Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
El autor de este tema ha marcado un mensaje como la respuesta a su pregunta.
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
Validity as a measure of intelligence
Reliability and validity are very different concepts. While reliability reflects reproducibility, validity refers to whether the test measures what it purports to measure. While IQ tests are generally considered to measure some forms of intelligence, they may fail to serve as an accurate measure of broader definitions of human intelligence inclusive of, for example, creativity and social intelligence. For this reason, psychologist Wayne Weiten argues that their construct validity must be carefully qualified, and not be overstated. According to Weiten, "IQ tests are valid measures of the kind of intelligence necessary to do well in academic work. But if the purpose is to assess intelligence in a broader sense, the validity of IQ tests is questionable."
source: not trust me bro, but for what its worth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford%E2%80%93Binet_Intelligence_Scales
personally i've never taken the iq test, lol i dont wanna find out tbh xD
Last edited by dingdong: Just now
I don't care for neither though; if I sound smart or if I am smart but I will say if that is going to help me in a practical sense from out of a situation, like a life threatening situation then that is what I will gauge that by, if I sound smart and if I am smart. I mean I guess one should have been in such a situation to understand what I mean but like for instance dealing with other people or (being) in a situation without people figuring out what to do can be helpful I think. I mean I guess not knowing a lot but still acting and or reacting.
Some people say to run away when in danger in regards of dealing with others or just to give them your things if they are robbing you and that's considered the right or the smart thing to do. You could try to talk your way out of a situation too but in the sense of a matter of life and death it's better I think not to sound too smart about it, and otherwise there are little uses to talk well when dealing with people.
Being smart has more purpose when you are trying to achieve something which usually relates to jobs and problem solving, not so much when dealing with people unless you are trying to teach them something, which then also is good I think to have patience with.
In a situation where you got to act then also if you can think fast and react fast sometimes can make a difference and I find that more of a type of smart than actually knowing like a whole dictionary or encyclopedia by memory but I must admit to know some practical things, helps of course in both instances of dealing with people and situations. (it might a completely different case when dealing with the self though)
What I do care for more though is that I can word myself properly in the sense of translating something from within to without which is usually kind of hard to do. One could know many words and still not be able to do this or one can not know many words but feel very precisely what they know from within, so in this sense we could ask ourselves what it actually means to be smart?
Is being smart just a matter of following instructions? Of achieving goals and using your memory to get to that goal, or is smart more of a thing related to experience, invention, not so much of being unique but rather being innovative and coming up with let's say tools or methods that could help a whole bunch of people and in that case I don't know if people in general are smart, and no offense to anyone just that most of us I think are more like kind of or type of people that more or less are following orders and that whole of our existence is based on and around that, because I think that we don't really have a great record at solving things at least when it comes to providing for solutions to let's say humanity's great problems, which are many.
For instance I would never doubt that engineers are smart because they do great things that help out usually whole of humanity or just society or smaller groups of people but I also see for instance engineers working from out of a framework that is rather thought than something that is spontaneous and inventive. I see science and scientists kind of in the same boat as engineers. Very useful and handy but in all of these fields I think there are individuals, exceptional individuals who through their minds make great leaps forward that everyone else in their individual fields can make use of and profit from. Even common or average (below and above too) people can become inspired by such individuals, whom are more evident historically than in the present times I think.
So smart could be knowing a bunch of stuff but that has I think accompanying issues. Like if you know a bunch of stuff and never do something with it, like experiment with it to make new inventions and provide for new solutions everyone can profit off of, and you are just smart for the sake of being smart like to just shut other people up I don't know how much that is worth.
If you are smart and know a bunch of stuff and you teach that to others and regardless of how hard or what a hassle that is, and have patience in this process wiling to help even those that don't understand it for a while or ones who need repeating to dawn through to, then I think that's one of the better types of being smart.
Then there are people that don't care about (being) smart. They do a job, they are specialized and through and with this they make their living and time passes and they save up money and they quit usually many years after they have started which is I think most of the people on earth on average.
So, what is really smart? It could be subjective but objectively we would say, something prejudiced like someone is smart when they know a lot. Do you know such people and do you know what they do with all the knowledge they have? Like. Do they put it to good use? Someone who is smart might not necessarily be willing to do good for others and aren't necessarily willing to do a lot of work for other people that could use their intelligence and then also I have the impression that people who are smart kind of are more well... I don't want to say: egocentric, but are more reclusive I think. Reclusive in that sense that they use their intelligence for self growth which can have more benefits to others in the long run, see of this kind of like "speaking from experience'' -kind of thing.
Then there are people who benefit from being smart by using or usurping others. You could say like, wow that guy is so rich and so successful by making others work for them (executing what their mind dictates) but then we could again ask what does success mean, like what does it entail?
Will the future remember those and such people for being great people or as being something else? Will they be remembered at all? How many people from the past do we know like that, and who are the people from the past who really mattered and why? They seem to be remembered but often they didn't seem to be... well let's just say they seemed to be much more altruistic than just entrepreneurs, although again and this is where that divide comes in from like. Successful/rich and innovative/genius. Like I don't want to say this but, do we remember the rich from the past and how? And do we know of those that did great things for humanity and were they themselves rich?
In the end I would like to say about myself that I would rather more be wise than intelligent.
...and, yes: knowing a lot is nice, that is smart. Until our understanding changes and what remains usually of such people? I think they tend to be very narrow minded. How many times has our understanding changed from the past? It is only relatively recently that we live in this age of kind of more or less "true" enlightenment where before that time of say I think 100-150 years ago we believed in all kinds of questionable things (perhaps even as close as 50 years ago, or less). Scientific method is good, but it is also only a means to an end it seems. Measurement is correct as long as you can measure something and I think the truth is that there are a lot of things we still can't or fail to measure, like things that are unseen and unknown for instance. Uncertains.... uncertains, ununderstanding.
Surely, pretty much every OT regular is already aware of that by now.