I have had debates on here about various issues. One of the debates was about why Africa is always in disarray.
So I talked to a guy from Nigeria and asked him why?
He looked at me and said.
It's simple of why Africa is in bad shape. He said....
Too many difference of opinions of how things should be. He said for example.
In Nigeria. There are over 500 different tribes. With various languages and cultures.
I told him my doctor was from Nigeria to. He said... What is his name.
I told him.
He goes.
Ah... an EBO man with a smile.
I said what's the smile about.
He said.. No offense to your doctor. But we DON'T TRUST EBO guys.
I said why..
He said they are shady and are money hustlers.
I said wow.
He said there are tons of African tribes that HATE EACH other.
Basically he said it's no different than DIE HARD LIBERALS fighting against DIE HARD CONVERSATIVES.
He said.. just imagine if there were 500+ political parties all with various thought processes. He said how much in fighting would there be.
He said. it has nothing to do with intelligence or anything like that.
He said it's all about ego. Such as "Our tribe" is better then your "tribe".
I thought this was interesting.
IMO, an IQ test is nothing more than an evaluation of a person's abstract thinking aptitude. I think that's why they do it at a fairly young age.
Some people think in more concrete terms but have little abstract thinking aptitude. Those people can do well in life, but lacking an ability for abstract thinking is a hinderance, and for a society as a whole is a very bad thing.
Leftists tend to be these types of people, from what I see.
I understand it's purpose.
I just think using a static number is a bad idea. I am learning how to draw right now.
It's a lot to it. Especially understanding how to draw 3D objects in a 2D piece of paper.
What my instructions are telling us to do. Is to fail fast and fail often.
It's the only way you are going to get better at this.
IQ seems to be a "Trophy" number for the most part. It's for people who like to FEEL superior then others.
Whenever it is mention. That's the context I see it in. Which tells me. It doesn't have much value in the real world.
Surely, you are not claiming that different people don't have different abilities in abstract thinking, are you? That would be absurd. We all have different abilities in everything -- throwing a football, art, speaking skills, whatever.
We also have different abilities for abstract thinking. Abstract thinking is what turns ideas into concrete things in the real world. It is the basis of all laws. It is the basis of all scientific understanding by way of the Scientific Method. It is the way roads are built, and the way farmers decide which crops to plant or which animals to raise.
It is an ability that goes into all aspects of life. It is likely the main reason why corporate CEO's become corporate CEO's rather than stay experts in a limited skill set, such as flipping burgers or writing computer code.
Since people have different abilities in this skill, it is only natural that we would attempt to quantify it in some way, just as we do for everything else (such as the grades you got in school to quantify your comprehension of material, and nothing more).
If we are going to quantify it, then a number to represent that ability makes a lot of sense. Maybe there is a better way, but I see no reason why anything else would be a better way to evaluate the skill.
Hey, I don't like the fact that Tom Brady can throw a football better than I can. But ...
So what?