Intelligence Quotient (idea)
Return to Intelligence Quotient (idea)
THE POVERTY OF THE OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT, [IQ]
'What is [Intelligence Quotient |intelligence]?' Asked Marmaduke, at one of the permitted [interval]s.
([Jack Vance], "Starking")
What Is Intelligence?
If intelligence was to be measured, thought some, it must first be defined.
Perhaps taking their lead from the [operational definition]s of [Special Relativity |the theory of relativity] - for example, [Moving clocks run slow |time] is what it says on the face of a [clock] - one [definition] was:
A person's intelligence is the score they get on an intelligence test.
Defining [Big Lie |mental] penetration like this seems the only way a scientific status may be lent to a measurement of IQ. And it is profoundly important to claim scientific-ness: Only then is the agreement of everyone coerced:
"You have to agree with us - this is science. You may no more disagree with this than disagree with gravity and jump, thereby, unharmed over a cliff." ([Social Control - David Hume and the Source of All Power (idea)])
[Reversing] the Marking [Scheme]
Couldn't the following [Pemberton's maneuver |maneuver] destroy the scientific legitimacy of IQ [test]s?
[Scientific Method |Derive a Contradiction]
It therefore seems possible to prove the same person to be a prodigy or a [cretin] without breaking the definition; dooming IQ testing to non-science [status].(See: [The Mismeasure of Man].)