I.Q. -- is it important?

[dust]

Even up to earlier this year, I placed a fairly high importance on I.Q.

 

Please note that I'm not talking about the theory of multiple intelligences. That's a different issue. My problem is with the standard idea of intelligence in the West, or any particular country, as measured by I.Q. tests.

 

It's drummed into us -- or at least it was in my schools -- from quite an early age that "intelligence" is important, and that measuring one's intelligence quotient is a valid way of measuring his or her quality.

 

Yes, a person's quality. That now seems pretty crazy to me, though I know people who believe it (whether or not they're aware that they do).

 

To be intelligent is extolled all over the place as something to aspire to (even though this is impossible), respect (even though many intelligent people are entirely unrespectable), and generally treasure as mankind's greatest gift (even though, as I think many of us believe, it's not).

 

I'll pontificate a bit more below, but for those who can't be bothered to read more, here are my key questions:

 

If we didn't place so much importance on I.Q., would it actually be of any importance?

Can someone not be happy in life unless they are intelligent achievers in modern civilization?

Do you place great importance on intelligence? Why?

Does your experience with Taoism, Buddhism, etc have a bearing on your view?

 

NB: Please, no mention of individual I.Q. scores. I will not have this devolve into a competition of egos.

 

________________________________________________

 

 

IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and mortality, parental social status...

(wikipedia)

 

The idea of measuring intelligence is necessarily subjective on many levels.

 

If a society prizes numeracy, numeracy will be a high factor in an intelligence test, and simultaneously a key factor in deciding whether or not someone will be successful in that society.

 

In a society where spatial awareness is more important, a maths whiz will be left well behind if he's not got a good sense of direction or coordination.

 

So, of course, someone who performs well in a test designed by leading "experts" in a particular country will necessarily be more likely to do well in that society.

 

However, does intelligence, in the usual Western sense, necessarily correlate with happiness? I mean, is someone with a "high I.Q." intrinsically happier than someone with a "low I.Q." ?

 

 

People with lower intelligence are more likely to be unhappy than their brighter colleagues

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19659985

 

The study said lower intelligence was linked to lower income, worse health and needing help with daily life, such as shopping or housework - all of which contributed to unhappiness

(my bold)

 

With scores ranging from 70-129 (70 meaning someone is probably not very good at maths, verbal reasoning, or whatever else), the higher I.Q. has an advantage on every level: she is more likely to be in a more respected position in a company, making more money, receiving more praise for her intelligence, and generally doing "better" by any standard by which people are judged in the country.

On the other side, someone of a lower I.Q. is in a lower position or without a job, making less or no money, potentially being mocked for his stupidity by some, and generally doing less well by any standard by which he is being judged, by others or himself. If someone is at the point that they need help with daily life, clearly something is very wrong.

 

Well, I'm not sure I trust this study, actually. (Admittedly without doing much research to find out) I don't know about the sample, the jobs these people do, how the data was analysed, etc. From personal experience, it's not always the case that intelligence = happiness. I know guys who went to Oxford for study who are miserable later on in life, and people who've never been to university, who did poorly in school, who are very happy at their job and life in general. And I don't know anyone who's so "unintelligent" that it is debilitating.

 

Just some thoughts.

 

________________________________________________

Of course, Daoist or other philosophical views are most welcome

Others have enough and more, I alone am left out

I have the mind of a fool, Confused, confused
Others are bright and intelligent, I alone and dull, dull

Drifting on the ocean, Blown about endlessly

[i am]

Well I guess to start with, the results are only as good as the test.

 

It definitely tells us something. People who score very low and very high are definitely people you would expect those relative scores from.

 

In today's society, though I'm sure there's a better test, I think it is somewhat appropriate.

 

But as far as a person's worth? No, it doesn't tell us anything about that.

 

Personally, I'm as smart as I am. So I can't say whether being more bright or more dim would help or hinder my cultivation. I know that in conversation, I prefer quickness in those I talk to. There are conversations you just can't have with certain people...

 

But I'll take a kind, upbeat, considerate person who's a bit slow any day over a real quick-witted highly-intelligent person who's an ass.

 

And in my limited understanding, high intelligence doesn't help one bit with cultivation. It certainly helps with understanding some of the complicated and esoteric practices and theories. But do you need to understand those to reach enlightenment? I kind of doubt it, but I really don't know.

 

In the professional and academic world, I think IQ tests are flawed way, but a way all the same to get some idea of what a person is intellectually capable of.

[Taomeow]

We didn't have the IQ test in the old country. Instead, the language has a whole array of synonyms for "smart" that pinpoint different kinds of smart and different ways to be smart. E.g.:

 

Умный -- smart,

шибко умный -- trying to be smart at someone else's expense,

толковый -- able to use one's smarts productively,

сообразительный -- able to put two and two together, and do it fast,

разумный -- smart in a prudent and balanced way,

головастый -- good at solving arcane problems,

хитрожопый -- smart in a cunning way detrimental to others,

неглупый -- moderately smart,

 

and so on, there's many more. I think English would do better hitting the "refresh" button on its linguistic capabilities to express finer distinctions of certain complex notions such as this one, instead of trying to relegate the task to numbers.

[Cookie Monster]

.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Ocean Form

[Cookie Monster]

.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Ocean Form

[Nungali]

People with high IQ are not immune from 'stupidity'

 

" Smart/Intelligent: who with his action tends to create advantages for itself, but also creates the benefit to someone else

 

Stupid/Fool: who causes damage to another person or group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring a loss. "

 

http://www.quadllc.com/Quadrivium/Blog_and_Articles/Entries/2011/3/15_Prof._Cipollas_theory_on_stupidity.html

[z00se]

People with high IQ are not immune from 'stupidity'

 

" Smart/Intelligent: who with his action tends to create advantages for itself, but also creates the benefit to someone else

 

Stupid/Fool: who causes damage to another person or group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring a loss. "

 

http://www.quadllc.com/Quadrivium/Blog_and_Articles/Entries/2011/3/15_Prof._Cipollas_theory_on_stupidity.html

 

But the fool cares not for the gain or even the loss. Often the fool is more enlightened than the magician.

 

As for the original post, important for what? IQ is important if you want to be a astrophysicist, but not if you want to be a labourer.

 

The fool cares not that he is a fool, any more than the intelligent one cares that he is intelligent. Sometimes i think i know too much and that is a source of unhappiness. Thats not to say i think i know alot, for it's all relative anyhow. You've only got to watch The Simpsons and see the simple pleasures that Homer enjoys

Edited November 2, 2014 by z00se

[BaguaKicksAss]

I have found that quite often people with extremely high IQs tend to lack other things, social skills primarily (difficult to do the small talk thing they seem to dislike), wisdom, and common sense. Obviously this isn't always the case, but I find that these qualities are important as well for day to day living.

 

Also folks with lower IQs often have other skills in which they can run circles around the high IQ folks with.

 

As far as employment goes.... well not necessarily. High IQ folks often go in directions which are different than your standard average cookie cutter career person. Lots of folks with university degrees working at minimum wage jobs.

 

I think day to day life takes quite a bit more than intellectual ability, or even further, ability to score high on IQ tests .

 

Folks with high IQs are a lot more fun to talk with though, and I don't get bored hanging around them .

[Chang]

Intelligence is very different from wisdom. Cleverness is something else again. Then we have common sense.

 

As we go through life we often meet people with brains the size of a small planet and they only become a problem when their head is of similar dimensions.

[C T]

Could be wrong, but i think genuinely intelligent individuals are usually gifted with sensitivity (in good ways) and quite humble in the sense that they know exactly when to be assertive and when its not needed. They instinctively know how to let others take the lead in order to groom them, without losing an inch of balance... its this quality i admire most in those whom i would equate as genuinely intelligent.

 

In life, one of the best things we can hope to cultivate is the ability to be flexible and adapt in such a way that we can immediately relate to others (humans and other beings) as well as to situations - this helps to put things in perspective quickly and will prevent potentially icky situations. To do this usually requires a kind of vision that enables one to cannily predict probabilities - whether this canny ability is inborn and the cause of one's intelligence, or a result of it, i dont know, or maybe its a bit of cross-influence. So, in this way, yes, genuine intelligence is primarily intertwined with wisdom. Having a certain depth to one's intelligence means knowing when to cut bs, and wisdom allows the cut to be painless for everyone involved.

 

Its those who worship their own intelligence above all others that sucks big time. Imo.

[dust]

 

and so on, there's many more. I think English would do better hitting the "refresh" button on its linguistic capabilities to express finer distinctions of certain complex notions such as this one, instead of trying to relegate the task to numbers.

 

Changing language would be one way of manipulating attitudes, though I don't know how one would go about it. People rarely adopt new language based on theory.

 

I like the idea of implying certain attitudes with these words -- cunning, prudent, arrogant, etc -- but then again, if people want to, they can describe people with these words already. "He's intelligent, but so arrogant!" .. "She's cunning, that one!"

 

 

 

Interestingly, the British language offers a lot of creative potential for expressing "stupid"

 

Yes. This is something I'm not a fan of.

 

 

 

 

" Smart/Intelligent: who with his action tends to create advantages for itself, but also creates the benefit to someone else

 

Stupid/Fool: who causes damage to another person or group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring a loss. "

 

If only people saw it like this. I don't think most do.

 

 

 

As for the original post, important for what? IQ is important if you want to be a astrophysicist, but not if you want to be a labourer.

 

Yes, mathematical ability etc is important to be a physicist. And in society, we extoll astrophysics as something grand, something to aspire to. We say things like "Come on stupid, it's not rocket science" or "It's hardly astrophysics, idiot"

 

Stupid people can't do astrophysics. In many people's eyes, an inability to understand physics beyond a certain level is a reason to mock someone. I've seen it, even on the television. We also extoll charity, giving to those less fortunate. So we think of ourselves as a load of intelligent people going around doing good deeds. How wonderful we are! But if we didn't love intelligence so much, would we need so much charity in the first place?

 

 

 

Also folks with lower IQs often have other skills in which they can run circles around the high IQ folks with.

 

Certainly, but I don't think these skills are emphasised much, are they?

 

 

 

Could be wrong, but i think genuinely intelligent individuals are usually gifted with sensitivity (in good ways) and quite humble in the sense that they know exactly when to be assertive and when its not needed. They instinctively know how to let others take the lead in order to groom them, without losing an inch of balance... its this quality i admire most in those whom i would equate as genuinely intelligent.

 

I think your definition of intelligence and the pervading idea of it are quite different.

 

If intelligence was thought of as also being "gifted with sensitivity and quite humble", I wouldn't have so much of an issue with people glorifying it (though I'd have an issue with the glorification of anything, tbh)

 

So, in this way, yes, genuine intelligence is primarily intertwined with wisdom. Having a certain depth to one's intelligence means knowing when to cut bs, and wisdom allows the cut to be painless for everyone involved.

 

This is, though, mostly an issue of definition. Most people don't think like this, as I see it. Which is my problem.

 

Its those who worship their own intelligence above all others that sucks big time. Imo.

 

Yes.

[iain]

To my mind IQ is like the temperature scale; nodal and irrelevant to one who studies the different states of matter them selves as elements and not the scale its self or its cause. The differing states of matter in relation to temperature for example are much more tangible that temperature scale its self.
You might assimilate the IQ quotient in this light, to the different states of being defined by the "cast" system in India, but nothing more conclusive than that.

To my mind, It is the inter state periods that are most interesting; those of change.
When, for example, a Bhramin of ksatrya decide to leave their cast.

If a genius builds a bomb that destroys the world, where is his IQ on a scale of practical Darwinian success, at the top or the bottom?

Perhaps it is an average IQ of 108 that gives the most successful and stable rate of reproduction ...

IQ and EQ seem to me to be to strongly interrelated to be taken into account separately, very misleading to do so.

Edited November 2, 2014 by iain

[i am]

Could be wrong, but i think genuinely intelligent individuals are usually gifted with sensitivity (in good ways) and quite humble in the sense that they know exactly when to be assertive and when its not needed. They instinctively know how to let others take the lead in order to groom them, without losing an inch of balance... its this quality i admire most in those whom i would equate as genuinely intelligent.

 

In life, one of the best things we can hope to cultivate is the ability to be flexible and adapt in such a way that we can immediately relate to others (humans and other beings) as well as to situations - this helps to put things in perspective quickly and will prevent potentially icky situations. To do this usually requires a kind of vision that enables one to cannily predict probabilities - whether this canny ability is inborn and the cause of one's intelligence, or a result of it, i dont know, or maybe its a bit of cross-influence. So, in this way, yes, genuine intelligence is primarily intertwined with wisdom. Having a certain depth to one's intelligence means knowing when to cut bs, and wisdom allows the cut to be painless for everyone involved.

 

Its those who worship their own intelligence above all others that sucks big time. Imo.

 

See when you combine a high IQ with a high emotional intelligence and humility and common sense, you've got a great thing going.

 

So as far as these go?

 

If we didn't place so much importance on I.Q., would it actually be of any importance?

 

In my day to day life, I don't see anyone placing any importance on IQ. But that's just my experience.

 

Can someone not be happy in life unless they are intelligent achievers in modern civilization?

 

People can absolutely be happy in life without being "intelligent achievers". Most of us, however, do need to feel we're doing something worthwhile and productive (those words are different to different people) to civilization on some scale, to be happy.

 

Do you place great importance on intelligence? Why?

 

No. But I do appreciate it when I encounter it. If it's the person who's designing my car or the safety controls on a nuclear power plant, I think it's fairly important I can use a bunch of different examples, but I'll just say that different types of intelligence (some of which wouldn't score well on an IQ test) are important for different activities. So it depends on what you decide to do with your life.

 

Does your experience with Taoism, Buddhism, etc have a bearing on your view?

 

Yes. I don't think I judged based on IQ before, but my involvement with these things has made me even less likely to judge someone's worth based on their wit.

[dust]

In my day to day life, I don't see anyone placing any importance on IQ. But that's just my experience.

 

Where do you live?

 

Perhaps my perspective is coloured more than I realize by the people that I know.

[i am]

I'ved lived a few different places and none of them placed high importance on IQ, except when I was in school. But I've always lived in the US.

[manitou]

Folks with high IQs are a lot more fun to talk with though, and I don't get bored hanging around them .

 

I would think that this is an indication of where your IQ is. Water seeks its own level. You are obviously an intelligent puppy, as you have demonstrated to all of us over time.

 

I so agree with the person above who said they'd rather be in the company of a less intelligent person with a good heart, than a real intelligent one who's an A-hole. (Or something to that effect, lol)

 

It seems to me that one can be intelligent about Life without having a huge IQ. My partner, in fact, is a fellow of low IQ, but is one of the most intelligent people about 'life' that I've ever seen. He made it through the 8th grade. His father's IQ was so low they wouldn't let him go overseas and fight in WWII; instead, he walked in front of a jeep while drunk and got killed anyway at an Army base in California.

 

But Joe is a shaman, a metaphysician. His third eye vision is incredible, and his instinctive understanding of how other people are affected, or how they're feeling, is a true thing of beauty. I would pit his Wisdom against anybody's, no matter how high their IQ.

 

It seems that IQ measures potential numerically. Just because the numbers are there doesn't mean the capacity will be utilized. Too many other factors come into play; perseverance, balance, attitude. IQ is potential, as I see it.

[i am]

Anybody taken an IQ test recently? There are some online. I took one 6 or 7 years ago, for fun (I had a really boring job). It was really interesting.

 

Not that it's necessary, but it would benefit the conversation if people actually had fresh in their mind what the test involved. There was one part of it that I remember not liking, and I don't remember what it was right now...except that it didn't test my ability to reason. It was something I only could have figured out if I knew certain "facts". If you never learned a certain thing, you couldn't answer the question, so it didn't really test "cleverness".

 

Sort of like crossword puzzles. They definitely give your head a workout, but they are 50% "trivia", not smarts. If you don't know about TV shows or movies from the 60s, there are just a lot of clues you won't get. Nothing to do with intelligence.

 

edit:...or maybe the online thing isn't such a good idea...http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/nov/29/iq-tests-online-are-they-valid

Edited November 2, 2014 by i am

[Brett]

When I was a child before coming into public school at age 11, my learning was centered around myself, nature and spirit.

 

When I entered the 'real world' at age 11, I was immediately introduced to stress, anxiety and constant fear, much of which was about my self-worth. Along with the change in environment, I myself started to believe the importance of these things like intelligence, likability, and status. I believed them to be real enough that they completely controlled my happiness.

 

These two worlds I had grown up in were completely different.

 

If you are living in that world, the one that ego thrives in, then intelligence will play a big part in your 'happiness'. This is because in this world, much of your 'happiness' is based on what you think others think about you. I believe that this self-worth is a much greater influence of a person's happiness than income and ease of living. Most people I have noticed seem to live in this world of ego. So in my opinion, most people's happiness is greatly effected by intelligence.

 

In the world of love as I call it, you are living from love instead of ego. (This is the only world where happiness isn't given quotations marks from me, as I see this happiness as true happiness.) In this world of love, intelligence has no effect on a person's true happiness.

 

So in my opinion, intelligence has a great effect and no effect on happiness. Depending less on where you live in the world, and more on what world lives in you.

[dust]

I so agree with the person above who said they'd rather be in the company of a less intelligent person with a good heart, than a real intelligent one who's an A-hole. (Or something to that effect, lol)

 

It seems to me that one can be intelligent about Life without having a huge IQ. My partner, in fact, is a fellow of low IQ, but is one of the most intelligent people about 'life' that I've ever seen. He made it through the 8th grade. His father's IQ was so low they wouldn't let him go overseas and fight in WWII; instead, he walked in front of a jeep while drunk and got killed anyway at an Army base in California.

 

But Joe is a shaman, a metaphysician. His third eye vision is incredible, and his instinctive understanding of how other people are affected, or how they're feeling, is a true thing of beauty. I would pit his Wisdom against anybody's, no matter how high their IQ.

 

This is what I was getting at.

 

Whatever influence it is that's made me so snobby about intelligence in the past (school, friends, family have certainly all contributed), I've come to realize that the IQ of a person (or where I estimate they might fall on the scale) has no relation to whether or not I enjoy spending time with them.

 

Your partner sounds like a cool guy.

 

 

 

 

 

edit:...or maybe the online thing isn't such a good idea...http://www.theguardi...-are-they-valid

 

The whole area is dangerous, online or not, which is why I warned against quoting individual scores. For sure, whether or not one places any importance on I.Q., most online tests are pure nonsense... but people still like to believe them. People want to think of themselves, and be thought of by other people, as "intelligent" (as it refers to I.Q.)

[Brian]

Measuring intelligence with a single number is like measuring attractiveness on a 10-point hotness scale...

[dust]

Measuring intelligence with a single number is like measuring attractiveness on a 10-point hotness scale...

 

Certainly.

 

But can these things be measured, if we do it differently?

 

And more importantly, should we bother to try?

[i am]

Measuring intelligence with a single number is like measuring attractiveness on a 10-point hotness scale...

 

Exactly.

 

In certain situations, it's perfectly appropriate (IMO). But it's very lacking.

[i am]

Certainly.

 

But can these things be measured, if we do it differently?

 

And more importantly, should we bother to try?

 

Some amount of error and subjectivity is always involved in everything, if we're talking about real life. The idea of any scale, score or description is just a tool. A language. And as anyone who's been around for a while knows (high IQ or not), language is a very inexact communicator. For most of us, it's the best we've got in most situations, and so we use it. And it is absolutely worthwhile. As long as we realize that it's lacking, not absolute, and only an approximation at the truth, designed to generalize and make some attempt at conveying a common standard.

 

If someone asks you how their soup is, do you say "good"? Or do you dive into a fifteen minute description of all the nuances of taste and how it felt on your tongue and the temperature and how it compares to other soups and in what situations it would be the better soup, and the different situations in which this same soup would not be as suitable as another soup?

 

There's a place for both of those descriptions.

[Brian]

 

Certainly.

 

But can these things be measured, if we do it differently?

 

And more importantly, should we bother to try?

I would say that there can be value in attempting to measure aspects of intellect but that it is very important to not lose track of exactly what is being measured -- and why. When we forget our motivations or our assumptions, we tend to overestimate the merit and legitimacy of the analysis (no, I'm not just speaking in terms of IQ here).

[GrandmasterP]

Check out Alfred Binet and the beginnings of the IQ test.

IQ began as a 'deficit discourse' and hasn't moved very far from those early days.

Edited November 2, 2014 by GrandmasterP