DNA tests can predict intelligence

economic

There is no linear relationship between IQ vs outcome in life. It is important to have an above average IQ if you want "success" and there is some (unknown) threshold of IQ you need to have to at least have a good chance in becoming a "success". But this does not mean you need 140 IQ nor does it mean 100 (average) is enough. Nor does it mean with an average IQ or below average IQ you will certainly be a failure. But statistically you stand a very poor chance of succeeding in the current economic setup.

The "nerd" is a nerd because he is motivated by doing geeky things not only because his IQ is presumably high. The "rugby type" whilst possibly attractive to girls because of him being confident and "manly", does not mean he will have a low or even average IQ, to work for a law firm you need a reasonable level of intelligence, at least above average, just to have then gone to a decent university to be accepted at a law firm.

EDIT: i guess it depends on what sort of law firm and what sort of job, but since its a nice job at a law firm i will assume its highly competitive to get into and therefore require good academics at a good uni.

Jackmydad

No such thing as fair and equal as per the OP.
God help us all if "they" start to mess.

I've known all sorts of people with all sorts of "intelligence" levels.
Intelligence doesn't really relate to real world success.
While you can measure IQ, I'm not so sure that it's easy to measure "whole" intelligence, whatever that is.
"Emotional intelligence" is just a misappropriation of the word "intelligence IMHO.

economic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nmjcx-4cJp4

Moby

GreatApe wrote: »

What does culturally sensitive mean?

What makes you think high IQ means being awkward? Or that high IQ means low creativity? That's just so stupid. You might as well have added in that high IQ people are ugly to finish off that nonsense post of yours.

I've met high and low IQ people who are awkward in fact many more low IQ people who are.
You need High IQ to be good at communication and speaking not least because you have to read a lot to be a great speaker. Likewise the most creative tasks need high IQ do you think painting some fruit is creative while designing a fighter jet isn't? Taking photographs is creative while the team that built that machine totally void of creativity?

And your experience doesn't seem to bare out in real life. It looks like IQ is the primarily determinant in a successful career and financials followed closely by conscientiousness.

You call me stupid and then ask.....What does cultural sensitivity mean??? ..........seriously?. There's reams written about it in the field. Look at the work of Anita Woolley on group intelligence. Her research found that social sensitivity – measured using a test in which participants had to identify another person’s feelings by looking at photographs of their eyes – was by far the most important factor as against individual group members IQ's. Woolley says that selection processes used to form groups in the workplace may need to be re-evaluated, shifting the focus from individual intelligence to collaboration skills. My work related training now reflects this approach. Many high IQ people have very poor communication skills whereas Jeremy Corbyn for instance has energised a mass movement of political change with I suspect an average IQ at best. :-) 'You have to read a lot to be a good speaker' ...absolute nonsense!...and I never said high IQ equals low creativity. I'm simply explaining to you that IQ tests have limited application and I used their inability to measure creativity/art as an example and I've added the above need to work as a team as evidenced by Woolley above as another. Have no idea what you mean by 'painting fruit' or comparing that with designing aircraft???

economic

Moby wrote: »

You call me stupid and then ask.....What does cultural sensitivity mean??? ..........seriously?. There's reams written about it in the field. Look at the work of Anita Woolley on group intelligence. Her research found that social sensitivity !!!8211; measured using a test in which participants had to identify another person!!!8217;s feelings by looking at photographs of their eyes !!!8211; was by far the most important factor as against individual group members IQ's. Woolley says that selection processes used to form groups in the workplace may need to be re-evaluated, shifting the focus from individual intelligence to collaboration skills. My work related training now reflects this approach. Many high IQ people have very poor communication skills whereas Jeremy Corbyn for instance has energised a mass movement of political change with I suspect an average IQ at best. :-) 'You have to read a lot to be a good speaker' ...absolute nonsense!...and I never said high IQ equals low creativity. I'm simply explaining to you that IQ tests have limited application and I used their inability to measure creativity/art as an example and I've added the above need to work as a team as evidenced by Woolley above as another. Have no idea what you mean by 'painting fruit' or comparing that with designing aircraft???

You would be surprised how there really are not that many people who give a !!!!!! about your feelings.

westernpromise

My observation at university was that very smart people tend to be good at more than one thing. Someone who does nothing but mug up one subject can go quite far, but if it takes 100% of their mental capacity to be really good at maths or whatever, then they will have no time to be good at music or sculpture or something else. Really bright people get their Firsts without much effort while having time left over to be really good at something else too, such as arguing with people on the internet.

kinger101

GreatApe wrote: »

What does culturally sensitive mean?

One example of an IQ test I've seen contains anagrams of American cities. That's quite an obvious example of test in which one group would perform better than another.

economic

kinger101 wrote: »

One example of an IQ test I've seen contains anagrams of American cities. That's quite an obvious example of test in which one group would perform better than another.

That’s not a real iq test. That’s a sort of puzzle you find at the back of trashy newspapers.

LHW99

Did you do the Myers-Briggs on that course? I think I'd have to tell them they're just horoscopes for graduates. It's rather sad that many employers still use them.

No. I'm not sure those are even properly categorised as measuring IQ, they seem more 'psycobabble' IMO.
The ones I was introduced to were some of the ones used (at that time, which was quite a few years ago) to assess young people deemed to be 'failing' in education.

kinger101

economic wrote: »

That!!!8217;s not a real iq test. That!!!8217;s a sort of puzzle you find at the back of trashy newspapers.

There are dozens of IQ tests available. I'm pretty sure this was regarded as a legitimate test. Anagrams are still used is some tests today. It was in a book aimed at undergraduates, not a newspaper.