3 ms·

> IQ is an EXCELLENT measure of "value, contribution, quality of thought". Actually, it is not. At best, IQ is correlated with intellectual potential. However

> IQ is an EXCELLENT measure of "value, contribution, quality of thought". Actually, it is not. At best, IQ is correlated with intellectual potential. However, having potential is not the same as being able to perform. Even a V8 without gas fails to perform on par with a filled 2-stroke motor.

scotty79 8y ago
> However, having potential is not the same as being able to perform. But having no potential is virtually the same as not being able to perform. You can find high IQ people in the highest places in human society and in the lowest places. But you don't find low IQ people in the highest places.
- geezerjay 8y ago
  > But having no potential is virtually the same as not being able to perform. That's true, but that refers to people with a low IQ. Thise with average IQ are quite able to outperform people with a high IQ if they have able to put in the legwork or even simply have an opportunity to improve their performance when some with a higher IQ does not. The old addage that the brain is like a muscle is very orelevant: it makes no difference if a talented athlete does not train, because that only means he js squandering his talent. Meanwhile, least capable athletes that put in the hours do end up improving their performance and eventually outperform more talented athletes. Potential means nothing if it's wasted.
  - scotty79 8y ago
    > Thise with average IQ are quite able to outperform people with a high IQ if they have able to put in the legwork... Yes, average can beat high with work. But still, high can beat high with work with higher probability than average can. Average Kalenjin with just few trainings will outrun most average runners even if they were training for years.
- ilikehurdles 8y ago
  You do find low IQ people in high places — they’re the low IQ people who have inherited wealth and social connections to those places.
  - repolfx 8y ago
    I would be fascinated to know the IQ scores of all the US presidents, but I assume no such dataset exists. Being the president would seem to be a good example of a form of success in which IQ would not be that important relative to other personality attributes, like understanding what people want and how to (re)phrase it well, persistence, bravery, being able to spot strategic mistakes of opponents etc. It's not clear any of these attributes would be classically considered "intelligence" in the IQ sense, but they're all clearly valuable for politicians to have.
    - xyzzyz 8y ago
      You can estimate that by looking at their SAT/ACT scores (which are intelligence tests to a large degree) and converting the percentile to IQ norming (mean 100, std dev 15). For Obama you get IQ 130, for George W. Bush 123.
  - LinuxBender 8y ago
    Not to mention, narcissistic sociopaths that rise to high positions of power because of confidence, hubris and taking a cavalier approach on life. Not all of them are genius.

scotty79 8y ago

> However, having potential is not the same as being able to perform. But having no potential is virtually the same as not being able to perform. You can find high IQ people in the highest places in human society and in the lowest places. But you don't find low IQ people in the highest places.

geezerjay 8y ago
> But having no potential is virtually the same as not being able to perform. That's true, but that refers to people with a low IQ. Thise with average IQ are quite able to outperform people with a high IQ if they have able to put in the legwork or even simply have an opportunity to improve their performance when some with a higher IQ does not. The old addage that the brain is like a muscle is very orelevant: it makes no difference if a talented athlete does not train, because that only means he js squandering his talent. Meanwhile, least capable athletes that put in the hours do end up improving their performance and eventually outperform more talented athletes. Potential means nothing if it's wasted.
- scotty79 8y ago
  > Thise with average IQ are quite able to outperform people with a high IQ if they have able to put in the legwork... Yes, average can beat high with work. But still, high can beat high with work with higher probability than average can. Average Kalenjin with just few trainings will outrun most average runners even if they were training for years.
ilikehurdles 8y ago
You do find low IQ people in high places — they’re the low IQ people who have inherited wealth and social connections to those places.
- repolfx 8y ago
  I would be fascinated to know the IQ scores of all the US presidents, but I assume no such dataset exists. Being the president would seem to be a good example of a form of success in which IQ would not be that important relative to other personality attributes, like understanding what people want and how to (re)phrase it well, persistence, bravery, being able to spot strategic mistakes of opponents etc. It's not clear any of these attributes would be classically considered "intelligence" in the IQ sense, but they're all clearly valuable for politicians to have.
  - xyzzyz 8y ago
    You can estimate that by looking at their SAT/ACT scores (which are intelligence tests to a large degree) and converting the percentile to IQ norming (mean 100, std dev 15). For Obama you get IQ 130, for George W. Bush 123.
- LinuxBender 8y ago
  Not to mention, narcissistic sociopaths that rise to high positions of power because of confidence, hubris and taking a cavalier approach on life. Not all of them are genius.