Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Discussion > Science and Technology

Science and Technology Science and Technology Forum - For topics and discussions about the sciences and technology


Thanks Tree8Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 4th, 2018, 12:02 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
xMathFanx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
@Sabcat

As I'm sure you may already be aware, there has actually been found to be a significant problem with Affirmative Action students being accepted to elite Universities for rigorous subjects--for instance, Engineering at MIT, only to find out it is not a wise move putting themselves in an environment that their scores/qualifications do not merit. That is, they quickly have to drop out as it becomes overwhelming, even though they would do just fine (or even well) at their states corresponding 'big public school' (i.e. Ohio State University, U of Texas, etc.). If a person is legitimately going to make it at MIT, then their Mathematics skills would need to be in the top fraction of 1% of the country, or they will not survive--as you are competing against students who are at that mark (or superior).

Bottom line, affirmative action ultimately does not even help them, rather it sells them false hopes which becomes even more damaging when they are confronted by it the hard way (in a very uncomfortable format). Also, of course, another person who may have been better suited/prepared for the program was passed up.
xMathFanx is offline  
Old April 4th, 2018, 06:47 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,052
Q tes

Quote:
Originally Posted by xMathFanx View Post
@imaginethat

My apologies, I did not see this when you first posted it.

~snip~
Yes, I believe my most valuable contribution to this discussion is my personal experience.

In the late-50s, my school district administered IQ tests to fourth graders. My results caused a minor stir in my life, parents summoned to school, discussions as to what to do with me. Ultimately, not much. Pushing me ahead, skipping grades was discussed, but left up to me to decide. I was a young boy who didn't want to leave my friends behind.

In the last few years my younger brother revealed that I actually freaked out our parents, my grasping concepts they struggled to understand. Both of my parents were some of the most intelligent people and parents that I ever knew.

Living with an intellect which scored and still scores highly on existing flawed IQ tests, presents daily challenges. Please do not misunderstand. I am not claiming to know what's right all the time. No one knows. But in terms of understanding and integrating new information, yes, my brain is much quicker than most. I'm by nature a rather patient person, and it's a good thing because I spend a lot of time waiting on others' cognitive processes.

Sometimes no amount of waiting seems to help, the issue seeming to be beyond the reach of some, literally. Sometimes the deficiency may stem from a lack of background knowledge, but sometimes that lack of background knowledge itself seems to be a function of an individual's lack of intellectual curiosity. Thus, an individual's choices and drives perpetuate their inability to process more complex information, information running deeper than the world of sensation and desire.

I think you've over-juxtaposed fast computational skills and the ability to comprehend "deep thinking" subjects. In my experience the two abilities generally go together.

At different times throughout my adult life, I have felt like an alien living within a humankind that I simply cannot understand. I can understand human events, the daily news for example, or the guy who couldn't wait 1.2 seconds longer for the guy in front of him in traffic so he had to sit on his horn to communicate his distress, I get that just fine. I'm referring to the "Whys?" Why do humans choose to do the things they do?

Why can't humans see that they're all one, that the planet is one, that unless we evolve, and rather quickly considering in evolutionary time is not good enough, our dog-eat-dog, survival of the "fittest" approach to everything will consume humankind?

We likely don't have the time we need. The minds of many, maybe even the majority, simply can't process new information quickly enough, cannot integrate new knowledge quickly enough, to dampen and reverse the inertia presently pulling us at an increasing rate "off the edge of the cliff" into a truly unknown abyss.

Of all events that could snap humanity into place, direct first-person contact with an alien race could turn things around in the needed timeframe, the wild card being the unpredictable, imo, reactions by the devoutly religious of primarily the Abrahamic religions.

The concept of IQ and its veracity truly fades into the larger picture of what to do with the conundrum we have created through our expressions of human intelligence. Short of close encounters of the third kind or better, the question remains open, more daunting than ever.
Thanks from xMathFanx
imaginethat is offline  
Old April 4th, 2018, 07:36 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
xMathFanx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
I think you've over-juxtaposed fast computational skills and the ability to comprehend "deep thinking" subjects. In my experience the two abilities generally go together.
@imaginethat

There is a lot you said which I agree with, so I am quoting the area where we may not in order to further the discussion. I will do this by quoting a previous post of mine to Athena, from a separate thread on a related topic.

First, some preliminary thoughts--it is not that they vary entirely independently, rather it is logically quite possible that a 'computer' may be able to handle a much larger load over a very extended period of time compared to smaller order problems in the short term; which are partially (not fully) connected. Also, like computers, it is possible to be excellent at identifying patterns that are already known to exist, while have poor ability to see new patterns.

I quite seriously see this all the time as Math/Physics student--and it is highly frustrating. For instance, in many ways, I can relate to George Carlin's mind space more than many/most of my Sci./Tech. peers who are essentially consumed/absorbed into the Pop. Culture, thinking it (somehow) makes sense--even though they can also do Advanced Calculus, Quantum Mechanics, etc. etc. It is fascinating really--to think the same mind that is doing IQ 130-135 stuff also highly conforms to our Pop. Culture (which is borderline mentally disabled; slightly hyperbolic) is mind-boggling (and often very frustrating). The gap is so bad, I quiet seriously cannot even talk/relate to many of them--other than 'small talk' and HW problems, etc. I attend a 50 level school, though I have read accounts of people who attend schools like MIT--they say it is (obviously) way, way better than other environments, though there are still many people (as in a very sizeable chuck--say 50ish %, or possibly more) who are as I describe many of my classmates, though with a higher base IQ (and corresponding cognitive abilities). Again, this is not to diminish IQ, as it is giving important information--though, it is just part of the story.

So, yes, I do not doubt for a moment it has been difficult for you to relate to most people--that is an extremely common problem encountered by people with cognitive abilities that deviate from the norm significantly. In fact, 2 standard deviations has been the mark found where it becomes an (essentially) unbridgeable gap, as there is a massive gulf between the two people.

Now, for my post to Athena [Note: in order to give proper context/depth, I will be copy-pasting multiple posts; Thread link here-- How independent are you?

1. @Athena

Mathematics does not necessitate any real independent thought until one reaches the point of doing legitimate research--which typically does not happen until a couple years into Grad school. Mostly, it necessitates a higher level 'copy-paste' function than average, though that does not indicate that students of Math are more likely to be 'independent thinkers'; and, I can tell you from personal experience, they often/overwhelmingly are not.


2. @Athena

I think we may be talking cross-purposes, as I essentially agree with everything you said.

Mathematics is still one of the best ways we know of to train abstract reasoning in that one needs to follow strict/rigorous lines of logical argumentation, identify a pattern, utilize strong mental visualization, assort the pattern into a working model, make swift and accurate computations, ect. ect. It is essentially rigorous training for your brain/mind in a very similar way that lifting weights/jump rope/sprints/jumping exercises/ect. ect is rigorous training for your body. That is, to continue with this analogy, if one's mathematical knowledge is limited to arithmetic, they may or may not have the mental strength to "bench press" 350+lbs (since a person can still be of very high intelligence and not have studied math) however, if a person's knowledge of mathematics extends to through modern Graduate school level, they definitely can "bench press" 350+lbs. since the nature of the material necessitates that level of strength or higher. Thus, one of the surest ways to get to that level (that we currently know of), is to study higher Maths (i.e. even though it is not requisite to know high levels of Math to be highly intelligent, if one does know high level Maths then they definitely are at a higher level of abstract reasoning by necessity--it is "push ups" for your brain/mind).

However, having that 'strength' still in no way guarantees that people will think independently--as these are separate skills/abilities that need to be developed as well (of which are only partially connected to each other).


3. @Athena

To explain the functional difference between independent thought and more calculator-type thought (although, the two are also inextricably bound), I think it best to continue with the analogy to athletics. For instance, let us take the example of jumping high:

Power = Force x Velocity

Now, in order to jump high, there is a simple equation relating how much 'limit strength' a person has and how fast it can be applied. When both of these figures are high, this is optimal. When one is high and the other lacking, it limits the range one is capable of. This is very similar to intellectual abilities, and why measures such as IQ do not necessarily correlate to general intelligence--as there is more to the equation. Now, Math through MA/MS helps train the 'computational power' aspect of general intelligence, much like weighted squats train 'limit strength'. However, in order to develop independent creative thought, this requires separate training much like jumping & sprinting exercises train the 'velocity' portion of physical power.

Then, this explains why people can have very distorted sense of their own intellectual abilities (as well as the abilities of others), much like physical abilities--as they may be focusing in on one aspect which is taken to be a complete measure while it is only partial. Intuitively, this is why it is trivial to think of people with very high 'computational/IQ type' intelligence, who are generally 'dumb', much like it is very easy to find big, strong people who are unable to jump high at all (or even terribly low). Likewise, people can think of those with low IQ-type intelligence who are 'smart', as one can think of thin, 'weak' people who do jump very high.

The educational system, as well as the mainstream job market, neglects 'independent, creative thought' as it relates to general intelligence; so, people often form very distorted views of who is & is not very 'intelligent'. Actually, people often have very distorted views about who is and is not very physical powerful also--although, in that case, it is at least on peoples 'radar' much more than with cognitive abilities.
xMathFanx is offline  
Old April 4th, 2018, 09:13 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by xMathFanx View Post
@imaginethat

There is a lot you said which I agree with, so I am quoting the area where we may not in order to further the discussion. I will do this by quoting a previous post of mine to Athena, from a separate thread on a related topic.

First, some preliminary thoughts--it is not that they vary entirely independently, rather it is logically quite possible that a 'computer' may be able to handle a much larger load over a very extended period of time compared to smaller order problems in the short term; which are partially (not fully) connected. Also, like computers, it is possible to be excellent at identifying patterns that are already known to exist, while have poor ability to see new patterns.

I quite seriously see this all the time as Math/Physics student--and it is highly frustrating. For instance, in many ways, I can relate to George Carlin's mind space more than many/most of my Sci./Tech. peers who are essentially consumed/absorbed into the Pop. Culture, thinking it (somehow) makes sense--even though they can also do Advanced Calculus, Quantum Mechanics, etc. etc. It is fascinating really--to think the same mind that is doing IQ 130-135 stuff also highly conforms to our Pop. Culture (which is borderline mentally disabled; slightly hyperbolic) is mind-boggling (and often very frustrating). The gap is so bad, I quiet seriously cannot even talk/relate to many of them--other than 'small talk' and HW problems, etc. I attend a 50 level school, though I have read accounts of people who attend schools like MIT--they say it is (obviously) way, way better than other environments, though there are still many people (as in a very sizeable chuck--say 50ish %, or possibly more) who are as I describe many of my classmates, though with a higher base IQ (and corresponding cognitive abilities). Again, this is not to diminish IQ, as it is giving important information--though, it is just part of the story.
Yes, we share the utter disbelief that people who test or would test out with a significantly higher than average IQ buy into pop culture, utterly mindless pop culture, like:
Kim Kardashian shares video of herself without foundation in must-see makeup tutorial

Kim Kardashian loves makeup so much that she ditched her foundation to show the difference it makes!

"Ok, so I took all my foundation off and you can really see how dark my under eye circles are and how crazy they look,” the cosmetics guru said in one clip on Instagram Stories and Snapchat.

Though she kept her eye makeup, the 37-year-old reality star was virtually fresh faced in the clip, showing off the must-see transformation to her millions of followers.
Aaaarrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhh

Quote:
So, yes, I do not doubt for a moment it has been difficult for you to relate to most people--that is an extremely common problem encountered by people with cognitive abilities that deviate from the norm significantly. In fact, 2 standard deviations has been the mark found where it becomes an (essentially) unbridgeable gap, as there is a massive gulf between the two people.
Age and experience help. I'm quite social and a born communicator, excelled as a journalist and teacher. My failing to overcome has been my assumption that everyone should get everything I get as quickly as I get it. Sounds a little weird to put it that way, but that's essentially true. And when they don't, my wondering "What's wrong with them?" when nothing's wrong.

I was blessed with a sharp and relentlessly curious mind. My third-grade science report was on Jupiter and its moons, along with atmospheric analysis (at the state of the art for back then), descriptions of the Galilean moons, and musings on the nature of the Great Red Spot, an oral report btw.

I can recall sharply the look of astonishment on Mrs. Kerr's face. Oh, and I've always loved an audience, , a trait passed with vigor to my oldest daughter.

Quote:

~snip~

Mathematics is still one of the best ways we know of to train abstract reasoning in that one needs to follow strict/rigorous lines of logical argumentation, identify a pattern, utilize strong mental visualization, assort the pattern into a working model, make swift and accurate computations, ect. ect.
My mathematical experience: Usually I understood mathematical laws and concepts, etc., before proving them. This began early on - with "word problems" and the "need" to "show my work - but became unmistakeable once geometric proofs were introduced.

[quote]It is essentially rigorous training for your brain/mind in a very similar way that lifting weights/jump rope/sprints/jumping exercises/ect. ect is rigorous training for your body. That is, to continue with this analogy, if one's mathematical knowledge is limited to arithmetic, they may or may not have the mental strength to "bench press" 350+lbs (since a person can still be of very high intelligence and not have studied math) however, if a person's knowledge of mathematics extends to through modern Graduate school level, they definitely can "bench press" 350+lbs. since the nature of the material necessitates that level of strength or higher. Thus, one of the surest ways to get to that level (that we currently know of), is to study higher Maths (i.e. even though it is not requisite to know high levels of Math to be highly intelligent, if one does know high level Maths then they definitely are at a higher level of abstract reasoning by necessity--it is "push ups" for your brain/mind). [/quote ]

I can accept that analogy. Allow me to add to it, please. Yes, strength training is useful. As an accomplished downhill extreme skier, it's good to know that should you have to push down the pedal, you have something there to tap, but in skiing, as in many sports, more is accomplished through nuance and finesse than brute strength. As I progressed as an extreme skier in my mid-40s I was fascinated by how easy extreme skiing is, how little brute force was required and in fact when skiing my best, no brute is required.

In fact, if while skiing I noticed that I was using brute force, that was a clue that I was skiing off-balance.

Mathematics are useful in disciplining the mind, push ups as you noted, but that only nourishes part of it. Crunching facts in isolation can be impressive, but the human mind's forte is both integration and abstraction, the search for insight and unconscious balance.

Quote:
~snip~
Now, in order to jump high, there is a simple equation relating how much 'limit strength' a person has and how fast it can be applied. When both of these figures are high, this is optimal. When one is high and the other lacking, it limits the range one is capable of. This is very similar to intellectual abilities, and why measures such as IQ do not necessarily correlate to general intelligence--as there is more to the equation. Now, Math through MA/MS helps train the 'computational power' aspect of general intelligence, much like weighted squats train 'limit strength'. However, in order to develop independent creative thought, this requires separate training much like jumping & sprinting exercises train the 'velocity' portion of physical power.
Yes, measures such as IQ do not necessarily correlate to general intelligence, but the exceptions tend to prove the rule.

Quote:
~snip~
The educational system, as well as the mainstream job market, neglects 'independent, creative thought' as it relates to general intelligence; so, people often form very distorted views of who is & is not very 'intelligent'. Actually, people often have very distorted views about who is and is not very physical powerful also--although, in that case, it is at least on peoples 'radar' much more than with cognitive abilities.
Indeed. Humankind tends to dismiss the value of "independent, creative thought" unless it leads to satisfying the love of money. Iow, independent, creative thought isn't of much use in leading to "making America great again" unless it satisfies the love of money in a culture focused on "price" rather than "cost."
Thanks from xMathFanx
imaginethat is offline  
Old April 4th, 2018, 09:29 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
xMathFanx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 955
@imaginethat

Do you have particular thoughts on people like George Carlin? Who, although may not score particular high on an IQ test, or be able to become an Engineer, are clearly quite intelligent--well beyond the 'average'. I often can find it easier to relate to people like this than many Engineers (and such) that I know--at least, in a number of areas. I really don't care if he can do technical material or not, there is clearly strong thought processes going on of which he is also confident of.
xMathFanx is offline  
Old April 4th, 2018, 10:25 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
xMathFanx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 955
@imaginethat

Also, were you already familiar with Chimp (projected) average IQ, or was that new info? Do you have any thoughts on it?
xMathFanx is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Discussion > Science and Technology

Tags
achievement, meaning, ranges



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Only federally funded voucher program has negative effect on student achievement foundit66 Education 28 May 4th, 2017 07:28 AM
colors have meaning webguy4 Christianity 16 October 12th, 2016 08:24 PM
The Meaning of Mr. Trump baloney_detector Americas 19 June 4th, 2016 05:34 AM
Science States Meaning while Art Expresses Meaning coberst Philosophy 0 July 27th, 2008 12:18 PM
This has major meaning to me? intangible child Religion 0 June 18th, 2007 10:27 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.