5 ms·

>> that the IQ test actually is precisely a measure of potential in various abstract areas. I'm trying to understand this. Here's my understanding: That it is

by aik 14y ago

>> that the IQ test actually is precisely a measure of potential in various abstract areas. I'm trying to understand this. Here's my understanding: That it is possible to take an IQ test and have score x, then perform activities y, retake the IQ test and have the score x+15. How exactly did the initial test measure the potential for that increase? That your potential is x (+-)15 (or 25 or whatever the number is)?

ghshephard 14y ago
IQ measures your potential to perform and learn in various areas. Per wikipedia, one of the standard suite of tests includes, "Comprehension-Knowledge, Long-Term Retrieval, Visual-Spatial Thinking, Auditory Processing, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed, Short-Term Memory and Quantitative Knowledge and Reading-Writing Ability" The argument that James Flynn makes, is that your potential can increase, through your environment. That is - your IQ isn't simply a function of your genetics, but also of what you are exposed to. To put it in concrete terms - someone who worked every day, from dawn to dusk, in very manual labor - let's say cutting wood, chopping it up, and stacking it, will develop their potential for abstract thinking very differently than if they had instead gone and gotten their PHD in some abstract field like Logic. Same person, same genetics - very different IQ. What you are referring to, is closer to the "Potential for Potential" - I don't know if there is any way, or anyone who measures something like that. But I think that everyone will agree, that IQ is _not_ a measure of your "Potential for Potential" - simply a measurement of your potential - and that is malleable.
- adgar 14y ago
  > What you are referring to, is closer to the "Potential for Potential" - I don't know if there is any way, or anyone who measures something like that. Your parent poster is definitely referring to this concept. (S)he is referring to that concept explicitly because it is so ill-definable and unmeasurable.
- ZeroGravitas 14y ago
  I think many people believe that IQ is your potential for potential, and indeed the potential for potential of your descendants and your "race". Thats what people generally mean when they say Group X has a high/low IQ. I think this might be referred to as the strong IQ hypothesis.

by aik 14y ago

ghshephard 14y ago

IQ measures your potential to perform and learn in various areas. Per wikipedia, one of the standard suite of tests includes, "Comprehension-Knowledge, Long-Term Retrieval, Visual-Spatial Thinking, Auditory Processing, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed, Short-Term Memory and Quantitative Knowledge and Reading-Writing Ability" The argument that James Flynn makes, is that your potential can increase, through your environment. That is - your IQ isn't simply a function of your genetics, but also of what you are exposed to. To put it in concrete terms - someone who worked every day, from dawn to dusk, in very manual labor - let's say cutting wood, chopping it up, and stacking it, will develop their potential for abstract thinking very differently than if they had instead gone and gotten their PHD in some abstract field like Logic. Same person, same genetics - very different IQ. What you are referring to, is closer to the "Potential for Potential" - I don't know if there is any way, or anyone who measures something like that. But I think that everyone will agree, that IQ is _not_ a measure of your "Potential for Potential" - simply a measurement of your potential - and that is malleable.

adgar 14y ago
> What you are referring to, is closer to the "Potential for Potential" - I don't know if there is any way, or anyone who measures something like that. Your parent poster is definitely referring to this concept. (S)he is referring to that concept explicitly because it is so ill-definable and unmeasurable.
ZeroGravitas 14y ago
I think many people believe that IQ is your potential for potential, and indeed the potential for potential of your descendants and your "race". Thats what people generally mean when they say Group X has a high/low IQ. I think this might be referred to as the strong IQ hypothesis.