Re: Web site for Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests

[Guest guest]

Helen Foisy wrote:

> Hi all!

> While on the topic of intelligence, and measuring various kinds of

> intelligence, here is a link to a site which has a list of links for

> IQ tests, articles, etc. For some of the sites listed, you must pay a

> fee to join, or to take a test. But others offer introductory or

> experimental tests. I have taken some of them in the past .... with

> interesting results! There are many interesting articles here as

> well. This site has been around for a number of years and not all the

> links are current, but most still work. Enjoy!

> - H.

>

> Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests

> http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/hoeflin.html

A seriously interesting list of " IQ " tests; if just a little obscene!

That said, in years past I had some real fun playing with a few.

But be very careful how you approach them. Most are mind games that

subvert both the meaning and the intent of " IQ " tests claiming

legitimacy. Most won't measure much of any real use in the real world.

Then too: " Harder " tests won't give you a better (or worse) " IQ " than

easier ones will. A " hard " IQ test is what? Harder to pass?? What

means " pass " ?

Consider:

Any test, easy OR hard, should measure the *same thing* as all the

others. The same " IQ " . Whether it takes 20-minutes or all day, whether

it's " easy " or " hard " , all that matters is the number. Which must be

the *same* number that all the other tests get, regardless of how they

get it. IF it claims legitimacy!

This all has something to do with why AS and NT often don't get the same

scores on " standard " tests. Why the *concept* of both " IQ " and " g " is

so slippery.

And why it's done so much damage to populations for which the

concepts don't apply, and the tests don't either.

- Bill, 76, dx AS; ...who's been involved

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

[Guest guest]

I've always preferred the approach that if someone asks me my number, I just make one up.

What's the difference!?

-Usarian

From: WD Loughman

Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 8:42 PM

To: aspires-relationships

Subject: Re: Web site for "Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests"

Helen Foisy wrote:> Hi all!> While on the topic of intelligence, and measuring various kinds of > intelligence, here is a link to a site which has a list of links for > IQ tests, articles, etc. For some of the sites listed, you must pay a > fee to join, or to take a test. But others offer introductory or > experimental tests. I have taken some of them in the past .... with > interesting results! There are many interesting articles here as > well. This site has been around for a number of years and not all the > links are current, but most still work. Enjoy!> - H.> > Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests> http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/hoeflin.htmlA seriously interesting list of "IQ" tests; if just a little obscene!That said, in years past I had some real fun playing with a few.But be very careful how you approach them. Most are mind games that subvert both the meaning and the intent of "IQ" tests claiming legitimacy. Most won't measure much of any real use in the real world.Then too: "Harder" tests won't give you a better (or worse) "IQ" than easier ones will. A "hard" IQ test is what? Harder to pass?? What means "pass"?Consider:Any test, easy OR hard, should measure the *same thing* as all the others. The same "IQ". Whether it takes 20-minutes or all day, whether it's "easy" or "hard", all that matters is the number. Which must be the *same* number that all the other tests get, regardless of how they get it. IF it claims legitimacy!This all has something to do with why AS and NT often don't get the same scores on "standard" tests. Why the *concept* of both "IQ" and "g" is so slippery.And why it's done so much damage to populations for which the concepts don't apply, and the tests don't either.- Bill, 76, dx AS; ...who's been involved-- WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USAhttp://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

[Guest guest]

HI Bill, thanks for your comments. I sometimes attach a disclaimer to

posts like these - as in " don't take this too seriously " - but

time did not allow me to do that so thank U for that. I did find that the

tests tended to support what I've long suspected about myself - my

own considerable " scatter " between verbal skills (high) and

problem solving skills (low-normal.) Not that I cry in my tea over it

every night ... now I've learned to play to my strengths and leave behind

that which I am hopelessly inept at. <grins!>

- Helen

At 19:42 10/27/2008, you wrote:

Helen Foisy wrote:

> Hi all!

> While on the topic of intelligence, and measuring various kinds of

> intelligence, here is a link to a site which has a list of links for

> IQ tests, articles, etc. For some of the sites listed, you must pay

a

> fee to join, or to take a test. But others offer introductory or

> experimental tests. I have taken some of them in the past .... with

> interesting results! There are many interesting articles here as

> well. This site has been around for a number of years and not all

the

> links are current, but most still work. Enjoy!

> - H.

>

> Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests

>

http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/hoeflin.html

A seriously interesting list of " IQ " tests; if just a little

obscene!

That said, in years past I had some real fun playing with a few.

But be very careful how you approach them. Most are mind games that

subvert both the meaning and the intent of " IQ " tests claiming

legitimacy. Most won't measure much of any real use in the real

world.

Then too: " Harder " tests won't give you a better (or worse)

" IQ " than

easier ones will. A " hard " IQ test is what? Harder to pass??

What

means " pass " ?

Consider:

Any test, easy OR hard, should measure the *same thing* as all the

others. The same " IQ " . Whether it takes 20-minutes or all day,

whether

it's " easy " or " hard " , all that matters is the

number. Which must be

the *same* number that all the other tests get, regardless of how they

get it. IF it claims legitimacy!

This all has something to do with why AS and NT often don't get the same

scores on " standard " tests. Why the *concept* of both

" IQ " and " g " is

so slippery.

And why it's done so much damage to populations for which the

concepts don't apply, and the tests don't either.

- Bill, 76, dx AS; ...who's been involved

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm