There was a change in the 4th edition, an introductory essay by Ian Hacking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Hacking
Don't know what was different in the earlier editions. If there is a problem with various editions existing, complaints should probably be addressed to University of Chicago Press.
Don't know what was different in the earlier editions. If there is a problem with various editions existing, complaints should probably be addressed to University of Chicago Press.
I see. As a conspiracy theorist I always liked that universities often used the same textbook with editions seemingly increasing in number every year. That way students couldn't easily sell their $200 textbooks to the next years students taking the same course. Great for book store revenues (and sometimes kickbacks).
And of course the publishers wanted a 2012 edition. Can't have 20th century thinkers leaving their mark (or meaning of life) in the 21st century.
(Where is Neitzche when you need him?)
And of course the publishers wanted a 2012 edition. Can't have 20th century thinkers leaving their mark (or meaning of life) in the 21st century.
(Where is Neitzche when you need him?)
Last edited:
That's the idea in the movie "Idiocracy".
Do reproduce, dumbs only and we see the result a couple of centuries later.
It's mainly anecdotal, there are a few studies that confirm it, however one study that disproves it.
First you need to define intelligence which is in no way an easy task in my view.
Anecdotal evidence for sure: i've got a bunch of 'gifted' people (in french they are called HP- High Potential- and defined to be IQ bigger than 130 mixed with high empathy) around me (and i'm in contact with even more) and all have kids when adults.
Funny thing is most of them don't think they are more intelligent than average until they are detected as such.
Anecdotal evidence for sure: i've got a bunch of 'gifted' people (in french they are called HP- High Potential- and defined to be IQ bigger than 130 mixed with high empathy) around me (and i'm in contact with even more) and all have kids when adults.
Funny thing is most of them don't think they are more intelligent than average until they are detected as such.
Are there specific studies you are referring to? Also, not clear what you mean by 'confirm' and or 'disproves,' as those are not usually used as conclusions in studies, particularly the latter term. It would be more expected to have results specified statistically, as well as information on such things as to how the intelligence of samples/populations was determined.
Like people far enough on the “spectrum” that women wouldn’t touch them with a ten foot pole, or “Not if you were the last man on Earth”?
Or that some are intelligent enough to figure out that the world is doomed anyway?
Of course, tongue-in-cheek, but with just enough truth to it…..
It seems many intelligence tests are being done on the internet... on those click-on type search engines. One I recently noticed went something like "only those with an IQ over 130 can recognize these actors" or something like that. It would seem that ones IQ would jump dramatically in taking the test twice.
We only have one child... a girl... but she was accidental... so I would think that should reflect a higher IQ on my part (and her mothers I suppose)
than having had her deliberately. Bear in mind I love her just as if she was a boy.
Low birthrates are an issue in a number of countries, but its not tied to intelligence per se:
https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/why-european-women-are-saying-no-having-more-babies
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1420441111
https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/why-european-women-are-saying-no-having-more-babies
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1420441111
That is constantly changing based on some new epiphony. A great watch if you have time is Terrance McKenna's "Terrance McKenna's last interview", He for one, has come to the conclusion that the universe itself is an organism with a definitive end game. And the universe is mantled fractally, as in Universe-galaxy- solar system, planet, cells, etc..., that they all have a similar form - core, outer.. Terrance discovered that the universe undergoing "concrescence" described as an ever moving to greater complexity and that the final state of concrescence is "the Esckaton" which is a state of final complexity (the last thing) where every point in the entire universe is connected or adjacent to all other points. Human history is merely a partial but essential stage of that final destination. But, humans are at the spearhead of this motion toward that final complexity. We have gone as far as we can in our physical bio-chemical status and the universe is pulling us toward a greater experience of complexity - seeking meaning and progression that is beyond the physical body. He claims that we are not being driven by the laws of physics and nature but are being pulled (attractors) by a concrescence seeking universe in order to arrive at the Esckaton. Its a hard listen, takes some committed focus to follow what he says.
But, ha, I can't argue with him! He's done way more homework on the subject than I .
Best,
Phil D
But, ha, I can't argue with him! He's done way more homework on the subject than I .
Best,
Phil D
It seems more of a hard believe than a hard listen... as someone seemingly asserting having found the meaning of life... and also to its end point. What is the meaning of life after the "Esckaton"? (nice name by the way) Does he have a chapter 2?
Anyone having stating "Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around" seems can't be argued with... nor his followers. I guess the patent rights on the animals invented by plants ran out millenniums ago.
Anyone having stating "Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around" seems can't be argued with... nor his followers. I guess the patent rights on the animals invented by plants ran out millenniums ago.
Those are quizz not test.
IQ tests are named WAIS and can only be meaningfull if done under supervision of a psychologist ( because there is the test in itself but an observation/interpretation from the Psychologist).
130 is a treshold, why it is often seen ( less than 2% people are above this iirc).
Makes you feel 'special' to be part of the 'club' ...for people not knowing the issues associated to this kind of IQ results: it's not true for all people but HP as i defined previously have differently structured mind ( tree thinking ) and as such are seen as 'atypical' for the others. Can lead to some real social issues, difficulty to feel being part of the 'human being' group, all nice things to deal with.
Not all high IQ have this issues though.
I always find girls to be smarter. You are lucky one. 😉
At three she was smarter than me... ( I couldn't tell myself... her mom told me)
By the way, if a "psychologist" is doing any meaningful "observation/interpretation" what is their IQ? It seems it should be above 130.
By the way, if a "psychologist" is doing any meaningful "observation/interpretation" what is their IQ? It seems it should be above 130.
Please apologize it might be lost in translation,
What i meant was the Pshycologist take a look at how you react during test and from this observation have the possibility to compensate for things. There own IQ as no value as there is an evaluation grid iirc ( WAIS is serious and international procedure).
By the way we have ranking between Psychologist in here, the one you see in this case are phD and known as Psychiatrist in there ( highest ranking).
What i meant was the Pshycologist take a look at how you react during test and from this observation have the possibility to compensate for things. There own IQ as no value as there is an evaluation grid iirc ( WAIS is serious and international procedure).
By the way we have ranking between Psychologist in here, the one you see in this case are phD and known as Psychiatrist in there ( highest ranking).
I'll agree that anecdotal "evidence" is a crude measure, something to inspire further research into a subject or theory, rather than a conclusion in itself. I think you have more intelligent aquantances than myself. I'll also agree that measuring IQ is rather difficult, a lot of people confuse a good memory with "cleverness".
As a child I used to equate success (success as defined by modern materialistic standards) as a measure of IQ, but I've since realised how foolish that was.
I was generally thinking of people with an IQ of 150, in regard to no having kids, but then I've only (knowingly) met someone who's scored over 150. I'm too scared to test mine.
That's only one of the normally accepted tests. Also CTMM, Stanford-Binet, Cattell, etc.
Yes you are right Mark there is many ways to evaluate IQ, but i can only tell about the one i know of.
And that is why i'm sceptical about them too: WAIS is ok to evaluate HP but they are one kind of a number of possible 'stereotype case', other 'stereotype' (and variants) exist.
Anyway it depend of the definition of inteligence you choose...
I don't think i have more intelligent aquantance than anyone: most of my friend you would not think they are 130 IQ (and more) if they don't tell you ( which they for most don't talk about as it is not something important to them, they most often seek to be 'normal' or accepted as such).
It is obvious on some situation though and not on things related to 'intelligence' but on reactions on some things in life...
It's just life made me in contact with them. And i have other close 'regular' friends too i like as much and are not high IQ at all on test. That doesn't stop them to be highly talented in my view.
Memory can be a symptom of high IQ but not always... there is an infinity of variation around the theme.
I've got an Einstein level friend (scored 148!): we had our kid in same school, teacher's once told me this guy was stupid... because he doesn't behave as 'regular' people. I laughed a lot but kept it for myself.
In the end if you don't have social issue, thinking you have a mental disease or had been detected... who cares? Test can help define some issues you can face related to being 'atypical' but otherwise i don't see the point.
Seen some parents of HP comparing the levels reached by their kids and thoughts it was just plain silly.
Poor kids.
And that is why i'm sceptical about them too: WAIS is ok to evaluate HP but they are one kind of a number of possible 'stereotype case', other 'stereotype' (and variants) exist.
Anyway it depend of the definition of inteligence you choose...
I don't think i have more intelligent aquantance than anyone: most of my friend you would not think they are 130 IQ (and more) if they don't tell you ( which they for most don't talk about as it is not something important to them, they most often seek to be 'normal' or accepted as such).
It is obvious on some situation though and not on things related to 'intelligence' but on reactions on some things in life...
It's just life made me in contact with them. And i have other close 'regular' friends too i like as much and are not high IQ at all on test. That doesn't stop them to be highly talented in my view.
Memory can be a symptom of high IQ but not always... there is an infinity of variation around the theme.
I've got an Einstein level friend (scored 148!): we had our kid in same school, teacher's once told me this guy was stupid... because he doesn't behave as 'regular' people. I laughed a lot but kept it for myself.
In the end if you don't have social issue, thinking you have a mental disease or had been detected... who cares? Test can help define some issues you can face related to being 'atypical' but otherwise i don't see the point.
Seen some parents of HP comparing the levels reached by their kids and thoughts it was just plain silly.
Poor kids.
There is a misconception about IQ test.
It was originally designed to evaluate retarded people. A guy with IQ 100 has a mental age equal to his physical age.
A 18 years old guy with IQ 80 has a mental age of 18 x 0.8.....14.4 year old.
IQ over 100, for adults is non sense, it was not designed for that.
Of course it was great to tutte that general Swartzcopf had a 140 IQ.
On line IQ tests are click baits.
In my opinion real intelligence is the ability to survive one's environment.
Here, I am amazed by a recent news.
Four children who survived 40 days in the Colombian Amazon jungle, aged 13, 8, 5, 1.
It was originally designed to evaluate retarded people. A guy with IQ 100 has a mental age equal to his physical age.
A 18 years old guy with IQ 80 has a mental age of 18 x 0.8.....14.4 year old.
IQ over 100, for adults is non sense, it was not designed for that.
Of course it was great to tutte that general Swartzcopf had a 140 IQ.
On line IQ tests are click baits.
In my opinion real intelligence is the ability to survive one's environment.
Here, I am amazed by a recent news.
Four children who survived 40 days in the Colombian Amazon jungle, aged 13, 8, 5, 1.
So, if you're around 65 and have an IQ of 140 then you have the mental age of... hmm... a 90 year old?
You trying to tell me that I have dementia already?
You trying to tell me that I have dementia already?