route...not knowing anything about the 50000 other FAR MORE INTERESTING jobs available to the enlisted with the right scores.

--------------------

To the rest of you:

You're all ducking the question in favor of tree-hugging "Everyone's special" programming we've all been spoon-fed over the last 50 years.

Is it because you've been brainwashed to react that way, or is it because you fear what your results would be?

Take your ego and programming out of the equation and discuss WHAT THE TESTS ARE.

We know about the I.Q. Test already. It's mainstream, it's in use. People like to argue that it's meaningless...I say that argument comes from people who didn't do so great.

So, what I'd like (from those people) is the preferred method of testing, so that we might measure Intelligence THE BEST WAY WE CAN.

Whether you like it or not, Society has already decided that we need testing of this nature, and that the results mean something, to someone, or some group, depending on who's giving the test.

So the argument of merit or necessity is moot.

Just tell me what the best test IS so we can all agree on it and have a litmus in discussions elsewhere.

come again?

Probably a battery of test to measure thought process, critical thinking, understanding, communication, probability to understand complex structures or models and test that include global and non-global thinking to be fair.

IQ has its foibles, but is still the accepted standard because it captures better than any other test yet conceived, the sort of basic analytical and critical thinking skills that translate to what we perceive as "smart".

I have spoken to people who know they have average IQs and some with unusually high IQs. Any reasonable person after meeting them would acknowledge that the high IQ individuals and quicker, more creative, and for lack of a better word: better.

Now we're getting somewhere. Highlighted part of quote resonates with what I suspect the conclusion of this thread will be once we finish arguing with people about exceptions and other leftist posturing.

If the IQ test was useless, it wouldn't be in use.

That said, if there are are other, better tests out there, in use, I'd be glad to bring them into the mix. So far, I haven't heard any.

You will think this strange, but reading comprehension is one of the best measures of intelligence. It can be applied to those who can not read by reading the story to them. It can be applied across languages by using an interpreter.

Not strange at all...in fact, if memory serves, I believe reading comprehension is a factor in the standard IQ tests.

why can't you put all your eggs in one basket?

The question is, why do you feel the need to measure your intelligence, or anybody elses?

Tests mean fuck all. We all have our strengths and weaknesses... a simple 5 minute conversation will tell me all I need to know about the mental capacity of a person.

Anybody has the capacity to increase there "IQ", as they do their knowledge of the world ... be reading, and learning!

*their

It is included on some types of IQ test. I believe it is the only method that should be used.

Well you try to fix things instead of being army controle badgay ? With no hair and with losers who realy give nothing then realy fantasised dorkism bllh ?

Would graduates from harvard question the society ?

Is that intelligence ? or fear ?

If its fear than how smart are they ?

If its intelligence .... than how come the Federal Reserve Exists ?

i guess the most intelligent man would be the one ready to learn ?