I do not know about that word, Spravedlibaya. My Russian is still too noob to ever have encountered that word. I am wondering about translations of that word, but I am not sure yet.
My latest trouble - Page 3
Blogs > MoltkeWarding |
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
I do not know about that word, Spravedlibaya. My Russian is still too noob to ever have encountered that word. I am wondering about translations of that word, but I am not sure yet. | ||
Liquid`Zephyr
United States996 Posts
re: iq score differences across other countries - same rationale follows. some tests will be translated and renormed for the correct population better than other tests. its not something i'm super knowledgeable about. as useful as iq tests are, they have many failings. do they measure whatever it is that most people generally assume they do? no. are they the best measure of that effort that we have? maybe - but again, given fluidity of iq scores and susceptibility of influence through environmental factors, reading anything biological into iq scores per country would be a massive overstep. but it could in part be looked at as systemic restrictions to opportunities (but again, those opportunities that would improve scores on iq tests are generally defined by western cultures as being important). iq tests have pretty massive blind spots for certain populations that excel as well (e.g. highly creative people). its easy to imagine how culture might shape exceptionally smart people who would still perform poorly on iq tests. On May 30 2020 02:33 MoltkeWarding wrote: We think in language. What we can even potentially learn depends on what we speak. some people have no internal monologues. you could say people think out loud through speech, or use another internal type of experience/sense modality (e.g. mental imagery) as a form of language, and I wouldn't fault that usage of the word. just a bit of a nitpick - and then an opinion - i think people actually vary a reasonable amount in how they think (consider/manipulate/conceptualize/rehearse) information (through type of inner experience probably). | ||
Jealous
9974 Posts
Researchers arrive to the Amazon rain forest, with an IQ test that they successfully launched in a number of countries. The feedback they got from the Mexico City, Moscow, New York City, Rio de Janeiro, and Tokyo trials has all been positive. Eager to see how the Amazonian war chief performs on this test, they hand him the paper and pencil. The only problem is that the Amazonian war chief has never used a paper or a pencil. He has never taken a test. He doesn't know how to write or read. The first question asks you to make a parallel analogy to "bus : car" but the war chief has never seen any of those either. After trying over and over to make the test approachable for the Amazonian people, the researchers finally cleared all of the hurdles that they perceived to be present. In the end, the Amazonians had an average IQ of 70. Satisfied with this answer, the researchers begin to head home, led by their Amazonian guide who has a mental map consisting of hundreds of landmarks in a 10 mile radius, their bellies full of elusive wild boar which the Amazonians caught in a complex and coordinated fashion, their skin covered in an Amazonian natural balm of 14 oils and minerals that protects them from mosquitoes which was meticulously derived through careful trial and error, with their guide having a home-made anti-venom prepared just in case anyone gets bit by a poisonous snake that is local to the area. Upon reaching the edge of civilization, the researchers finally confer about their results, outside of earshot of the Amazonian guide: "I can't believe these idiots can survive in the jungle with such a low IQ." | ||
Jealous
9974 Posts
On June 08 2020 15:46 MoltkeWarding wrote: I do not know about that word, Spravedlibaya. My Russian is still too noob to ever have encountered that word. I am wondering about translations of that word, but I am not sure yet. Only put it because you were asking for the translation of "fair." Spravedlivaya* PS: The "s-" prefix is Indo-European meaning "good," so the word is a feminine adjective of "good truth," though the "good" much less colloquially apparent/known. | ||
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
Obviously, IQ has no correlation with survival. We have done some testing on some higher apes, some of whom we have also taught how to communicate in reasonable sign language. It brings to mind about how sapient homo sapiens really are, when the IQ estimates for some apes exceed the averages for some human countries. I have no doubt that those apes can taught in the use of common human tools too. The link between memory and IQ is another one of those questionable things. Interestingly, the more you can remember, the higher your fluid IQ seems to be, but there is no correlation with how you remember them. That is another thing that I was thinking about. Maybe some countries in the world average very high IQs because they remember a lot of things. But we are back to that "Asian creativity deficit" problem. They have very high IQs, but they do not seem to ever innovate. I do not know, but perhaps the more things you have to remember, the fewer new things you can learn. | ||
Jealous
9974 Posts
PS: The Amazonian warchief was a hypothetical extreme to demonstrate most clearly the types of faults that occur when trying to apply standardized tests intersectionally - it was not meant to be taken literally, but as a figurative expression of the types of pitfalls that international IQ comparisons have historically had. EDIT: PPS: There is definitely a link between IQ and survival, otherwise there would never have been a reason for us to advance to the point of having a concept of IQ in the first place. We are scantly haired apes with a severely limited arsenal of physically imposing factors. The only thing we have going for us is a now absent or nearly vestigial stamina. The provider hypothesis of evolutionary psychology postulates that our evolution was sparked by our ability to hunt, which for us as apes hinged necessarily on communication, teamwork, the use of tools and tactics, etc. These are all factors of IQ, in my opinion. You may be familiar with some of the more broad approaches to intelligence, such as Gardner's "Theory of Multiple Intelligences" which is composed of 8 factors. There are others, numbering upwards of 13 and beyond. We currently don't have a comprehensive understanding to determine which theory/approach is most accurate, much less so an ability to universally measure any of them to a satisfactory standard. Thus, it is an acceptable topic to discuss but it is largely a matter of opinion, and my opinion is that your opinion is too restricted by a dependence on what is essentially a faulty and dated approach to answering the question. | ||
JimmiC
Canada22810 Posts
| ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11352 Posts
| ||
| ||