|
|
|
|
|
|
by mikequinlan
623 days ago
|
|
|
1. IQ is a bad measurement of intelligence. 2. IQ is a quotient. What age did they say that o1 was? 3. Using a Mensa test (Mensa Norway apparently) is a bad way to determine IQ. https://test.mensa.no/home/test/en "This online test gives an indication of general cognitive abilities, represented by an IQ score of between 85 and 145, where 100 is the population average. This test is not a substitute for professional intelligence tests, such as those administered by Mensa and licensed psychologists. This test consists of 35 puzzles in the form of visual patterns that must be solved within a 25-minute time limit. Participation requires neither specialised knowledge nor mathematical skills. The puzzles, which get progressively difficult, are weighted equally, so you get a point for each correct answer. You do not get bonus points for finishing the test early, so try to manage your time optimally. Also, you are not penalised for answering incorrectly, so make a guess whenever you are unsure." |
|
|
I'm unconvinced that if everybody suddenly woke up tomorrow with an IQ score that was 20 points higher, that all of the most pressing issues in the world would start to be solved. Maybe some would, but I suspect we'd find out that there are tradeoffs that occur when we min/max a particular form of intelligence. There are also raw physical limits to contend with. The speed of light will remain a limit no matter how high your IQ. So there may be diminishing returns to science as well.
There are all sorts of ethical and social and game theory related problems that don't seem like they would be at all helped out by having a radically more analytically competent populace. If anything, I suspect we may be worse off.