What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
27 Comments
- manvsmonster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This goes along with this digg on the front page: http://digg.com/science/Brains_Of_Very_Smart_Kids_Mature_Later
- tryferos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Come to think of it, kodekitten has a point as well. I know someone who is really intelligent, but due to the environment he grew up in, his social skills are lacking. Now as an adult he is super impatient, has a harsh personality and tends to offend people easily.
- Smoov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Digg reflects the full IQ spectrum. The posts range from those by illiterate mouth-breathing troglodytes incapable of an original thought (sux dood LOL f*ck you I rulz) all the way up to those which are well-considered, articulate and a pleasure to read.
The trick is to use your intellect to filter out the idiots and the crackpots and digg for gold. - kodekitten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm always increasingly interested in research that seeks to find a physiological difference between children with different cognitive capacities. IQ has always been a dicey measure of an individual's cognitive abilities as a whole, but this study spreads probably cause to a few other things, such as home environment and soical environment. I think the issue of "race" or "ethnicity" is really manifested in cultural environment as manifested in the home and with friends, not in an actual biological difference in overall brain abilities. The idea that your environment, in conjunction with your genes, really is what shapes your attitude towards education, and thus your likelihood to improve or enhance your abilities, is a very important one in multicultural education.
I would be very interested to know specifically what kind of tasks these children were given, and whether the researchers at all modified the model to include general intelligence instead of just IQ, since IQ is really only a measurement of how well you can perform in a classroom setting. - billydisaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Ummm, no. There is a beauty and elegance to these special numbers, but not to the frankly random string of integers that make up the decimal approximation of them. Maybe in a bad Hollywood movie, perhaps with a stirring orchestral score.
- CaughtThinking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Intelligence Quotient is so misnamed.
Abstract Puzzle Quotient
is a better name. 80 years from now they'll realize the IQ concept is a joke. - super_duper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've always thought this was obvious. Don't smarter people tend to think differently?
A 'normal' person may seen Pi as a never-ending string of numbers, while a 'smart' person may see Pi as a musical score that just "makes sense". - mckirkus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If something is counterintuitive like economics (Socialism leads to poverty) smart people can have a hard time with it which is why a lot of Democrats score relatively well on IQ tests. When smart people aren't checked by a democracy you get things like planned economies where smart politicians meet to figure out how much hair cuts should cost.
- teknotant, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5You must have a low IQ. J/K
- Lady_Phoenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Replace the word "stupid" with "ignorant" and I'll agree with you completely. :)
- tryferos, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Layzie is right. IQ is only one part, and can be pretty limited in defining intelligence. Some one who is a "genius" may not really have a clue in the real world. There are plenty of smart people who are just devoid of all common sense and logic when it comes to life in general.
My goal is to keep remaining above average, and to never be given a darwin award. (www.darwinawards.com) :P - Narrator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Maybe the negative personality characteristics are genetic too?
- IKbot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I would like to know why there is such a huge gap in IQ between races. Is it a higher propensity for certain cultures to put kids in environments where they succeed/fail leading to higher/lower IQs?
The only real reason to study any measure of intelligence is to find a way to boost intelligence. Imagine a big machine learning problem: you're given the complete DNA sequence for 10,000 people. You are then given their IQs, income, athletic abilities, propensity to have disease X in their family, and any other measure you like. Now find a way to boost the average Joe in any measure.
Decades ago intelligence testing seemed like a dead-end. Even if you found commonalities in a group, what would you do with it? Now, we are close to being able to activate a particular gene, and the only question is what to do -- not how to do it.
I very much look forward to a pill or hormone therapy that will make me smarter. This, combined with human-machine interfaces, is the only way to avoid an "US vs. THEM" scenario for strong-AI & robotics.
This is all coming from a roboticist, by the way - ripter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I always find it amazing when the 'smartest' kids in school where some of the dumbest people I've ever met. I remember my classes valedictorian tell everyone at a party that water makes wood catch on fire easier.
- Digital.Totem, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2All IQ tests are a real measure of are spatial reasoning and pattern recognition, you can have a fantastic IQ and be a very stupid person if you don't want to learn or aren't given the chance to learn.
- Lady_Phoenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I am curious to know if you've ever taken an IQ test yourself...? The whole "IQ tests only show how kids can do in a classroom setting" makes no sense. IQ tests check pattern recognition, problem solving, and logic skills mainly. I was tested as a child, one-on-one, and I've taken a few on-line, by myself. There is no classroom setting in this country (USA) that even remotely resembles the way IQ tests are administered, and the content of the tests bears no resemblance to anything a teacher ever teaches in a classroom setting.
- kodekitten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"There is no classroom setting in this country (USA) that even remotely resembles the way IQ tests are administered, and the content of the tests bears no resemblance to anything a teacher ever teaches in a classroom setting."
EXACTLY! That's exactly why these tests are controversial. They were originally designed and are currently used to determine how a student will be able to handle a formal education (whether they would need to be labeled as having a learning disability), but the reason some people place no importance on the "Intelligence Quotient" these tests come up with is because they are a bit misleading.
Firstly, they do test some of the basal critical thinking skills you would need to solve problems in the classroom, but being able to think logically is not the only thing that is required to function in a normal classroom setting (students with autism are highly logical, but may not be able to acquire knowledge from a typical classroom very effectively.)
Secondly, many people feel that your IQ does not at all determine your success in later life.
Thank you for proving my point. - Lady_Phoenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1CaffiendCA: "IQ is one of many contributing factors to intelligence."
Amen! Those that support or bash IQ tests as "stand-alone onlies" for measuring "smart" misunderstand the tool. Just from reading the posts above, "smart" = intelligence, aptitude, potential, and/or education in academic, social, and/or emotional skill sets. I've never heard of ANY single test that accurately measures all of these at once. IQ testing was never meant to measure more than a small part of the whole picture. - CaffiendCA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1IQ is one of many contributing factors to intelligence. I'd bet you could take top performing students and find significant differences in IQ.
The sample here, 300 kids, seems a bit small to be making any blanket conclusions. The same sample would probably show hair color as a good guide. - breakneckridge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ya mean smurt peoples brains is diffrunt 'n dum people's brains? Who'da thunk it?
- Ribald_Jester, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Good point.
Is emotional intelligence (EQ) the same as social intelligence? I've never heard of the social one before... - mwong, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1IQ test was originally made just to see who was retarded (too low an IQ to be in normal classes). It's a strange concept to go so far to try to figure out all the high IQ kids. They don't need the ego trip, just let them go about their bussiness and get the low IQ kids the accomodations they need.
- drakonite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"the idea that IQ is a meaningful concept in neuroscience."
Shame it can't be considered a meaningful concept for anything else...
"IQ" tests are a horrible tool. The rating itself is extremely flawed, partially as the formula is based upon a steady increase in score over a linear age increase (is someone that is 40 going to have as much of a score increase over a 35 year old as a 20 year old would over a 15 year old?)
The tests themselves are horribly written; they are largely based upon little tricks different people learn at different times, and have very little to do how intelligent someone is.
If you think IQ is a meaningful value, I implore you to do some research and learn all the ways the IQ test is complete bunk. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Thanks for the link dude, good story
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4IQ might be just as important for studying neuroscience as any other subject, but I personally find social intelligence more important than a high IQ.
- Izzie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2IQ is an inadequate tool to evaluate intelligence and wisdom. it might a meaningful concept in neruo-sciences but it has proven itself to be wrong, inefficient and badly used in practical way.
about IQ you can check this movie: http://stupiditythemovie.com/
and about adequately evaluating things you can check these: http://www.general-semantics.org/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_semantics - manvsmonster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Sounds like me. Ha ha.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is