Re: Making Charisma more important
- From: Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:16:01 +0300
Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd wrote:
On 2007-09-06 21:45:35, Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd wrote:On 2007-09-06 20:47:00, tigen wrote:This was new definition for IQ to me. I have always thought IQ asOk. But you still need raw IQ to be a good negotiator and businessman.IQ is, formally speaking, a speed-of-recall measure. It so happens that raw
Bargaining should not only be Cha, but also Int/Wis. And in that case
the importance of Cha is even lessened.
speed helps more with abstract-formal reasoning and quick acquisition of
elementary facts, than other uses of intelligence.
capability to make connections of different things in logical manner.
Understanding of cause and consequence, and what affects what and how.
None of which is directly tested by the usual IQ tests (Bidet, etc.). I say
this both from a casual layman's reading of their design, and having taken quite
a few in my elementary/high school years [it helps when qualifying for advanced
coursework in the U.S. lower education system].
The usual approach is to try to estimate what would be "general knowledge" (both
verbally and nonverbally), and then test for how fast those answers are given. That is: a raw speed test of how fast one can get at general knowledge.
That's strange. I have taken at least one US IQ test which didn't measure time (it had _some_ "deadline" by which answers must have been given, but it didn't measure time which you used as long as it was under that deadline). I got IQ 175 out of it and I'm not something people would call "fast thinker". I can handle large and quite complex....damn, dictionary isn't helping....systems, blocks, entities...something... quite easily though.
Also with general knowledge I can beat most people _if you give me time_ to "dig" that info out of my brain.
How fast you can do that isn't really very relevant, but usually higher
IQ makes making relatively easy connections easier, so it speeds up the
process. Real test for IQ is when connection between two things is very
complex, and then usually fast(er) thinker might hit a brick wall, when
slower thinker with high IQ doesn't see any difficulty connecting things.
Yes, IQ is ideally a proxy for this. But none of the above is directly
testable
I think it is testable. It's like testing how well you understand rubicks cube. How many moves you can backtrack from one position to startpoint before losing entirely what has been done. Give very basic consepts but create increasingly complex connection between them and see who can solve the puzzle. Finnish Mensa test is pretty much just that (might be global, I don't know). It does measure time you use too, though.
and much of that can be accelerated by in-depth background knowledge.
....If you get asked something that background knowledge helps. I had an friend that had extremely good memory and because of that she had quite good knowledge of things, but she still hit that brick wall as soon as there was something to....damn, again my dictionary fails...apply in a way that she had never seen done.
Timo Pietilä
.
- References:
- Re: Making Charisma more important
- From: Timo Pietilä
- Re: Making Charisma more important
- From: Timo Pietilä
- Re: Making Charisma more important
- From: Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd
- Re: Making Charisma more important
- Prev by Date: Re: Making Charisma more important
- Next by Date: {S} new bug found
- Previous by thread: Re: Making Charisma more important
- Next by thread: Re: Making Charisma more important
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading