The Lemon Fool

Leeds: Boy, 11, beats Hawking's Mensa score

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-63629222

Yusuf achieved 162 on the test, which is more than the late physicist and author Prof Stephen Hawking, who is believed to have achieved 160.

I have not found a reliable source for Stephen Hawking's IQ (there probably isn't one) but a figure of 160 is bandied around, often hinting at a standard deviation of 15 (as per most current IQ tests). This would put him in the top 1/31560 of the population.

Mensa use the Cattell III B test which has a standard deviation of 24. 162 on this scale is in the top 1/204 of the population, and is equivalent to about 139 with an SD of 15 — well short of 160. Obviously, as Yusuf maxed out on this test, it is still possible that his IQ equals that of Stephen Hawking (or, rather, what it was when he was still alive) but it certainly cannot be inferred from what we are given.

Mensa also use the Cattell Culture Fair IIIA test which has a higher maximum score. Both tests are included in the price and are administered consecutively in the same session (source: https://www.mensa.org.uk/iq-booking) so, presumably, Yusuf took both. What was his other score?

The Cattell III B test actually goes higher than 161 (or 162 for kids) but Mensa only score it up to 161 (or 162). I am not sure of the reason for this, it could be that group administration does not allow extra credit for finishing early but that is a guess.

If you want to converse and form discussions with genuinely intelligent, knowledgeable and (mostly) respectful people, I suggest that you visit this site, Genius Site


Julian F. G. W.

There was a kid at my school who scored 180 on an IQ test.

He was quite brilliant, but had zero social skills. He got a maths degree from Cambridge in his spare time before going up there, and had a Ph.D. at the age of 21.

He killed himself at age 25.

Lootman wrote:There was a kid at my school who scored 180 on an IQ test.

He was quite brilliant, but had zero social skills. He got a maths degree from Cambridge in his spare time before going up there, and had a Ph.D. at the age of 21.

He killed himself at age 25.

Very sad, but as irrelevant as is this IQ score. We have not managed to agree upon what intelligence actually is, let alone how to measure it. Is the chess grand-master more intelligent than the farmer or the man who trades grain futures?

Indeed, is intelligence the sole attribute? Many philosophers think otherwise, though they oft think it important.

The dictionary definition is basically the ability to acquire knowledge. But, what form of knowledge and how do you test the ability to acquire?
Tests HAVE to fail, if they can't ask questions that the person tested doesn't know the answer to.

Likewise people can have handicaps that effect a given method of acquiring knowledge. I have overcome most of how my dyslexia effects my ability to do so, but do we claim that people who can't read, because they are blind, must be less "intelligent"? There is a BLIND astronomer. The concept is incredible. Does that handicap make her more or less intelligent?

Clearly she is LESS able to acquire knowledge, in the traditional ways. She has found other ways, in a specific field. How would an IQ test gain a sensible quotation.

https://www.astro4dev.org/ted-talk-how- ... the-stars/

Urbandreamer wrote:
Very sad, but as irrelevant as is this IQ score. We have not managed to agree upon what intelligence actually is, let alone how to measure it. Is the chess grand-master more intelligent than the farmer or the man who trades grain futures?

Indeed, is intelligence the sole attribute? Many philosophers think otherwise, though they oft think it important.

The dictionary definition is basically the ability to acquire knowledge. But, what form of knowledge and how do you test the ability to acquire?
Tests HAVE to fail, if they can't ask questions that the person tested doesn't know the answer to.

Likewise people can have handicaps that effect a given method of acquiring knowledge. I have overcome most of how my dyslexia effects my ability to do so, but do we claim that people who can't read, because they are blind, must be less "intelligent"? There is a BLIND astronomer. The concept is incredible. Does that handicap make her more or less intelligent?

Clearly she is LESS able to acquire knowledge, in the traditional ways. She has found other ways, in a specific field. How would an IQ test gain a sensible quotation.

https://www.astro4dev.org/ted-talk-how- ... the-stars/

My dog can lick his own testicles, sleep on the couch for 23hrs a day, turn up for breakfast and tea without a watch and always farts when he's sat on the girls sofa, not mine.

Beat that for a high IQ

AiY(D)

AsleepInYorkshire wrote:My dog can lick his own testicles, sleep on the couch for 23hrs a day, turn up for breakfast and tea without a watch and always farts when he's sat on the girls sofa, not mine.

Beat that for a high IQ

AiY(D)

Sounds like your dog, just like sheep, or possibly unlike sheep, has found an ideal spot.

Now Panda's have not. Dog's are useful to humans, but we don't eat them as often as sheep, which is why there are more sheep than dogs, and more dogs than panda's.

Your point was?

Seriously, there is a STRONG argument that sheep, despite their lack of IQ have outperformed dogs. There do seem to be a lot more of them than dogs.

Again, your point?

Seriously I was questioning how we specify or measure"IQ" in humans. Not in Dogs.

I would say that the ability to acquire knowledge is complementary to intelligence, not synonymous.

It is possible for someone to soak up knowledge and apply it in a formulaic manner without understanding any of it. That is not intelligence.

I would associate intelligence with understanding and problem-solving. I would expect an intelligent person to challenge knowledge, not indiscriminately absorb it.


Julian F. G. W.

AsleepInYorkshire wrote:My dog can lick his own testicles, sleep on the couch for 23hrs a day, turn up for breakfast and tea without a watch and always farts when he's sat on the girls sofa, not mine.

I can do all of that. I can lick your dog's testicles, sleep on the couch for 23hrs a day...

Urbandreamer wrote:Dog's are useful to humans, but we don't eat them as often as sheep

I did't know sheep ate dogs.


Julian F. G. W.

Elon Musk must have an impressive IQ. Hasn't seemed to help him avoid making a dog's breakfast out of his Twitter business.

Leothebear wrote:Elon Musk must have an impressive IQ. Hasn't seemed to help him avoid making a dog's breakfast out of his Twitter business.

It appears to be just that right now, I do wonder what rabbit he will pull out of the hat, as he IS a bright guy.

Don't dis sheep!

Even as we speak one is on their way to the moon.

N° 42–2022: ESA names first ‘astronaut’ to fly on the Artemis I lunar mission

https://www.esa.int/Newsroom/Press_Rele ... ar_mission

The specially trained woolly astronaut, Shaun the Sheep, has been assigned a seat on the Artemis I mission to the Moon, it was announced today.

The US contribution to this first non-human expedition to the moon is Snoopy.

jfgw wrote:I would say that the ability to acquire knowledge is complementary to intelligence, not synonymous.

It is possible for someone to soak up knowledge and apply it in a formulaic manner without understanding any of it. That is not intelligence.

I would associate intelligence with understanding and problem-solving. I would expect an intelligent person to challenge knowledge, not indiscriminately absorb it.

Julian F. G. W.

Hi Julian,

Am I allowed to offer seasonal greetings, albeit just a gnats early

My point about intelligence, rather poorly made, I hasten to add, is the ability to survive. What's the point of creating nuclear weapons and then using them to wipe ourselves out?

I agree with you. Intelligence is more the application of knowledge. My dog(s) have limited knowledge. But their application of that knowledge is, in my opinion, outstanding.

Take care

AiY(D)

jfgw wrote:I would say that the ability to acquire knowledge is complementary to intelligence, not synonymous.

It is possible for someone to soak up knowledge and apply it in a formulaic manner without understanding any of it. That is not intelligence.

I would associate intelligence with understanding and problem-solving. I would expect an intelligent person to challenge knowledge, not indiscriminately absorb it.


Julian F. G. W.

There was a man who won a French scrabble contest, he not only doesn't speak French he doesn't know the meaning of the words. I woudn't call that inteligent just obsessive.

Rob

It's often said that IQ tests measure the ability to perform IQ tests. It's hard for tests to account for the "common sense" for want of a better word that allows knowledge and cognitive powers to be applied appropriately in day to day life.

Midsmartin wrote:It's often said that IQ tests measure the ability to perform IQ tests. It's hard for tests to account for the "common sense" for want of a better word that allows knowledge and cognitive powers to be applied appropriately in day to day life.

I would go further than that and suggest that a very high IQ might be indicative of a lack of corresponding cognitive skills like common sense, social skills, physical skills etc. The sad case of the boy I gave earlier is an extreme example - he had no friends, was excused sports because he was so uncoordinated, and he would probably strike most people as somewhere odd and weird.

IQ tests mostly measure left-brained skills like logic, numeracy, verbal skills and pattern recognition. They don't measure right-brained skills like judgement, emotional maturity, intuition and instinct, coordination and so on.

Lootman wrote:IQ tests mostly measure left-brained skills like logic, numeracy, verbal skills and pattern recognition. They don't measure right-brained skills like judgement, emotional maturity, intuition and instinct, coordination and so on.

Um...

Next, you will be telling us that we all: "Only use 10% of our brain".

Leothebear wrote:Elon Musk must have an impressive IQ. Hasn't seemed to help him avoid making a dog's breakfast out of his Twitter business.

Only time will tell, but I am starting to draw parallels between a kingdom being ruled by a king, an empire being ruled by an emperor, a principality being ruled by a prince, and Twitter being ruled by Elon Musk.


Julian F. G. W.

XFool wrote: Next, you will be telling us that we all: "Only use 10% of our brain".

This prompted me to use google
We are all quite amazing
"the memory capacity of a human brain was testified to have equal to 2.5 petabytes of memory capacity. A “petabyte” means 1024 terabytes or a million gigabytes so that the average adult human brain can accumulate the equivalent of 2.5 million gigabytes of memory!
Who knew
https://www.medanta.org/patient-educati ... man-brain/

pje16 wrote:

XFool wrote: Next, you will be telling us that we all: "Only use 10% of our brain".

This prompted me to use google
We are all quite amazing
"the memory capacity of a human brain was testified to have equal to 2.5 petabytes of memory capacity. A “petabyte” means 1024 terabytes or a million gigabytes so that the average adult human brain can accumulate the equivalent of 2.5 million gigabytes of memory!
Who knew
https://www.medanta.org/patient-educati ... man-brain/

But as I get older, I find it becomes write-only memory
doolally

doolally wrote: I find it becomes write-only memory
doolally

Careful you might go over capacity

Lootman wrote:

Midsmartin wrote:It's often said that IQ tests measure the ability to perform IQ tests. It's hard for tests to account for the "common sense" for want of a better word that allows knowledge and cognitive powers to be applied appropriately in day to day life.

I would go further than that and suggest that a very high IQ might be indicative of a lack of corresponding cognitive skills like common sense, social skills, physical skills etc. The sad case of the boy I gave earlier is an extreme example - he had no friends, was excused sports because he was so uncoordinated, and he would probably strike most people as somewhere odd and weird.

IQ tests mostly measure left-brained skills like logic, numeracy, verbal skills and pattern recognition. They don't measure right-brained skills like judgement, emotional maturity, intuition and instinct, coordination and so on.

High IQ can lead to complacency. Go through school thinking everything is far too easy, and obviously there's no need to concern yourself with other things: you'll get a good degree from a top university, and doors will open for you. Kids are still told a simplistic and exaggerated story of the importance of qualifications.

Then in the real world, those expectations work against you, and not merely did you never concern yourself with brown-nose skills necessary for a successful career, you learned to despise them.

That's societal expectations. It was my young self, with parental and societal encouragement. The case you mention may have been a worse example of something similar. And it can manifest in different ways: the archetype of the absent-minded professor surely has similar roots.

jfgw wrote: Only time will tell, but I am starting to draw parallels between a kingdom being ruled by a king, an empire being ruled by an emperor, a principality being ruled by a prince, and Twitter being ruled by Elon Musk a corporation being ruled by a tycoon.
Julian F. G. W.

FTFY.