Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CusterInvestor who wrote (29029)	1/6/2007 11:51:34 AM
From: LoneClone	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 78424

When I used to teach undergrad courses at university, whatever the ostensible content of the course, it was just an excuse for trying to teach the tools for and inspire a love for critical thinking. As my subject areas were cultural and communication studies, this was the ideal training ground. As to the IQ debate, let me compare myself and my lab partner through high school and the early years of university when I was still studying the sciences. Marshall was an absolute workhorse. He did at least three hours homework every night, which made him an ideal partner for me, who did homework precisely once during high school. But he was a very much by the book, follow the instructions type, while I always experimented. When we played chess, he would run through the best known opening variations and try to simplify, but I would always be throwing in off the beaten track complications. I won most of the chess games, but... We both were top of the honour roll types in high school, but while he went on to become a well-respected astronomer, I have followed a varied and chequered series of careers as I privileged my multitudinous interests over career. The reason I bring this up is that by sneaking into the school office a friend got access to all our IQ scores. Of our bunch of nerds, I had the highest and Marshall the lowest, yet by most accounts Marshall has been much more successful. The difference is that he was always focussed and hard working toward a singular goal, traits ensured by his family background, while I was always given the freedom to follow my nose. I wouldn't want to trade lives with Marshall -- focussed discipline never agreed with me! -- but our stories do show that its not so much your innate abilities as what you do with them that matters. Or something. LC

To: CusterInvestor who wrote (29029)	1/6/2007 3:28:57 PM
From: koan	Respond to of 78424

I AM SO VERY SORRY FOR BUMBLING THAT POST LAST NIGHT!! the human species is all one very closely related species (according to DNA testing we are all very closely related) and all peoples pretty much have the same normal curve for intellectual distributions. And creativity is a profound intellectual capability that normal IQ tests generally miss. IQ tests are very simplistic, as are SAT scores which is why I believe all people should get a shot at their state university regardless of high school grades. Most people will find they can master a state college regardless of what they did in high school. They are older and that seems to make all the difference most of the time for success. I have seen that first hand many many times. Having my post misunderstood because of my own careless posting unsettled me a great deal. I have fought racism my whole life and never even allowed racist jokes in my own family. And my mother was one of 12 children. I have seen all my life the horrible effects of racism, sexism and gay bashing on people. I was only talking about statistical populations for IQ, statistical populations regarding mental disabilities, and the horrible effects of racism, poverty and other problems which make it hard for one to get an education which does help one live life more comfortably. And you are correct bigpike about intellectual development. Education is much more important than IQ except at the very low IQ levels where people cannot tend to themselves. Scientific American recently had an article on the "expert mind:". they studied chess players and found it takes 10 years (the 10 year rule) to develop an expert mind (longer than it takes to educate a brain surgeon). The expert mind develops internal software, whereby it thinks in clumps of information. For instance take the nursy rhyme Mary had a little lamb. If one knows the rhyme it is one clump of information. If they do not know the rhyme it is 5 clumps of information mary-had-a-little-lamb. if they do not know english it is 21 pieces of information (letters) and if they do not know our alphabet it is almost impossible to remembe because the letters are just squiggles on a piece of paper. Knowledge builds on knowledge.