Is it Ethical to raise everyone's IQ on this Planet to 180?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by HawkI, Feb 1, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    I did when I was 15. Doesn't mean much today.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. HawkI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    335
    Thank you river for getting this thread back on track.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Sure. I got something above 135 as well. All it really means is that you are operating at a grade 7 level while in grade 5

    This is what the number literally means: 140 is to 100 as 7 is to 5.

    Frankly, I think a better measure of my ability to learn is that I skipped Gr.4 - going straight from Gr.3 to Gr. 5.
    (Unfortunately, it meant all my classmates were a year older than me from then on. Including the chicks.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    ...
     
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Haha. I saw that!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Yes, of course it is. For some. The OP claims he knows the secret to genius intelligence. How can that not be a brag about his own intelligence?

    For others, it's simply pointing out that specious and artificial measurements of intelligence are pretty worthless i.e. not much to brag about at all. I've never met anyone who didn't have an IQ above 120 when they were a kid.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
  9. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    The short answer is: as long as you're not forcing anything on anyone, there is no ethical dilemma about giving anyone who wants it the opportunity to improve themselves.

    But I think the OP knows that already. Which is why this whole thread is a vanity act.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
    HawkI likes this.
  10. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Perhaps , but really to take someone with a IQ of 100 >120 , to 180 is a huge intellect change . Its not something to be flipant about , not to me anyway . To an IQ of 140 to 150 to start would be better and safer I think .
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    It seems pointless to discuss practicalities and safety limits without even having a method described by which it might be done.

    For example, if the method were using chemicals and electrical shocks, then the safety threshold would be "don't do it at all".

    Since the OP seems to hint that all you have to do is read his book and somehow you'll suddenly do quadratic equations in your head and solve logic puzzles faster, I suspect it's pretty early to suppose he's got an idea how to improving one's IQ at all, let alone by how much.

    Besides, it's Hawki. This thread's mostly just for fun.
     
  12. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Indeed to all .

    Interesting idea though . And the ramifications .
     
  13. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    Yeah, I wouldn't go so far as to declare the various IQ tests utterly and completely worthless, but they don't tell you a whole lot. And making determinations based upon said scores can create it's own unique set of complications. (Not to mention racial, cultural, class, gender biases intrinsic to any such test.)

    Personally, I know that I am not a complete idiot; yet, at the same time, I also know that I am nowhere near as "smart" as various tests (several IQ test, SATs, GREs, etc.) would seem to suggest. (I suppose there is a remote possibility that I actually am, and I am simply far more lazy than I have always thought, but I think that most unlikely.)
     
    river likes this.
  14. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Omg, you ninja!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Oops wrong post I’ve quoted. lol
     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  15. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I think Likely . Lazy ? some think more than do . Some of Us has to Think .
     
  16. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    A quote often attributed to Woody Allen: 90 percent of success is simply showing up.

    Sure, that can be read in the Malcolm Gladwell sense, putting in one's due diligence over the course of time, but it can also be read as, well, simply showing up. (Please try to resist the urge to speculate upon my preferred reading of that quote.) Insofar as our inability to reliability measure and assess "intelligence" in any truly meaningful sense, we also cannot wholly discount the role that perceptions play in the assessment of intelligence. I mean, show up enough to become a regular commentator on Fox news, and you'll have nearly 100 million people thinking you're a freakin' genius.

    There's also certain highly contentious approaches to, ostensibly, dramatically improve one's grokking capabilities. Jacques Lacan was, rather infamously, a strong proponent of the obscurantism approach--a sort of synthesis of something akin to Zen koans and cryptic crosswords. My take, Lacan believed that via obscurantism, the fruits for ploughing through such can far surpass the understanding one might glean from a more straightforward approach. Either that, or he believed that his obscurantist prose made him appear all that more "intelligent." Possibly a bit of both.
    ____________________
    I can't fully explain why I find this thread so intriguing, but I do feel that it's got potential to be another of those "I can see subatomic particles with my naked eyes" type threads. You gotta sift through a lot of crap in those threads, but there's enough gems there to make the effort worthwhile.
     
    river likes this.
  17. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    I was an unusually small child and appeared much younger than my actual age, and I was quite emotionally underdeveloped, so do you know what "they" did? They kept me with kids of my age, and sat me at a desk in corner where I worked, self-directed, on materials a few grade levels advanced. This went on for years. Fortunately, I would also spend a few hours of the school day in a separate gifted program classroom.

    I really don't have to think terribly hard on how I became such a maladjusted individual.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    I think part of Hawki's charm as a contributor is that he doesn't take himself too seriously, so that when he posts, he isn't rabid about where the thread is going. That gives others a chance to wax somewhat fanciful without feeling they are in front of a jury of science Nazis. He has a talent for being disarming that way.
     
    parmalee likes this.
  19. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Nooooo one takes themselves seriously on Sci-Forums, what??

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    lol You are far from a 'complete' idiot. What I admire about you and a few others on here in your posts...omg, you are thorough. I'm a bit lazy at times with my ''rebuttals,'' but have learned much on here. Ya'll take debating to Olympic levels.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    I agree. And even amongst the silliness, there's some genuinely thought-provoking stuff here. I'm generally more partial to science fiction, as opposed to science fiction proper--you know, PK Dick, JG Ballard and the like. And, like you note, without the scrutiny that more proper science-oriented are apt to invite, there's a lot of room for freeform brainstorming.
     
  22. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    That's funny. I actually perceive you as generally being more thorough--and, perhaps more importantly, keeping to the topic at hand. I've always had a bit of a problem, in that respect: I digress... and I digress... and I DIGRESS. I could try and justify such by saying that I'm adopting one of Stephen Jay Gould's approaches--talking around and around, and gradually honing in on the topic of focus--and, yeah, I do do that, but often enough, rather sloppily. (With more academic writing, or stuff intended for publication in some form, I'm a bit more diligent on that.)
     
  23. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    Translating thought to action has often presented somewhat a challenge to me--but mostly with respect to matters of a more "intellectual" nature. Character flaw? Personality disorder? I dunno. But I do think that laziness is an enormous factor (for me).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page