Posted by: sharkbok (11607 posts)
May 18, 2020, 15:22
@Ceradynce, somewhere along the line you seem to think the IQ test is a failure because it is not objective as a result of the frame of reference.
For some reason you seem to think that you have the ability to see inside my head and know why I say things and why I hold certain views.
I have never said that the tests failed. I questioned the value of using the tests, especially what you want to use it for. and I told you exactly why. If you don’t believe me then tough shit.
I asked the question, and I’ll ask it again. What is the use of an IQ test? What do you want to achieve with it? The only one who really have a use for an IQ test is a clinical psychologist who uses it as a first step indicator. It is often used as a diagnostic tool for kids with behavioural issues. The starting point for diagnosing autism, ADHD, etc is usually an IQ test. You do know that quite often kids, with autism, score very high in IQ tests, don’t you? Kids with severe learning disabilities, on the other hand, get very low IQ test scores.
Do you know the scales on the IQ table at all? Do you know without Google at which point you are considered to be of average intelligence, what is classified as severe mental disability, what is classified as gifted, etc, etc.
You have come up through thumb sucking with the idea of 100 (IIRC) as the qualification norm for voter eligibility. 80-114, is classified as average. You want to disqualify people of average intelligence from voting. Do you know that around 30% of children with autism are average to above average on IQ? Are you mad?
The parts that are the frame of reference are biased to Western society, or modern society. However, some parts are purely mathematical and consistent in any culture.
You are accentuating your ignorance in virtually every single argument you throw out. A proper comprehensive IQ test, once again, is a total battery of tests covering a whole spectrum of dimensions. You just do not understand, or maybe you are too stubborn and do not want to understand. The questions has to be conveyed in such a way that the test subject fully understand the questions.
I will try to explain this to you. Back in the day, communication between black and white was very difficult. I can guarantee you that, should we now both have been able to be transported back to 1970, and be put in among black people at the time. I would be able to communicate more easily than you. Take note. I do not say easily. I say more easily. In those days you would explain to a black guy how you wanted something done. At the end you would, for instance say do you understand? In his language and idiom, that he has translated in his head, would be: “Do you hear me”. He would say “Yes”. Meaning : Yes, I hear you”. You hear: “Yes, I understand”. He would go away and do what he think you wanted him to do. You come back and crap all over him, thinking he is stupid. The right way, after explaining what you wanted, would have been to ask him to explain to you what he needed to do.
It was the same with the tests. You needed to be 100% sure that the right message got across.
Once again. The tests did not do justice to the blacks. It would have been an even bigger discrimination to use it on them to determine voter eligibility. I said that immediately following your post, suggesting that.
Ever since you’ve been dancing around trying to persuade me that, despite you not having a clue about IQ testing, that I am an idiot who just refuse to agree with you because I’m trying to be funny.
However, it would stand to reason that a coloniser is smarter than those being colonised, .....
You are getting more and more ridiculous by the minute. That is the biggest lot crap so far. Nothing says the one is smarter than the other and your assertion that the whites (the colonisers) was smarter than the blacks(the colonised) as a fucking insult to the blacks. I’ve been trying to tell you this all along. The blacks scored lower on the IQ tests because the freakin’ tests discriminated against them unfairly. That is why your idea of using IQ as a norm to determine voter eligibility is outrages.
In addition, you have still not commented on another point that I made. You would have had to sell this bullshit to people who have clearly declared their main goal of “One man. One vote”. Your idea would never fly. There first comeback would be: “You want to deny my voting rights based on a test designed by white men for white men? You can go fuck yourself”. They would have run straight to the UN and the entire world would be jumping down our throats.
......otherwise it would be the other way around. Just like the Vikings took over the UK, or the Romans etc because at the time they were smarter.
More bullshit.
Just like if Aliens arrived tomorrow, they got here first so it could be assumed they are smarter- at least as a statistical average.
Hahaha. Now your dragging in imaginary aliens. Are you going to run IQ tests on them as well? Which one do you think would work the best? Wechsler or Stanford-Binet?
The purpose of colonisation is to take over a country. By today's moral code it would be considered illegal, however social mores change over centuries.
And then some more of the same.
So an IQ test is probably not entirely fair.
Only probably. After all of this, do you still think that there may be a slight chance that it may be fair?
However, it is a better option than Apartheid .....
And out pops the ignorance again. Intelligence Quotient is a psychological diagnostic tool.
Apartheid is a socio-political system of governance.
This is like saying gumboots is a better options than an ejection seat.
....as it at least identified the smarter individuals within the colonised race and then make an attempt to integrate them into society and give them a western/modern frame of reference. Over time they have children and the middle class continues to grow.
And on and on and on and on.
Apartheid just destroyed any idea of a frame of reference.
And there we go. You heard the term frame of reference and you patched on to it. You are talking shit mate. If anything their frame of reference broadened under Apartheid but sadly not enough. But, once again. The frame of reference would not have been important had the black academia gotten out of their corners and assisted in developing tests for the black kids. So, clinically, they were as much to blame than the Apartheid govt.
So it is a transition process that could take hundreds of years. It would break down racial barriers - at least in the middle class.
Hahaha. And then you come up with this beauty. You are shitting all over the NP for not getting it right in 46 years.
The goal, of course, is also to not allow the colonised population to outvote the colonials, as that would defeat the purpose of colonising a country.
America only used to allow other races to vote if they could write. That is similar to an IQ test as it demonstrates at least average intelligence (at least in that time).
Yadda yadda yadda. Being able to write is a far cry from scoring high average in a “foreign” IQ test. You do know that “One man, one vote, only really came to light I’m the USA in the mid 1960s.