Perhaps you will find this an interesting challenge for a discussion... As you might know, IQ is a relative measure of human intelligence (or at least, certain kinds of human intelligence -- depending on where you come down on the issue of what such tests measure). That is, an IQ test does NOT measure absolute intelligence, but only intelligence relative to something. In the case of the tests, that 'something' is other people.
So, for example, an IQ of 100, which is average, means (1) half of all people taking the test are 'smarter' than you, (2) half are 'dumber' than you, and (3) you are twice as 'smart' as me. To recap, it dos not mean you are smart or dumb, it means you are smart or dumb relative to other people.
So, here's the question... How would you test, measure, or define human intelligence in absolute terms? Assuming it's possible. Any ideas?
Albert Einstein had many things to say about human intelligence, but one of the things he said might suggest an absolute standard by which to judge it. To paraphrase, he described intelligence as the ability to adapt to change. Do you find that a useful definition?
So, for example, an IQ of 100, which is average, means (1) half of all people taking the test are 'smarter' than you, (2) half are 'dumber' than you, and (3) you are twice as 'smart' as me. To recap, it dos not mean you are smart or dumb, it means you are smart or dumb relative to other people.
So, here's the question... How would you test, measure, or define human intelligence in absolute terms? Assuming it's possible. Any ideas?
Albert Einstein had many things to say about human intelligence, but one of the things he said might suggest an absolute standard by which to judge it. To paraphrase, he described intelligence as the ability to adapt to change. Do you find that a useful definition?