IQ test are largely based on memory

[Redbrow]

Most schooling is based on tests and most tests are based on memory. Memory is a fine tool for an intelligent person to use. But if memory was intelligence, the chimps would rule the earth:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

[GlobalExplorer]

Isn't intelligence, at least partially, also based on memory?

[mrbeast]

Maybe they do. Perhaps they are just lulling mankind into a false sense of security before they.......... burst on the scene............ and take all our bananas!

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by GlobalExplorer

Isn't intelligence, at least partially, also based on memory?

I can't remember. :hmm:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

just add more RAM if you want to have better memory :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[FIREWALL]

Or wear that hat Redbrow posted on other thread. :rotfl:


http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=129689

[Skybird]

Memory and intelligence interact, but both are two different things. Most IQ tests I have seen based on knowledge of any kind, and learned/trained skills. the confusion comes from the fact that when you ask 100 psychologists for a definition of what intelligence is, you will get 30 different answers or so.

Obviously there are people who are not educated very well anbd have not stored a mlot of knowledge in their memory, nevertheless they act by healthy reason and act and talk by solid brightness, cleverness, however you wan t to label it. while others have a lot of diploma, trained a lot, learned a lot of stuff - and fail when needing to think cratively or independently. You can know a lot and still be dumb. You can lack education, but be very reasonable.

Anonymous pressure by your social environment also influences your individual thinking, anbd very massively so.

I did three clinical IQ tests at university, and the results varied widely from I think 118 (slightly above average) to 145 (top 5% of population), depending on how much number stuff there was included (not good for me), and how much abstract thinking and threedimensional imagination there was (very good for me). Should I just take the means core, then? Nonsens. My conclusion as an ex-psychologist is that I do not want anybody to bother with IQ tests, it is misleading and gives a distorted image of your real skills and mental talents. the result most often tells more about the test and how it was constructed, than about the quality of yolur intelligence. So just use your brain to the best potential you are capable of - that is good enough, since that is what it is there for. It must not be compared to anyone else anyway. It is not the olympics.

there have been - and still are - chess champions who played the game extremely way - and were described to be total idiots when it came to handling issues of ordinary life.

And never forget what Einstein said: "imagination is more important than knowledge". that's not just another bon mot - that simply is true. Without imagination, you do not think - you just repeat old habits.

[Yahoshua]

This comes down to the difference between knowledge and wisdom.

You can memorize all the books and all the information there is to know (this is knowledge). But if you are unable to interpret that information and apply it to real-world circumstances, and adapt your actions according it means you lack wisdom.

For example, we all know that gravity pulls objects downward, but if we aren't smart enough to figure out that a short fall won't hurt us (off a curb) but a big fall (off a cliff) will then we won't be around for long. Kinda like the Darwin Award winners.

[FIREWALL]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Memory and intelligence interact, but both are two different things. Most IQ tests I have seen based on knowledge of any kind, and learned/trained skills. the confusion comes from the fact that when you ask 100 psychologists for a definition of what intelligence is, you will get 30 different answers or so.

Obviously there are people who are not educated very well anbd have not stored a mlot of knowledge in their memory, nevertheless they act by healthy reason and act and talk by solid brightness, cleverness, however you wan t to label it. while others have a lot of diploma, trained a lot, learned a lot of stuff - and fail when needing to think cratively or independently. You can know a lot and still be dumb. You can lack education, but be very reasonable.

Anonymous pressure by your social environment also influences your individual thinking, anbd very massively so.

I did three clinical IQ tests at university, and the results varied widely from I think 118 (slightly above average) to 145 (top 5% of population), depending on how much number stuff there was included (not good for me), and how much abstract thinking and threedimensional imagination there was (very good for me). Should I just take the means core, then? Nonsens. My conclusion as an ex-psychologist is that I do not want anybody to bother with IQ tests, it is misleading and gives a distorted image of your real skills and mental talents. the result most often tells more about the test and how it was constructed, than about the quality of yolur intelligence. So just use your brain to the best potential you are capable of - that is good enough, since that is what it is there for. It must not be compared to anyone else anyway. It is not the olympics.

there have been - and still are - chess champions who played the game extremely way - and were described to be total idiots when it came to handling issues of ordinary life.

And never forget what Einstein said: "imagination is more important than knowledge". that's not just another bon mot - that simply is true. Without imagination, you do not think - you just repeat old habits.

So am I to understand your saying A person can be a Village Idiot with alot of experience. Or an Einstein with no Social Graces at all.

[Redbrow]

Obviously if you can't recall what 2 signifies you can't understand 2+1. Of course there are all kinds of IQ tests - I was speaking of the standard ones back when I was in High School in the early 70s. One test made by researchers for primitive tribes was designed where the natives would classify shapes found around them in nature, such as rocks and plants. With this test the natives scored high scores. Then they applied the standard civilized tests or matching polygon objects to polygon holes. The natives scored horrible. But then they took the natural shape test to students in civilizaed schools and found they did scored low when trying to deal with the real shapes found outside a civilized setting.

BUt my view is like elite_hunter_sh3

To me intelligence begins with a CPU. Without a CPU all the memory ram in the world is as intelligent as a mass of mere crystals. But for a CPU to really perform complex crunching it has to have lots of data storage. But for both to produce results they need lots of good data and programs.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

So am I to understand your saying A person can be a Village Idiot with alot of experience. Or an Einstein with no Social Graces at all.

no that is not what i am saying.

Originally Posted by Redbrow

To me intelligence begins with a CPU. Without a CPU all the memory ram in the world is as intelligent as a mass of mere crystals.

No. intelligence does not compare to a CPU. a CPU provides an automatic processing of something, 0s and 1s in this case. A CPU cannot leave the pattern of it'S blueprint, never. It thus cannot grow in options and possibilities. It cannot improvise. It messes up if one Nil or one One is missing. a sofware also can only do what is encoded in it. So, both software and CPU are amongst the dumbiest things you can think of.

Intelligence means, amongst others, to be able (to varying degree) that your thinking improves, chnages, becomes better, adapts, and leads you to new ways of thinking, and to come to results whose range of possibilities is not limited from the beginning by the software you are running. Here is, were creativity and imagination, as Einstein meant it, comes into play. You need both to not think in circles just becasue it appears to be reasojmable, you need them to break deadlocks, and dare toi go on although the intellectual knowledge/experience/data suggesting that still is missing. You need it to get a feeling when you should do that - and when better not. Intuition - is a form of intelligence, or a part of it. You can go beyond expected results, and beyond the initial range of possibilities, and you can change the way of processing the new inpout. An intelligent being can improvise. It can adapt to what was not forseeable. A CPU cannot do all that. It always continues to run in the same way, like a clock, no matter what - it cannot leave the microchannels of it'S layout. A clock does not even measure anything, it has no sensors. It is an automat only, ticking in regular intervals - that'S all. clocks do not measure time. CPUs are not intelligent.

In the 80s and early 90s, our technical enthusiamsmmade us comparing man and computer at every opportunity. But the comparison does not work on any level, it is totally useless. If you think of yourself as a PC only, okay, that is no sign of intelligence, but it illustrates the practicing of free speech. but please do not include me in your generalisation, because I am no C3PO!

I see the need to point out that groups and intelligence seem to be mutually excluisve. the greater a group, the less intelliegence you see in the individual'S behavior. Especially when group means a state, a nation, a population. The options of intelligence I lined out above get reduced and cut back the more, the greater the group is, groups tend to be uniform, and the more uniform they are, the greater the groups are, the more th e individual is falling into that streamlined state of being. Stupidity is a social problem for me in the first, not so much an intellectual problem., in this understanding. You see less stupidity in people not belonging to a given group, and are independant. You see them fall victim to decreasing intelligence when group pressure and streamlined thinking gets them under their influence. In worst case, you get a movement like the Nazis: totally streamlined thinking, maximum stupidity. Religions work good at this, too, of course.

So Firewall, you see now what I meant? If not, look at politician. Often they have absolved some elite university. Nevertheless their intellects often are extremely limited, judging by their actions. Whereas university knowledge often is not needed to judge things reasonably, decide for the right, needed, approriate thing to do, and eventually becoming a valuable member of a community whose advise is being asked for. - that does not mean that education and intelligence cannot come together. they can - but it is no case i take for granted. Some profs I knew at university - were idiots, plain and simple. Another guy i remember, who was an easy, uncomplicated character, a simple mind, and having had not much school education - but nevertheless he was wise, in an unstudied, natural way.

[Fish]

The video.

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-gb&fg=r...cc0&from=en-gb

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by mrbeast

Maybe they do. Perhaps they are just lulling mankind into a false sense of security before they.......... burst on the scene............ and take all our bananas!

It's already started

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Originally Posted by elite_hunter_sh3

just add more RAM if you want to have better memory :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

:rotfl: Yeah, I think my 64k Acorn Computing chip needs a refit :hmm:

[kiwi_2005]

Originally Posted by Skybird

And never forget what Einstein said: "imagination is more important than knowledge". that's not just another bon mot - that simply is true. Without imagination, you do not think - you just repeat old habits.

Thats all i need to know & learn...