![]() |
Quote:
Or is it something else? |
The trouble with IQ tests is that they're very crude measures of intelligence. The more we learn about the human brain and the different kinds of intelligence, the less relevant those tests become.
|
Quote:
|
How about the job of President of the United States? Should a person with an IQ that's below average be allowed to run one of the most powerful countries in the world? Could you imagine what kind of horrific decisions a person like that might make?
|
I think everyone except the person who posted 50th on this thread is stupid.
|
It depends on what you're trying to measure. IQ doesn't say much, and IQ test results can vary depending on alertness level, physical condition (if you've spent the previous night spewing your guts out with a stomach flu you won't do yourself any justice) etc. A general IQ test isn't the best, but some sort of aptitude tests, of which the IQ test may be a small part, are common these days.
I would only use IQ tests to weed out the below average intelligence people in non-manual tasks, but I wouldn't require a manager to have a membership in Mensa, say. Many people with extremely high IQs have a very low EQ. I know I'd far rather work with a people person who isn't afraid to ask his or her co-workers when they're unsure about something than a hyper-smart know-it-all who thinks the sun shines out of his orifices. |
Maybe the real question is, "Should there be aptitude and knowledge testing requirements for politicians?"
|
An IQ test would do well to indicate a person's ability to do a job...as a developer of IQ tests. That's probably all, though.
|
Quote:
:D j/k |
Given the content of the written answers, the poll votes surprise me.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Ditto.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.