…The first attempt by a politician losing an argument is to attempt to obfuscate the discussion by using ambiguous terms. Often this is accomplished via complex ideas and phrases such as "egalitarian", "various rights" and, "my opponent does not understand the underlying social ramifications of his argument."…
…When disguising their weakened position through incomprehensible concepts does not work, the politician will then generally take the approach of defamation. In political contests, this is typically done via "negative" TV and newspaper ads - as attempting this face to face allows an opponent with a sharp wit to bite back…
…These approaches define the human pattern of the "stick" response seen in chimpanzees. When a smaller chimp is threatened by another over food, a mate, or other issues, often the threatened chimp will pick up a piece of wood or stone and hold it high in a threatening manner…
These are excepts from a paper I wrote during college entitled, "Apes in Congress." The paper was for my Human Behaviour class. I've found them to be very valid predictors of debate behaviour, both on the part of conservative and liberal politicians. Human behaviour is a fascinating topic to me, unfortunately the pay stinks, so I just make rich people richer.
It is apparent that your Humanity training is minimal. This is typical, considering that most engineers concentrate their University science credits on fields such as Physics and Chemistry. I myself barely know the difference between a prion and gluon, except that one is taught in BioChem, and the other in Quantum Physics. Let me explain exactly what an IQ test is.
An IQ test is an attempt to approximate an individual's rate of learning. The ending factor is analogous to a financial "spread margin". The higher the number, the more the student can learn from a given situation, likewise, a lower number means less learning from the same situation. As many have become aware of, IQ does not measure knowledge, creativity, or cunning (street smarts) - but it is biased by these factors. Instead, it attempts to extrapolate how much a child can learn from a given situation, by effectively, testing the "performance" or "clock speed" of his or her mind.
A simile of IQ testing in physical endurance. Two wrestlers that can both bench press 150kg and weigh 100kg are fairly matched. But, if one has superiour endurance due to a secondary career as a cross country runner, he has better odds of winning more matches, from points if not from pinning. Another way to put it is that an Olympic Runner is likely to be a better basketball player than an American football linebacker. The runner has a higher innate endurance, and although the linebacker is bigger, stronger, and has a greater pain threshold - he will be huffing on the side court long before the runner is even sweating. In the real world, success is the only game, and mental endurance (IQ) is the main trait in determining who wins.
In order to measure IQ, primarily two methods are employed. The prominent method (as it crosses many language and racial barriers) is visual problem solving. The child is shown a drawing, and asked to identify as many problems with the drawing as possible in the shortest period of time. Problems in the drawing range from the mundane (missing limbs on people), the moderate (vehicle driving the wrong way on a street) and the advanced (script in a mirror appearing left to right). An attempt is generally made by the test designers to avoid social bias, but a very bright Taiwanese immigrant child may miss the fact that English is written left to right. (Even if the child recognizes that mirrors reverse light.) This is also why these tests are hand graded, and not simply shipped off to a card reader in St. Paul for analysis.
The second method is a familiar method to anybody who has taken American standardized tests. Pattern recognition. These tests are very effective at determining an individual's reasoning and analytical skills, two of the most important types of higher intelligence. These tests often take this form:
"Solve the following sequence, Anna, Bryan, Deanna, Henry, ______." On standardized tests, these questions are multiple choice, making them rather easy to solve. But, on an IQ test, this would be open ended, and timed - giving a valid idea of the "speed" of the child's mind. (The answer is any female, first name beginning with the letter P). These tests are subject to more class bias, and are not considered to be as valid as a "picture" test.
In addition, most IQ tests include testing for standard basic skills. Arithmetic, reading comprehension, and vocabulary being the most prominent. I say child on purpose. Testing an adult's IQ has low validity. Adults have acquired far too much "knowledge" to accurately test their rate of learning. A carpenter would bias a test as having a higher IQ than a bank teller, because the carpenter's job requires more knowledge of geometry, a basic skill. More comprehensive in adults are standardized post-graduate entrance scores - if only for those in similar professions.
The true importance behind IQ is that fact that it is a very strong predictor of future success. The highest correlation between personal earnings (American success), and any other sociological factor is education. The highest correlation between education and any individual factor is IQ score. IQ is a stronger correlater than standardized tests, college entrance scores, or high school grade performance for total educational achievement. To concede a point, a parent's social class is the 2nd most important factor in determining a child's personal earnings as an adult.
I would not argue that IQ is 100% of the reason for success, as I said before. I've met many successful people who are not the sharpest tools in the shed. But through hard work, and oftentimes, good luck - average and sub-average individuals can attain high earnings status.
To be honest, I don't know about educational proceedings at Berkely, Zurich, or really, outside of the American Midwest. My familiarity is best with Iowa State University, one of the more respected engineering schools in the world; where we were extremely effective at separating the chaff from the grain. Our freshmen engineers were typical college rabble. Slightly above average in intellect, but misguided in life. When you examine the senior class, this had resolved, and most candidates are extremely bright and focussed.
The beauty of the free trade system is that it is based on achievement. At large, land grant institutions with huge international student populations as we had, most of what you accomplish is based on your academic skill. The students who were able to fight their way through Fluid Dynamics, Static's, and Differential Theory were the ones who became engineering seniors. The rest flunked and came over to join me in the business college. In all, less than a quarter of engineering freshmen graduated with an engineering degree. Those who do graduate have a high chance of being successful at their profession, and are amply paid for this. (About $55,000 mean starting salary for Chemical, Mechanical and Electrical Engineers - top 30% of American earners, at age 23.)
In America, everybody has a chance. The classist bias is that a few have a better chance than the others. This is not fair, but life isn't fair. Michael Jordan was born with a special athletic skill to play basketball - most of the rest of us weren't. Some people are born to wealthy, successful parents, the rest of us weren't. As the 1978 Alice Cooper song goes, "Wish I were born in Beverly Hills, I bet I couldn't drink as much as I spilled." |
