Very intelligent people make less effective leaders, according to their peers

[anon9798425]

@firemonkey

Except for those of us with spiky profiles. Where the sub test scores are more relevant than any overall measure of IQ.

I do accept that is not the case for the vast majority of people ie most don’t have spiky profiles.

Yes, that’s a good point. It’s not easy to interpret a spiky profile.

[anon1571434]

Nah. Personally I wouldn’t do it but it’s okay for me if others do it. Especially if I get a laugh out of it lol

[anon9798425]

@anon76219695

It was once accepted that the earth is flat. This test ‘measures’ some abilities but in many cases, these measurements are useless.

Honestly, when you compare modern psychology with medieval religious understandings of the cosmos, I don’t see the point of talking with you about this at all. I actually think I’d rather discuss global warming with Trump.

@anon76219695

These anecdotal examples are showing the disparity between IQ scores and one’s ability to live a fulfilling life.

And are completely irrelevant to what you just quoted.

[firemonkey]

@anon76219695

These anecdotal examples

There’s a danger in placing too much emphasis on anecdotal examples. They may, or may not,deviate from a larger evidence base.

[anon9798425]

By the way, you should read up on this. It’s an extremely well-replicated, significant and important construct if you want to understand IQ and intelligence. There’s a section (practical validity) on how it predicts life outcomes.

g factor (psychometrics)

[firemonkey]

@anon9798425

Yes, that’s a good point. It’s not easy to interpret a spiky profile.

I have heard it said that the most accurate measure of intelligence in such a situation is the higher of the two be it VIQ or PIQ. Whether that is true or not I wouldn’t like to say.

[anon76219695]

I should get some sleep…
g factor makes sense. but experience and natural tendencies may be very impact full as well.

@anon9798425

I don’t see the point of talking with you about this at all.

It seems like you are avoiding the main point.

@anon9798425

And are completely irrelevant to what you just quoted.

Yes, I am disorganized and I struggle with expressing myself in English but the point is still the same, my point is that humans do not yet have the tools to quantify intelligence in a meaningful way. that was what I was trying to say. And it seems like I am wrong, because for their needs, they kinda do.

[Moonwalker]

General Intelligence and 5 Factors of IQ: Definitions and Tests

[anon76219695]

And still, I do think that current tests are just not good enough to represent effectively one’s practical ability to solve problems efficiently and understand and manipulate complex systems to gain a meaning full advantage, which I believe should be included in the measurement.
Maybe the extremely “intelligent” woman in the article were just too good at superficial calculations, had a good working memory and maybe some other stuff. but they did lack some meaningful abilities ,which shall be represented by one’s intelligence, that aren’t simply measured in these tests.
I hope I’ve expressed myself well enough now @anon9798425

[anon9798425]

Yes, you have. I understand where you’re coming from now. I also completely agree that IQ tests are very limited, and are only redeemed by their usefulness. They are approximations of intelligence, and useful approximations, but not very good ones.

[Moonwalker]

Best of all iq tests are fun and easy!