For those who took Electronics and Communications Engineering in college

[Afrospinach]

Yes, any functional person in good health could eventually get the same knowledge that the genius had when they took the IQ test. Assuming that they have the interest and motivation for doing so.

Probably worth pointing out when iq is measured a purposeful attempt is made to divorce the test from prior knowledge. An iq test is not a trivia quiz(knowledge) it is an attempt to measure intelligence. After a certain age, which I believe is lower than 10 years old - before you would care, it becomes nigh impossible to improve your iq. In short, a genius will always be a genius and a dumbass will always be a dumbass and a proper iq test will identify them as such. Sorry but stupid people exist, there is no "catching up". If you are learning iq tests you are invalidating iq tests.

What you are saying though is quite true, *eventually* you should be able to teach anyone most anything. However, if someone is not keeping up with their peers at university then maybe they should start considering the ramifications in a limited opportunity environment. I do not see the point of encouraging people to pursue a field in which they may never be particularly valuable.

[PC2]

How would you know that, if you don't think that past observance can be used to predict future outcomes?

This is awkward for you.

My line of reasoning is that the Scientific method works, regardless of your hypocrisy.

The scientific method works properly in the *natural sciences* but applying it to a non-scientific field is called scientism. That's why the scientific method doesn't apply to things like moral laws and determining government social policy.

[Felya]

Yes, any functional person in good health could eventually get the same knowledge that the genius had when they took the IQ test. Assuming that they have the interest and motivation for doing so.

No, IQ does not require knowledge... it’s a flawed way to measure perception.

- - - Updated - - -

The scientific method works properly in the *natural sciences* but applying it to a non-scientific field is called scientism. That's why the scientific method doesn't apply to things like moral laws and determining government social policy.

Half a point... Science cannot handle the immeasurable or subjectivity, like moral laws. But, government social policy? It absolutely can... you just have to know your goal.

[Machismo]

The scientific method works properly in the *natural sciences* but applying it to a non-scientific field is called scientism. That's why the scientific method doesn't apply to things like moral laws and determining government social policy.

Your argument is refuted by your own teeth...

[Felya]

Probably worth pointing out when iq is measured a purposeful attempt is made to divorce the test from prior knowledge. An iq test is not a trivia quiz(knowledge) it is an attempt to measure intelligence. After a certain age, which I believe is lower than 10 years old - before you would care, it becomes nigh impossible to improve your iq. In short, a genius will always be a genius and a dumbass will always be a dumbass and a proper iq test will identify them as such. Sorry but stupid people exist, there is no "catching up". If you are learning iq tests you are invalidating iq tests.

What you are saying though is quite true, *eventually* you should be able to teach anyone most anything. However, if someone is keeping up with their peers at university then maybe they should start considering the ramifications in a limited opportunity environment. I do not see the point of encouraging people to pursue a field in which they may never be particularly valuable.

You can train your self to do better at IQ tests... I recommend paying attention to the extras and background, when watching film. Ignore what the camera tells you to see...

[PC2]

No, IQ does not require knowledge... it’s a flawed way to measure perception.

That makes no sense. An IQ exam is an attempt at measuring your abstract knowledge. How could you know the answer to any questions on an IQ exam without the knowledge of how to solve the problems? Without knowledge you would simply be answering the questions randomly. If it's a multiple choice exam with 4 options per question you would get approximately 25% of the questions right but it would only be due to probability.

Your argument is refuted by your own teeth...

How so?

[Machismo]

That makes no sense. An IQ exam is an attempt at measuring your abstract knowledge. How could you know the answer to any questions on an IQ exam without the knowledge of how to solve the problems? Without knowledge you would simply be answering the questions randomly. If it's a multiple choice exam with 4 options per question you would get approximately 25% of the questions right but it would only be due to probability.



How so?

Your teeth show that you can make future predictions based on previous observations.

[PC2]

Your teeth show that you can make future predictions based on previous observations.

I mean you can make those predictions and you can also believe in God and predict that a rapture is coming. However the ideas behind them don't actually have any causal power to determine the future.

[Machismo]

I mean you can make those predictions and you can also believe in God and predict that a rapture is coming. However the ideas behind them don't actually have any causal power to determine the future.

Smile for everyone.

[Rozz]

This is off-topic and closed.