Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Is this a clever thing to say about women's IQ?
By Tony Halpin, Education Editor, The Times

HALF the population will dismiss this story, but a study claims that the cleverest people are much more likely to be men than women.

Men are more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, making them better suited for "tasks of high complexity", according to the authors of a paper due to be published in the British Journal of Psychology.

Genetic differences in intelligence between the sexes helped to explain why many more men than women won Nobel Prizes or became chess grandmasters, the study by Paul Irwing and Professor Richard Lynn concluded.

They showed that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rise. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, a level typical for people with first-class degrees.

When scores rose to 155, a level associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman.

Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, said that he was uncomfortable with the findings. But he added that the evidence was clear despite the insistence of many academics that there were "no meaningful sex differences" in levels of intelligence.

"For personal reasons I would like to believe that men and women are equal, and broadly that's true. But over a period of time the evidence in favour of biological factors has become stronger and stronger," he said.

"I have been dragged in a direction that I don't particularly like, but it would be sensible if the debate was based on what we pretty much know to be the case."

The findings from the study involving 24,000 students will intensify a battle of the sexes that was triggered last week by Michael Buerk, the BBC newscaster, who complained that "life is now being lived according to women's rules". He said that men had been reduced to little more than sperm-donors because of the female dominance of society.

Professor Lynn, a Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, is no stranger to inflammatory conclusions as the author of a number of publications arguing that there are differences in intelligence between racial groups.

He published a controversial study in 2003 that identified a clear correlation between the levels of prosperity in 60 countries and the average IQ of their populations.

Professor Lynn argued in a letter to The Psychologist this month that the differences between the sexes were explained by a link between IQ and brain size. He said: "Men have larger brains than women by about 10 per cent and larger brains confer greater brain power, so men must necessarily be on average more intelligent than women."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm interested to hear whether people (particularly women) agree or disagree with this study, and whether people think these findings are plausible?

schmoll
IQ tests are generaly unfair anyway.

oh..and brain size have nothing to do with intelligence. look at gorilla.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Is this a clever thing to say about women's IQ?
By Tony Halpin, Education Editor, The Times

HALF the population will dismiss this story, but a study claims that the cleverest people are much more likely to be men than women.

Men are more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, making them better suited for "tasks of high complexity", according to the authors of a paper due to be published in the British Journal of Psychology.

Genetic differences in intelligence between the sexes helped to explain why many more men than women won Nobel Prizes or became chess grandmasters, the study by Paul Irwing and Professor Richard Lynn concluded.

They showed that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rise. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, a level typical for people with first-class degrees.

When scores rose to 155, a level associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman.

Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, said that he was uncomfortable with the findings. But he added that the evidence was clear despite the insistence of many academics that there were "no meaningful sex differences" in levels of intelligence.

"For personal reasons I would like to believe that men and women are equal, and broadly that's true. But over a period of time the evidence in favour of biological factors has become stronger and stronger," he said.

"I have been dragged in a direction that I don't particularly like, but it would be sensible if the debate was based on what we pretty much know to be the case."

The findings from the study involving 24,000 students will intensify a battle of the sexes that was triggered last week by Michael Buerk, the BBC newscaster, who complained that "life is now being lived according to women's rules". He said that men had been reduced to little more than sperm-donors because of the female dominance of society.

Professor Lynn, a Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, is no stranger to inflammatory conclusions as the author of a number of publications arguing that there are differences in intelligence between racial groups.

He published a controversial study in 2003 that identified a clear correlation between the levels of prosperity in 60 countries and the average IQ of their populations.

Professor Lynn argued in a letter to The Psychologist this month that the differences between the sexes were explained by a link between IQ and brain size. He said: "Men have larger brains than women by about 10 per cent and larger brains confer greater brain power, so men must necessarily be on average more intelligent than women."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm interested to hear whether people (particularly women) agree or disagree with this study, and whether people think these findings are plausible?



Yep.

off course men are smarter............geeeesh as that wasn`t common knowledge

Originally posted by Clovie
schmoll
IQ tests are generaly unfair anyway.

oh..and brain size have nothing to do with intelligence. look at gorilla.



w00t men are smarter then women but keep in mind men, if a woman takes of her shirt, you become as dumb as rock and you all know this

Originally posted by Leo.M


w00t men are smarter then women but keep in mind men, if a woman takes of her shirt, you become as dumb as rock and you all know this


I think you mean as hard as a rock.

IQ tests generally have more logical questions than any other type and it's already documented that male brains are better suited to logic and females are better suited to common sense. If the IQ tests were able to incorporate more questions geared towards common sense then the results may well be reversed.

Originally posted by BackFire
I think you mean as hard as a rock.

yes yes, that too

Originally posted by Corran
IQ tests generally have more logical questions than any other type and it's already documented that male brains are better suited to logic and females are better suited to common sense. If the IQ tests were able to incorporate more questions geared towards common sense then the results may well be reversed.

thats true.

Originally posted by BackFire
I think you mean as hard as a rock.



a saying thats true in several different ways

WOMEN SUCK

I can name at least 20 men(boys) on this board alone whos intelligence can not compete with mine, at any level.

any level???? ok Norwegian History

Originally posted by finti
any level???? ok Norwegian History VIKINGS!!!

sowwie

Originally posted by finti
any level???? ok Norwegian History

Don't be a hater girlfriend, mhm! *snap*

you aint up for the challenge, the Danish influence on the Nordic countries the last 500 years, cultural ,economical and religious

Norwegian History and intelligence dont acturly have anything to do with eachother, intelligence and Knowleage is completely diffrent, knowing say all the capitals or maybe all the top 100 highest mountains has very little to do with any sort of intelligence.

How odd, I was just watching a program about this very subject. I can't actually recall what the show was, which kind of answers the question posed, but it was about genius children. The show examined children who seem to have been born with inate abilities, such as a proclivity for math and science, or gifts for understanding and producing music, playing the piano at age five, etc. And on the whole, these kids were males more often than females.

I don't think, however, that means that men are more intelligent than women, or have any more or less capacity to learn or apply that knowledge. Also, I think that the inequities in the roles of the two genders in society has lent itself to more men being discovered with the special gifts the show mentioned.

One interesting thing I did notice during teh show, was that a lot of these child prodigies were first generation Americans. Their parents were, more often than not, immigrants.

she said at any levels and knowledge of different subjects makes up part of your intelligence

Originally posted by finti
she said at any levels and knowledge of different subjects makes up part of your intelligence

Don't confuse education with intelligence no2

Originally posted by Corran
IQ tests generally have more logical questions than any other type and it's already documented that male brains are better suited to logic and females are better suited to common sense.

'Common sense' is rooted in logic.

Thats true as Victor says, like 'Common sense' says that you cannot jump from a building to another cause they are 40feet from each other, here is a good page to see all the intellegence fields.

http://www.accelerated-learning.net/multiple.htm#bod

your ability to pick up what you learn is a part of your intelligence

Women are more recpetive to emotions and empathy.
Men better establish information and knowledge.

It's not set in stone, but that's ussualy how it works. This is why men do better with routine jobs, like office work and hard labour. Where as women can do well enough in more stressful settings such as doctor work.. The woman annatomy was made to handle the stresses of multi-tasking, the male annatomy was intended to get simple things done in large qunatity.

Gee xmark......I thought you were a nice guy......guess not....

Hmmmmm intelligence.......I never do well at tests..like that...I think too abstract.....they're flawed for people like me.. cause I'm more intelligent then some guys I know.....and besides that...Women are usually more creative....

Originally posted by debbiejo
and besides that...Women are usually more creative....
There you go, women adheve to the more femmenine aspects of God. Men are not smarter, men are just differant, we process information differantly and extract it in a foreighn way.

I wish people would stop implying that one has to be better then the other simply cause of differance, this isn't a contest..

I don't see any evidence that women are more creative, if anything the opposite appears to be true.

This is my personal opinion, but it is based upon observation of various 'creative' media.

Keep in mind that IQ tests actually only test a very small portion of one's intelligence.

(I'm still proud of my IQ score, though )

I'd say it's a contest

I agree with Finti on the knowlegde/intelligence subject.

You can define intelligence simply as the "ability to comprehend" or something similar, but if you don't actually know anything, you're quite dumb.

ulven???? watch out for the shepherd they dont wear stone slings these days

There was a book printed several years ago that touched on a topic about intelligence. I believe it was called the Bell Curve and it related to intelligence between different races........

I believe that anyone that has taken a full battery IQ test and not just a paper test can say that men and women have a very good shot at scoring equally assuming that there is a large enough number of participants and spread of age and gender.

So even if it were true that women scored lower on IQ tests on average they will still always have a "leg up" on us........maybe even two

Mmm, also keep in mind the Bodily intellegence, just look at the sports, soccer, baseball, basketball, american football, running, marathon and sprinting, I mean men have better results on almust all the sports, so we deffently have the edge on that one

the Logical-Mathematical Intelligence also, there are many more men that have made breakthoughs there, Einstein, and Tesla are great exsamples, the guy that invented the rockets also, I dont know about any woman that have made such breakthough as those have

Yes, on paper we seem better. Better physiques, better progress, but I ask you.. who's the one responsible for the better man to begin with?

A woman. Behind every great man, lies a woman.

Besides, we can't judge by scientific geniouses. True men might be better suited for sports and hunting, but women could be just as smart maybe even smarter on a study basis. We don't know. Only in the past hundred years have women been given the freedoms to fully excell in what they believe they were destined to do..

And rather then use that freedom to become scientists and astronaughts, they much like men, have degenerated into playing the beta-role in following someone else's words. Working in cubicles doing nothing or simply going through life getting by on sex and drugs. This is yet again how the devil (Not litteraly THE devil, but I don't know what else to call this hive-mind of destruction..) keeps us down. Keeping us from evolving into a super powerd being capable of discovery and enlightenment.. Because you'd rather argue like children who is better, instead of using the gifts God gave you to make life better..

hmm Women have made a great deal of social changes and at the end of the day in a society like ours that says alot.

Anyway it is an interesting topic its just I am always cynical of the scientists that do research like this.......I mean whats "their agenda?"

Women have periods.

Originally posted by Clovie
schmoll
IQ tests are generaly unfair anyway.

oh..and brain size have nothing to do with intelligence. look at gorilla.

rationalizing

BackFire :quote:Women have periods:quote:

yes beackfire and sometimes periods don't always come at the end of a sentance

Originally posted by Lana
Keep in mind that IQ tests actually only test a very small portion of one's intelligence.

(I'm still proud of my IQ score, though )

more rationalizing...!

Originally posted by BackFire
Women have periods.
Being sickly, and being smart enough to ask trying to invision what one feels like, I can see why women act alot differant during a period.

I don't know if you've had hemroids before, but they hurt like a *****. And you bleed out the ass. That's the first half of the period.

The other half is like someone squeezing your testicles for a week once a month.

And then they have the nerve to make wisecracks about it and treat it like some kindof mysterious disease no-one knows anything about.

I think God knew what He was doing when He didn't make me a woman.. There's no telling the amount of lives I would've taken out of anger..

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
rationalizing

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
more rationalizing...!

No, it's the truth. I've taken full IQ tests before, and they do only test a small amount of your intelligence, and it's mostly the stuff based on logic. However, there are FAR more facets to one's intelligence than just that.

Try an emotional IQ test! Or better yet get several guys and gals to volunteer and go to a mensa website and take their test online then link share their scores

You can go to a neuro-phsycologist and take a real battery of IQ tests like 15 and then see where the ball falls.

When I was in college and worked for a neurologists office I got to do a small battery of tests and watch the physcologist run tests and for the life of me I cannot recall any of the men or women statistically showing higher or lower scores......(I wan't tracking them on paper either)

tell you the truth, I cant see any of the the intelligence fields where Woman are far superior then the males.

I remember taking an IQ test back when I was six, my score was 181 I believe. I should take one again..

Meh, my school's honour role of about 200 students, over 80% average, about 70% are female.


Depends on the test, the location, and other factors really.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
I remember taking an IQ test back when I was six, my score was 181 I believe. I should take one again..

I bet it was, seeing as how on average 140 is genius, in this case 155, yea, I believe you

Originally posted by Spelljammer
I remember taking an IQ test back when I was six, my score was 181 I believe. I should take one again..

Spelljammer, what your mom said was a smudge really was a coma.........sorry to break it to ya.........it was 18,1

~wickerman~

Originally posted by silver_tears
Meh, my school's honour role of about 200 students, over 80% average, about 70% are female.


Depends on the test, the location, and other factors really.

Yeah, same with my school, all the top students, ones who scored best on the ACT and SAT and AP exams....majority were girls.

Originally posted by Lana
Yeah, same with my school, all the top students, ones who scored best on the ACT and SAT and AP exams....majority were girls.

Same here. That was however not very decisive, seeing as how about the same percentage (about 80%) of the national olympics winners were guys. In maths, IT, physics, chemistry, etc. etc.

~wickerman~

Originally posted by silver_tears
Meh, my school's honour role of about 200 students, over 80% average, about 70% are female.


Depends on the test, the location, and other factors really.

Well, high school's different. It has a lot to do with applying yourself. I know that I was pretty bright in high school (I'm on the dean's list now), but I just didn't care (I wish I would have, now that I think about it). I was just having fun, not really putting a whole lot of effort into my school work.

In college, there's a lot more incentive to do well (since you're paying for it), but there's room to mess up to. But I guess my point is that a lot of guys as a whole are more focused on other things during high school (i.e. girls, sports, partying, etc.).

Remember, females mature at an earlier age than males do, which definitely plays a major role there.

Yeah 18.1 would barely place you high enough to be able to cross your eyes

Perhaps the doctor got a bunch of men that are hyper competitive and had to impress ppl and the girls were a little more lacks in the testing........who knows maybe all the real intelligent women thought that this experiment was to comical to partake in as it really doesn't do much for society which is why the professor was so disturbed at the fact women were setting "more" of the societal rules!

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
Well, high school's different. It has a lot to do with applying yourself. I know that I was pretty bright in high school (I'm on the dean's list now), but I just didn't care (I wish I would have, now that I think about it). I was just having fun, not really putting a whole lot of effort into my school work.

Not always -- I put zero effort into my schoolwork and was among the top-scorers for my school on the ACT, SAT, and AP exams. Not to mention that I consistently got A's on all my tests. Some of that is just natural, not applying yourself. Trust me, there aren't many honor roll students with a 50% homework average, but it happens.

Originally posted by soleran30
Yeah 18.1 would barely place you high enough to be able to cross your eyes

Perhaps the doctor got a bunch of men that are hyper competitive and had to impress ppl and the girls were a little more lacks in the testing........who knows maybe all the real intelligent women thought that this experiment was to comical to partake in as it really doesn't do much for society which is why the professor was so disturbed at the fact women were setting "more" of the societal rules!

And I gotta say this brings up a good point. We don't know anything about the people used in the study. It has to be done more than once to become something conclusive.

Well said Lana


The only other thing to remember is Lana and Morgoth is that it is difficult to relate to this findings if you look at it from a personal view since perhaps this study doesn't place you in the blanket findings!@


Also on the "physical intelligence" there are many women setting higher physical standards its just they are not as popular as the male achievements.


As a side note regardless of intelligence did you know that a woman uses more of her brain and communicates better between her left and right lobes better then men......huh interesting

''Also on the "physical intelligence" there are many women setting higher physical standards its just they are not as popular as the male achievements.''

Ya like what?

In high endurance sports women tend to excell simply due to the extra fat they carry so long distance running.......swimming the english channel or extreme swimming events as well for distance its just that explossive events tend to be more eye catching then say a 12 hour swim across a great lake.

IQ is a flawed way of measuring intelligence, Emotional intelligence and Multiple intelligences are far superior, intelligence is about more than seeing patterns and problem solving so saying anyone who does well on IQ tests is very proud of this fact

Hmm thats a intresting one Soleran, I dont see any Intellegence req for endurance acturly, at least very little, its all about fat? then it has nuthing to do with intellegence, take Basketball, now that req some tactic and team work and stuff there you are acturly using your head while preforming the sport

Originally posted by The Highlord
Hmm thats a intresting one Soleran, I dont see any Intellegence req for endurance acturly, at least very little, its all about fat? then it has nuthing to do with intellegence, take Basketball, now that req some tactic and team work and stuff there you are acturly using your head while preforming the sport

Endurance

EPO these days says the cynic.

pulse rate, resting volume, beta agonism, lung capacity, mitochondrial number, slow twitch muscle/high twitch musle ratio etc etc

Originally posted by Spelljammer
I remember taking an IQ test back when I was six, my score was 181 I believe. I should take one again..

That means you had a mental age of 10.86 if my maths is correct.


All IQ tests really prove is how good a person is at doing IQ tests.

It's like doing an intelligence crossword.

Having said that, while results aren't conclusive by any stretch of the imagination, they are a decent indication of one's intellectual capacity.

Like exams I suppose- good results or bad results aren't really a great comparison between people, but they are something in assessing the particular person's abilities.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
That means you had a mental age of 10.86 if my maths is correct.


All IQ tests really prove is how good a person is at doing IQ tests.

It's like doing an intelligence crossword.

Having said that, while results aren't conclusive by any stretch of the imagination, they are a decent indication of one's intellectual capacity.

Like exams I suppose- good results or bad results aren't really a great comparison between people, but they are something in assessing the particular person's abilities.

not really, they work purely on problem solving

Something else to keep in mind is that you can train yourself to become good at IQ tests once you understand the process and the type of question. Which is why they say don't test often! So really IQ tests done frequently is like lifting weights after a awhile you need to pick it up cuz you need bigger better challenges.

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
not really, they work purely on problem solving

Not really what?

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Not really what?

a good indicator of intelligence, multiple inttelligences are far superior

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
a good indicator of intelligence, multiple inttelligences are far superior

That's why I didn't say that.

If you took people's IQ performances and put them on a big graph, there would be a definite correlation between 'smart' and 'dumb', as it were, with the usual variations from the norm.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
That's why I didn't say that.

If you took people's IQ performances and put them on a big graph, there would be a definite correlation between 'smart' and 'dumb', as it were, with the usual variations from the norm.

yes in the area of patterns and problem solving the statistics would tell you nothing about "intelligence"

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
yes in the area of patterns and problem solving the statistics would tell you nothing about "intelligence"

They would, indirectly.

I'm not saying it's a good measure of intelligence- read my first post.

I said there will be a loose correlation between general performance and general intelligence, across a wide group.

Like I said above- if one person got 56, one got 193, you couldn't say one is factually more intelligent than the other. The point I was making is that in many cases, they will be.

thats true Von Doom, in most cases thuse with 54 are almust retarded and those ppl lack in many areas not just those on the IQ test

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
They would, indirectly.

I'm not saying it's a good measure of intelligence- read my first post.

I said there will be a loose correlation between general performance and general intelligence, across a wide group.

Like I said above- if one person got 56, one got 193, you couldn't say one is factually more intelligent than the other. The point I was making is that in many cases, they will be.

It simply means they are better at logic based problems - multiple intelligences look at all areas of intelligence including emotional intelligence.

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
It simply means they are better at logic based problems - multiple intelligences look at all areas of intelligence including emotional intelligence.

I know this.

We aren't making different points.

I don't take IQ tests. They're boring and stupid. Don't care if they accurate or important. They blow and suck. Period!


Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I can name at least 20 men(boys) on this board alone whos intelligence can not compete with mine, at any level.

Oohhh!!! I know I'm on that list.

They blow AND suck, eh? Maybe they do have a use after all...

hehe...maybe...just maybe.

Bit of a claim, unless of course she's interacted with them on every single level that intelligence is rated on.

I have no clue who they are but it's not hard to find 20 guys on here dumber than you are.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Bit of a claim, unless of course she's interacted with them on every single level that intelligence is rated on.

I have no clue who they are but it's not hard to find 20 guys on here dumber than you are.

-AC

No it is not

.

Men are smarter due to thousands of years of men doing all the important things while women were looked upon as inferior and just did the most trivial of tasks. Now all of a sudden women have equal rights and are allowed to do all the things men do but that cannot undo thousands of years of development. Ofcourse some women are smarter than some men but overall the trend will be men are smarter.

Think of it this way....

For every scientific break though, which sex was responsible?
Which sex is responsible for the most about of technological design?

look at it this way: did both sexes have the same opportunities and means?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Gee xmark......I thought you were a nice guy......guess not.... I am a nice guy. I don't necessarily agree with or endorse the view of Professor Lynn.Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
For every scientific break though, which sex was responsible?
Which sex is responsible for the most about of technological design? Do you know who Watson and Crick are? If so, do you know who Rosalind Franklin is?
Contribution to science isn't always as widely recognized when the contributor is a woman.

Kylie Minouge and Jason Donovan`s Stock, Aitken and Waterman sidekick that really flopped with the single "D.N.A in your face Rosalind"?

Originally posted by Corran
IQ tests generally have more logical questions than any other type and it's already documented that male brains are better suited to logic and females are better suited to common sense. If the IQ tests were able to incorporate more questions geared towards common sense then the results may well be reversed.

Uhh...what exactly do you think is the difference between logic and common sense?

I figure you're thinking about verbal and language oriented problems, which women generally do better at on standardized tests. But that shit ain't gonna help you make any inventions or win any Nobel Physics prizes. I wonder how well it translates into the real world, too; most acclaimed writers and artists are men.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Do you know who Watson and Crick are? If so, do you know who Rosalind Franklin is?
Contribution to science isn't always as widely recognized when the contributor is a woman.

Sorry I came across wrong....

I'm not saying men created everything... just alot of the technology and scientific breakthoughs have come from men....

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Sorry I came across wrong....

I'm not saying men created everything... just alot of the technology and scientific breakthoughs have come from men....

Yeah, but it's the women that gives them the ideas...

Originally posted by debbiejo
Yeah, but it's the women that gives them the ideas... E.g. the foundation work done by Rosalind Franklin which enabled Crick and Watson to determine the structure of DNA.

yeah if you refer to that women is the one responsible for driving them so nuts with their constant babbling so they drift on to invent stuff inside their head while looking like they listen to the never ending flow unnecessary stuff you are right

Women give me ideas... naughty

No finti....constant babbling?....no.. ...It's the ones that say..."What If"......

or how come there are no female f1 drivers???

because they have poky breast and it gets in the way of the stearing wheel

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
or how come there are no female f1 drivers???

Maybe they just like to go really fast......


That has nothing to do with IQ though...

what it comes down to is this....

God/nature made man superior in some aspects... In other animals the female is the superior one... However for humans Men are mainly stronger, faster and aparently slightly more intellegent...
Sounds like men were made to do everything to look after there mates... while the women kick up there feat and lean back and take the good life...

Oh driving race cars deffently has alot to do with IQ

Or maybe not exacly IQ, but deffently intellegence

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
what it comes down to is this....

God/nature made man superior in some aspects... In other animals the female is the superior one... However for humans Men are mainly stronger, faster and aparently slightly more intellegent...
Sounds like men were made to do everything to look after there mates... while the women kick up there feat and lean back and take the good life...

Unless you're a lion..Then it's reversed.....lazy male, provider female.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Unless you're a lion..Then it's reversed.....lazy male, provider female.

I believe I said In other animals.....

Women are far superior dishwashers etc

I don't think you can blame the male for having hundreds/thousands of years in advance since a child, whether male or female gets an equal amount of chromosomes from each of the parents (except the ones with the Downs syndrome but I don't think will drag those into this discussion). The reason lies with the position women have had in history untill very resently. Men have had a head start.

For some reason though, women often shuns the classical engineering subjects like maths, physics etc...the majority of students are males (at least in Norway, but I believe this is a general rule in most countries). And even though those subjects don't encompass every branch of the different IQs, most people tend, and probably will continue to think so.

But to prove to me that they aren't inferior, they better start crack out some amazing theories, paint some damn good paintings and compose symphonies that make my heart stop...
I'm willing to call the woman in charge of curing cancer a genious, no matter her level of IQ! (<-- this hasn't yet happened, I'll bet a guy steals the throne)

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Is this a clever thing to say about women's IQ?
By Tony Halpin, Education Editor, The Times

HALF the population will dismiss this story, but a study claims that the cleverest people are much more likely to be men than women.

Men are more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, making them better suited for "tasks of high complexity", according to the authors of a paper due to be published in the British Journal of Psychology.

Genetic differences in intelligence between the sexes helped to explain why many more men than women won Nobel Prizes or became chess grandmasters, the study by Paul Irwing and Professor Richard Lynn concluded.

They showed that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rise. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, a level typical for people with first-class degrees.

When scores rose to 155, a level associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman.

Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, said that he was uncomfortable with the findings. But he added that the evidence was clear despite the insistence of many academics that there were "no meaningful sex differences" in levels of intelligence.

"For personal reasons I would like to believe that men and women are equal, and broadly that's true. But over a period of time the evidence in favour of biological factors has become stronger and stronger," he said.

"I have been dragged in a direction that I don't particularly like, but it would be sensible if the debate was based on what we pretty much know to be the case."

The findings from the study involving 24,000 students will intensify a battle of the sexes that was triggered last week by Michael Buerk, the BBC newscaster, who complained that "life is now being lived according to women's rules". He said that men had been reduced to little more than sperm-donors because of the female dominance of society.

Professor Lynn, a Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, is no stranger to inflammatory conclusions as the author of a number of publications arguing that there are differences in intelligence between racial groups.

He published a controversial study in 2003 that identified a clear correlation between the levels of prosperity in 60 countries and the average IQ of their populations.

Professor Lynn argued in a letter to The Psychologist this month that the differences between the sexes were explained by a link between IQ and brain size. He said: "Men have larger brains than women by about 10 per cent and larger brains confer greater brain power, so men must necessarily be on average more intelligent than women."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm interested to hear whether people (particularly women) agree or disagree with this study, and whether people think these findings are plausible? To be fair, the IQ test doesn't really test ALL intelligences. Mostly booksmarts.

Intelligence, being the minds ability, to learn, reason, and remember, goes into different areas.

Mine was way above 155, but I do many things, drawing, exercise,etc. Those weren't even tested.

Some people have good linguistic intelligence, some spatial, some reasoning, but its hard to test them all.

Girls tend to be meticulous, but guys have been shown to be better leaders, and able to survive longer.

My question is: is anyone truly dumb?

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
My question is: is anyone truly dumb?

Yes....

But I agree especially American IQ tests seem to lack any reason nowadays....oh and IQ tests don't ltest booksmarts but the ability to deal with new situations.......at least they should....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes....

But I agree especially American IQ tests seem to lack any reason nowadays....oh and IQ tests don't ltest booksmarts but the ability to deal with new situations.......at least they should....

What if someone is an idiot savant?

Autistic children who can look at a large building ONCE and illustrate it perfectly.

People who have a part of their brain that doesn't work as well, but another part that works superhumanly well.

See what I mean?

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
What if someone is an idiot savant?

Autistic children who can look at a large building ONCE and illustrate it perfectly.

People who have a part of their brain that doesn't work as well, but another part that works superhumanly well.

See what I mean?

Yeah. Having said that, some people really are truly dumb.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
What if someone is an idiot savant?

Autistic children who can look at a large building ONCE and illustrate it perfectly.

People who have a part of their brain that doesn't work as well, but another part that works superhumanly well.

See what I mean?
Well they are not necessarily dumb....but there are people that are way below average in most fields of Intelligence...so yes, there are dumb people, according to Intelligence and IQ tests....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well they are not necessarily dumb....but there are people that are way below average in most fields of Intelligence...so yes, there are dumb people, according to Intelligence and IQ tests....

Yea, thats my point, if the IQ test is flawed, then should its result be held of value? ( I know most people can care less about them)

I think this could spark up an interesting SAT discussion lol.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Yeah. Having said that, some people really are truly dumb. Explain....

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Explain....

Some people have no discernable abilities.

I know the point you are making though- I was just flippantly commenting on the concept.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Some people have no discernable abilities.

I know the point you are making though- I was just flippantly commenting on the concept.

Understood, but do you think its that we haven't discerned them, rather than them not having any discernable traits?

Originally posted by Lana
The SAT basically just measures basic knowledge of English and Math -- I can't understand how people get such low scores on it because it's really quite easy.

Or maybe that's just me I did well, I just skipped a part of it, an entire section.

1280, I was quite annoyed.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
I know I just hate sat's and think they should be done with, considering my experience for one years ago.

Most of the arguments are just that "book smarts" have been associated with intelligence for a long time, so anytime you hear someone is "very intelligent" it usually pertains to that.

I believe there is a balance, be it athletic, emotional, spatial, linguistic, etc.

Yes, SATs indeed are a pain in the arse.....

Again I know what you are saying, but knoledge (book-smart) is not the same as being intelligent (able to deal with new situations, amount of knowledge on can store, time one need to learn new things....) and at least I use when I say someone is very Intelligent the correct definition.....


Now there I disagree, I think some people are just more gifted than others....and why should it be balanced, there is no real reason for that....

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Agreed, but do you think its that we haven't discerned them, rather than them not having any discernable traits?


Nah.

Although if we're getting philosophical, I guess they have a great ability to be useless. So no-one can ever be truly useless.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Understood, but do you think its that we haven't discerned them, rather than them not having any discernable traits?

I did well, I just skipped a part of it, an entire section.

1280, I was quite annoyed.

I did well too, but was annoyed because I had expected to do better...but I blame the fact that the test was at 7am the day after my last day of school that year I got a 1340, I'd hoped for a 1400. Or at least that's what was predicted I'd get based on my ACT score.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Nah.

Although if we're getting philosophical, I guess they have a great ability to be useless. So no-one can ever be truly useless. lol, greatnes for not being great eh?

I can buy that, I just feel people have them, but they can't be discerned upon, rather because its hard to detect, less popular (leadership), or they havent shown it.

*shrugs*

Originally posted by Lana
I did well too, but was annoyed because I had expected to do better...but I blame the fact that the test was at 7am the day after my last day of school that year I got a 1340, I'd hoped for a 1400. Or at least that's what was predicted I'd get based on my ACT score. I got accepted into my college so all was well, I only took it once, and SAT just proves you can take the SAT.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
lol, greatnes for not being great eh?

I can buy that, I just feel people have them, but they can't be discerned upon, rather because its hard to detect, less popular (leadership), or they havent shown it.

*shrugs*

Is always possible.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, SATs indeed are a pain in the arse.....

Again I know what you are saying, but knoledge (book-smart) is not the same as being intelligent (able to deal with new situations, amount of knowledge on can store, time one need to learn new things....) and at least I use when I say someone is very Intelligent the correct definition.....


Now there I disagree, I think some people are just more gifted than others....and why should it be balanced, there is no real reason for that....

Yes intelligence isn't wisdom, and wisdom isn't knowledge.

I understand that, as I'm more versatile than most, but its just a theory of mine.


I was hinting at a person's personality affecting their "intelligence" or "success".

Like I did relativley bad in school, because I was too carefree. My friend, considerably less intelligent and knowledgeable, did much better.

He was very self critical though.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
I know I just hate sat's and think they should be done with, considering my experience for one years ago.

Most of the arguments are just that "book smarts" have been associated with intelligence for a long time, so anytime you hear someone is "very intelligent" it usually pertains to that.

I believe there is a balance, be it athletic, emotional, spatial, linguistic, etc.

this concept is called multiple intelligences C I argued for it pages back - Emotional intelligence is the other bi new idea.

Originally posted by Lana
I did well too, but was annoyed because I had expected to do better...but I blame the fact that the test was at 7am the day after my last day of school that year I got a 1340, I'd hoped for a 1400. Or at least that's what was predicted I'd get based on my ACT score.
i got 1140....I think not bad for a foreigner now is it......

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
this concept is called multiple intelligences C I argued for it pages back - Emotional intelligence is the other bi new idea. I saw that as well, I was mainly pointing it out, as the IQ test attempts to cover these intelligences, but does a poor job.

Furthermore, some people have a better aptitude for taking tests in general, so its maybe 10% reliable IMO.

Originally posted by Bardock42
i got 1140....I think not bad for a foreigner now is it......

It's well above average for American students, that's for sure....I think the average score for the SAT (on the old scale) is somewhere around 900....that's pretty low.

Originally posted by Lana
It's well above average for American students, that's for sure....I think the average score for the SAT (on the old scale) is somewhere around 900....that's pretty low. Unimpressive and dissapointing.

Lack of discipline I think.

It proves your ability to learn... some people just can't learn as well as others... There are somethings in life that you can just look at and say..." yer I get that.." other times you have to study... everyone is born blank.. and have the option to learn anything they want... Dumb people are the ones to lazy to learn.. Smart people are the ones who always want to know more... Colleges want to know your a smart one who wants to learn....

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Dumb people are the ones to lazy to learn.. Smart people are the ones who always want to know more...

You believe all people are created with equal capacity for learning?

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Colleges want to know your a smart one who wants to learn....

I disagree with this on so many levels.

Its not the brains that make the good grades.

I was considered the smartest of my school and had a "C" average for 3 years.

Why?

Because I didn't give a damn, but some people study, study, and study, until they get that grade, be it for discipline, ethics, or self criticism.

If you are the smartest person in the world, but don't do your work you still get an "f".

So its good study habits, and for the record, the really smart hate school.

School isn't the only place to learn.

I daresay I learned most of my stuff OUT of school.

Exactly.

I know someone who is really academically smart, but as them about what's going on in Iraq, New Orleans or anywhere just outside of London and they're at a loss.

-AC

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
How odd, I was just watching a program about this very subject. I can't actually recall what the show was, which kind of answers the question posed, but it was about genius children. The show examined children who seem to have been born with inate abilities, such as a proclivity for math and science, or gifts for understanding and producing music, playing the piano at age five, etc. And on the whole, these kids were males more often than females.

I don't think, however, that means that men are more intelligent than women, or have any more or less capacity to learn or apply that knowledge. Also, I think that the inequities in the roles of the two genders in society has lent itself to more men being discovered with the special gifts the show mentioned.

One interesting thing I did notice during teh show, was that a lot of these child prodigies were first generation Americans. Their parents were, more often than not, immigrants.

That is interesting, I've also read some studies that had to do with health and diseases that aren't as prevalent in first generation Americans......Kinda gets one thinking.....Maybe goes hand and hand...

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
It proves your ability to learn... some people just can't learn as well as others... There are somethings in life that you can just look at and say..." yer I get that.." other times you have to study... everyone is born blank.. and have the option to learn anything they want... Dumb people are the ones to lazy to learn.. Smart people are the ones who always want to know more... Colleges want to know your a smart one who wants to learn....

Uhh, wrong. There are plenty of smart people who simply couldn't care less and plenty of dumb people who work hard to learn more. I'm like C-Master, I was easily one of the smartest students in my grade all through high school, I got the 3rd highest score in my class on the ACT (of 303 people), consistently scored in the 97th-99th percentile on EVERY standardized test I've ever taken...yet I never did my homework anymore than half the time, because I simply didn't care. I didn't need to work to learn anything (not even in my German class, in which I wound up being the only person to pass the AP test). If not for AP classes, I'd have only had a C+ average, but the weight added by AP classes meant I wound up with a B average by the time I graduated. But I HATED having to do homework and such -- because I found it to be tiresome and a waste of my time. I even flat-out told one of my math teachers that I refused to do my homework one night because I found it to be busywork. Which it was, it was something I had learned when I was in 6th grade and could do in my head without even thinking.

But anyway, my point is, most of the time when someone doesn't care about school, chances are they're actually very smart and just find all the work put into learning something tiresome. And the people to whom learning things doesn't come so easily, tend to spend more time on their work and care more.

If your so smart then why dont you realize that by putting in a bit of effort in school your whole life will be much easier?

Because I didn't NEED to put any work into anything in high school -- it was all very easy for me.

Originally posted by Lana
Because I didn't NEED to put any work into anything in high school -- it was all very easy for me.

But you had a C average? If your really as smart as you claim it wouldnt be that hard for you to get straight A's with a bit more effort into your work, and from there you could get into schools like harvard and yale.

My theory is - Anyone who is good at schoolastics is stupid.

There.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Is this a clever thing to say about women's IQ?
By Tony Halpin, Education Editor, The Times

HALF the population will dismiss this story, but a study claims that the cleverest people are much more likely to be men than women.

Men are more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, making them better suited for "tasks of high complexity", according to the authors of a paper due to be published in the British Journal of Psychology.

Genetic differences in intelligence between the sexes helped to explain why many more men than women won Nobel Prizes or became chess grandmasters, the study by Paul Irwing and Professor Richard Lynn concluded.

They showed that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rise. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, a level typical for people with first-class degrees.

When scores rose to 155, a level associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman.

Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, said that he was uncomfortable with the findings. But he added that the evidence was clear despite the insistence of many academics that there were "no meaningful sex differences" in levels of intelligence.

"For personal reasons I would like to believe that men and women are equal, and broadly that's true. But over a period of time the evidence in favour of biological factors has become stronger and stronger," he said.

"I have been dragged in a direction that I don't particularly like, but it would be sensible if the debate was based on what we pretty much know to be the case."

The findings from the study involving 24,000 students will intensify a battle of the sexes that was triggered last week by Michael Buerk, the BBC newscaster, who complained that "life is now being lived according to women's rules". He said that men had been reduced to little more than sperm-donors because of the female dominance of society.

Professor Lynn, a Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, is no stranger to inflammatory conclusions as the author of a number of publications arguing that there are differences in intelligence between racial groups.

He published a controversial study in 2003 that identified a clear correlation between the levels of prosperity in 60 countries and the average IQ of their populations.

Professor Lynn argued in a letter to The Psychologist this month that the differences between the sexes were explained by a link between IQ and brain size. He said: "Men have larger brains than women by about 10 per cent and larger brains confer greater brain power, so men must necessarily be on average more intelligent than women."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm interested to hear whether people (particularly women) agree or disagree with this study, and whether people think these findings are plausible? what are you fu.cking kidding me....i can't see men as the smarter gender, their decisions and opinions are drove by their penises...my opinion

Im not saying school is important, Im saying it is something to be used for your advantage.

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
But you had a C average? If your really as smart as you claim it wouldnt be that hard for you to get straight A's with a bit more effort into your work, and from there you could get into schools like harvard and yale.

1) I didn't WANT to go to a school like Harvard or Yale; I didn't want to go somewhere where people think they're better than everyone else because they're at a prestigious school.

2) I didn't NEED to do the work 99% of the time, so I didn't feel like wasting my time when I could have spent it doing other things that meant more to me.

Originally posted by Lana
1) I didn't WANT to go to a school like Harvard or Yale; I didn't want to go somewhere where people think they're better than everyone else because they're at a prestigious school.

2) I didn't NEED to do the work 99% of the time, so I didn't feel like wasting my time when I could have spent it doing other things that meant more to me.

Your not getting my point, I understand If you felt like school wasnt important because it isnt, atleast for the gifted, but If you are gifted you can use school to your advantage to get into a prestigous school which in turn means a whole life of ease and comfort. If you dont want this fine with me, Im just giving you my recommendation.

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Your not getting my point, I understand If you felt like school wasnt important because it isnt, atleast for the gifted, but If you are gifted you can use school to your advantage to get into a prestigous school which in turn means a whole life of ease and comfort. If you dont want this fine with me, Im just giving you my recommendation.

I got your point just fine. I just didn't chose to do things that way, I could have, but I didn't want to.

Besides which, considering the amount of time I'll be in school (planning on going for my masters at the least, possibly a doctorate), in the end where I got my bachelors isn't going to matter so much.

What's the SAT graded out of? In terms of the maximum score possible.

It used to be out of 1600, they just changed it so I don't know what it is anymore.

And what subjects does it test?

English and math. Each section is worth 800 points, giving you a total of 1600. If I remember right they just changed it to add an essay section, so the new scoring would be out of 2400, but I'm not sure; I took it a little over 2 years ago so it was still on the old scoring system then.

Our university entrance exams tested individual subjects of which you chose 5, e.g. Math w/Calc, Biology, French etc. Officially marked out of 100 for each subject but the highest mark they would ever award was 96.

I didn't even submit my SAT scores for colleges, I went with my ACT score because it was better, and because it tests on more subjects (math, english, science, and reading comprehension). Still was ridiculously easy, though.

Originally posted by Great Vengeance
If your so smart then why dont you realize that by putting in a bit of effort in school your whole life will be much easier? Intelligence isn't always wisdom.


Also depends on "easier". I had a friend who was valedictorian, and she went to a great school, still very self critical.

Success doesn't equal easy.

No different than a person who's gorgeous but thinks they're ugly.

C-Master is right. I have some pretty foul grades, yet on the FCAT tests, I consistantly get exemplary marks. I even got double 99's, the highest you can get, one year.

It's not how much you know, but what you know. Anyone can learn facts, it's how you use the knowlege that makes you smart...

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Exactly.

I know someone who is really academically smart, but as them about what's going on in Iraq, New Orleans or anywhere just outside of London and they're at a loss.

-AC Which makes me ask if there are people with "no" intelligence, or "little" intelligence.

I think it should be "aptitude" an AQ test sounds more reasonable.

Yeah I mean who cares about IQ and tests I mean I took the SAT and scored 720! Then i realized I should take an IQ test and scored 72.........is that a coincence...........I mean cuz if it is I do fine in society and aside from shoe laces I get it on!

A 72?

Wow, never thought about the correlation myself.

Originally posted by soleran30
Yeah I mean who cares about IQ and tests I mean I took the SAT and scored 720! Then i realized I should take an IQ test and scored 72.........is that a coincence...........I mean cuz if it is I do fine in society and aside from shoe laces I get it on!

No offense friend but 72....and 720........that's just well.....it could be more....

I forget what 72 is ranged as.