That just means the IQ test is not configured correctly. Or was it the median score must be adjusted to be 100? I thought it may have been the case that a correctly calibrated IQ test for a population must have exactly 100 as the average score.
This just shows the IQ test they used was not calibrated correctly for the target population, perhaps due to even cultural differences between where the test was made and used.
Pretty sure the nature of IQ as a measurment itself also makes it non-perfect for measuring intelligence.
Itโs mainly education I think. Because this โnational iq scoreโ was done far after the richard lynn one.
None or the countries go below 80. The countries that have an IQ below 95 are usually failed states with little education.
Interestingly some poor countries do score higher than what you would believe. For example Yemen and Ethiopia scored higher than South Africa despite being way worse.
Maybe this shows where higher focus lays in these two groups of statesโฆ
Similarly, states of the same country doing the same have different iq, like in Maine the average iq is 103, which isnโt high over average but is still a little high, and in California itโs 95, which isnโt low below average but is still a little low. Despite this though, Maine is a very rural area, itโs most rural part contains 157,000 people, and California is more urban, and both of them are American states, so they are as developed as each other
Provinces within one area can still be at different levels of development.
Yup. Counties to Counties can vary, and even cities within Counties can vary.
Heck, even district to district it can varyโฆ
with an idealized population yeah. But if you measure over the entire planet itโs not against the spirit of the thing to have some nations worse than others, and if you donโt care about scientific rigor and fairness, say, if youโre trying to measure intelligence, a hard thing to do scientifically, and rank people, a slightly callous thing to do, you have no strong incentive to make sure the test is fair towards people living in sub-saharan africa. Itโs a waste of your time.
It does show where the situation would especially use an improvement I guessโฆ
Mensa is quite realistic.
Until I was around 11 or 12, I always scored 128. When I was 11 or 12, I finally scored 135, and then leapt to 145+ when I was 13 after I watched a video explaining every puzzle on the test. I also watched a video explaining the solutions to the Mensa Denmark test. Still, a year later, I took Mensa Denmark, not remembering many of the answers but vaguely remembering some of the ideas behind solutions, and scored 145. As it turns out, matrix reasoning is probably one of my greatest strengths, since my FRI could be 150-154, so my true matrix reasoning ability would probably land me at 140-143 on average on IQ tests designed for older teens or adults.
Roughly a year ago, I remember solving each puzzle on this page correctly. I donโt know exactly how difficult the puzzles get, but my guess is that they are, on average, 128-135, and the trickiest one is probably 140+.
Iโm probably most proud of solving this one correctly, since the pattern I found was quite out-of-the-box.
Speaking of intelligence, would the saying that the more smart a being is the more capable of cruelty it is apply only to entire species or also the individuals within those species?
Only to the entire species, an ant probably couldnโt create a nuke to end its rivals. Not necessarily because it doesnโt want to, but rather because itโs not capable. Similarly, an antelope would probably shoot its rival if it could, but it canโt.
I wanted to consider the individual level since it should only be the intelligence of an organism, and not of the species on an average, impacting of how much cruelty such an individual is capable of doing, right? So for instance a โstupidโ person would do cruelty in a pretty crude way that does do much suffering, and a โsmartโ person would do cruelty in a sophisticated way that causes even more suffering.
I suppose you could make that caseโฆ
Iโve heard realisticly animals like dolphins would have 2-3 IQ when using the human IQ system
To be fair, they are not taught mathematics and deductive reasoning as a part of their life education.
Still you could potentially have them learn as much as they can and see how they compare vs humans who got a similar treatment.
I wonder how much a language barrier would be an issue (we canโt speak their language)? To us, math symbols mean math, but to dolphins, they might interpret it as random squiggly things.
Thatโs why we shouldโve teached them math in a way that they can understand, in the beginning at least. Think of something like the messages weโve sent into space but directed towards those aquatic beings instead.
