Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

THE LENS OF IQ

G is an average of the two abilities (of perhaps eighty) of the human mind that are the most correspondent with demonstrated life long ability to learn and adapt quickly. All other abilities scale in correspondence with those two. It is arguable that we should split this number: verbal(describing)/spatial(modeling) to gain a higher degree of precision. And it is arguable that we should round down to the nearest 5 points, but there is NO DEBATE in the scientific community over the correspondence of G with the rate of learning and adaptability demonstrated in reality. EXCEPT that personality defects, and life’s shocks, can further diminish the potential. And accumulating general knowledge and stoic discipline will allow you to maximize your potential. But the fact remains, that at every 15 points of difference we are very different ‘breeds’ of human. And at 30 points of difference we are analogous to different species.

Conversely, the problem facing those with lesser abilities, is the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which people with lower intelligence demonstrably overestimate their abilities. While people with higher intelligence, encountering the same problem, will question their abilities.

So, I would not argue with a baboon, any more than I would argue anything of substance with someone with a <100 IQ. It’s not so much that they’re stupid but they demonstrate an absurd overconfidence in their understanding and opinion that insulates them in a bubble of inescapable ignorance.

THE MODEL

I tend to look at IQ as the center of a lens of capability that slides up and down the IQ index. This lens is frosted around the edges. if others are too relatively dim it is hard to understand them. If others are too relatively abstract it is hard to understand them. But in general we can see seven points either direction pretty clearly, and 15 points either direction if we work at it. But beyond that it’s hard to make out more than vague shapes.