Monday, April 13, 2009

Society's IQ

Recently I've been thinking about intelligence, how to define it - or not - and the implications of being labeled on a scale of intelligence.  

Historically, humans have attempted to measure "intelligence" and aptitude for certain mental tasks by using tests for hundreds if not thousands of years.  Hierarchical societies often placed people in power based on birthright alone, but if they wanted to last for any significant period of time, they generally appointed "smart" people to actually guide the nation.  The Chinese Imperial Examination, probably the most famous pre-modern standardized test (to history geeks, anyway) lasted for 1300 years and saw China develop a highly skilled, highly specialized bureaucracy which guided the nation through centuries of prosperity, including the Song and Ming Dynasties.  In fact, the exam was so successful at producing expert civil servants that, when the Mongols invaded China in the 12th to 13th centuries A.D., they kept the bureaucratic system and the exam almost completely intact.  

The exam consisted of testing on various skills such as reading, writing, mathematics, archery, and riding which would have been expected of a young Chinese civil servant circa 1000 A.D.  One could say this was simply a test to ensure that a pupil had learned all of his lessons to satisfaction, not a true test of intelligence.  However, did not the Imperial Examination serve the same purposes that modern I.Q. tests serve today?  But I'm getting ahead of myself.

In 1903, a French psychologist by the name of Alfred Binet published a book, L'Etude experimentale de l'intelligence, or The Experimental Study of Intelligence, detailing his findings, as part of the Free Society for the Psychological Study of the Child, into the divisions between children of "normal intelligence" and "abnormal intelligence."  Binet intended his study to help place children with special learning needs in appropriate classrooms.  

In 1905, Binet, along with a research student named Theodore Simon produced a new variant of Binet's original exam and tested it on a small (50) group of French children who were identified by their teachers, people who interacted with them almost every day, as of average intelligence and competence.  Binet and Simon asked the children questions of varying degrees of difficulty, ranging from simple tasks like shaking hands, to complex questions involving creative thinking and inference like, "My neighbor has been receiving strange visitors. He has received in turn a doctor, a lawyer, and then a priest. What is taking place?"  A subject whose score on the test was completely average for their age would receive a score exactly corresponding to their age (such as 10 years old = 10.0).  Binet, as I have said, intended only for his test to assist in the placement of children in special education programs.

In the United States, variations of the Binet-Simon test were used for everything from advancing the cause of eugenics to classifying recruits for service and officer potential in WWI.  

Enough history, and back to the question I posed earlier when I said that one could claim that the Imperial Examination merely tested absorption of information, not intelligence: did the Chinese Imperial Examination serve the same purposes as modern I.Q. tests do today?  If so, do they both measure intelligence, or absorption of information?  

You see, I question the use of I.Q. tests.  I do not believe that a single number, or even a set of numbers, can accurately describe a person for all given situations.

Modern society, more so than ancient society, even Imperial China, values above almost all else simplicity and elegance of form.  This is evident in our obsession with standardization, our struggles with cultural pluralism, even our stylistic and design preferences.  "Simple" has become a buzz-word.  Hell, a popular and successful advertising campaign even centers around a big red button with the word "EASY" on it.

This obsession with the compact, the elegantly sparse, and the understated began right about the time that Alfred Binet was developing a test for kids ages 6 to 15.  In physics: James Clerk Maxwell's fusion of electricity and magnetism into the electromagnetic force, Albert Einstein's development of his famous law of energy-mass equivalence (in 1905, the same year as the Binet-Simon test's advent, no less), the explosion of Grand Unified Theories of Physics.  In fashion: a move away from the gaudy and lavish costumes of the 19th century towards the more plain and simple attire, including slips and evening gowns of the 1920s - still expensive and at times flamboyant, but nowhere near as detailed or wildly over-the-top as previous centuries.  In trade and foreign policy: the rise of globalisation, the decline of traditional national sovereignty, and the rise of international organisations.  In almost every field, the world has become simpler, and I.Q. scores, and the huge amount of importance which is placed upon them, is a manifestation of that trend.

I want to pause for a moment and ask, what does it mean to be human?  A question without an answer, both philosophically and biologically.  There is such a range within what is considered "human" that the definitions of that range cease even to exist.  Can humanity be identified by a single gene, a single strand of DNA, even a series of behavioural characteristics?  It is impossible to compress all the wonders of humanity, all the beautiful variation, the fractal-like similarity and scalability hand-in-hand with the distinct individuality of each being.  Within the fractal of humanity, there are an infinite number of variations - each a person, and, following my little fractal metaphor, it is just as impossible to compress all the wonders of a single human as it is all of humanity (whatever "humanity" means).

I.Q. tests compress humans into scores.  They define people within a single range, and though they may predict with a certain degree of accuracy how well a student will do in high school or even how much money they will make, there is enough evidence that these are influenced by factors closely associated to, but not part of, I.Q. scores to cast significant doubt on the situation.

Is it possible, though, that telling someone their I.Q. score, or even telling others, can influence perception of that person and therefore have a positive or negative effect on their life?  Is it at all fair (for lack of a better word) to afford a person with a higher I.Q. score more opportunities than a comparable person with a lower score?  Similarly, is it fair for a society to spend more money on a person with a lower than average I.Q. than on a person with a normal I.Q.?  What unintended implications can testing people for "intelligence" have?  Is moral?  Is it just?

And to think that Alfred Binet was only trying to help children find a classroom that suited their needs.

P.S.  While researching this post, I ran across an uncited Wikipedia mention of a Venetian meritocracy during the period of the Venetian Republic.  Apparently Venice used a "points system" to determine who was on the oligarchical ruling council in a given year.

37 comments:

誤會 said...

i trust everything will be fine. bless you!........................................

護唇膏 said...

TAHNKS FOR YOUR SHARING~~~VERY NICE ........................................

lesson said...

噴泉的高度,不會超過它的源頭。一個人的事業也是如此,它的成就絕不會超過自己的信念。 ....................................................

曉豪 said...

一沙一世界,一花一天堂,掌中握無限,剎那即永恆..................................................

于名于倫 said...

生命的意義,是在於活的充實;而不是在於活得長久。 ..................................................

Rosalind治男Garney火吟 said...

如果相遇.你會感到相知.那麼.有一種習慣叫做陪伴;如果陪伴.你會感到珍惜.那麼.有一種甜蜜叫做存在!......................................................

子珠 said...

I love readding, and thanks for your artical.........................................

佳安 said...

a愛情館影片免費85cc 85cc成人免費看 85cc成人片免費看 成人18色網85cc 觀看85cc 85cc成人片小澤圓 85cc免費成人片觀賞 85cc免費影城net 85cc免費影城無碼 85cc免費影片觀看8 85cc免費a片下載 85cc. 85cc 免費影城 net 18成人網85cc影城 18成人85cc影城0204movie aio交友愛情館免費85cc 85cc歐美免費影片欣賞 成人影城85cc 免費電影85cc hilive tv免費電影85cc 85cc片 85cca 85cc- 85cc歐美 免費影片欣賞 85cc成人片免費觀看 85cc免費長片 成人電影85cc 成人85cc影城 情色視訊85cc影城 免費影城85cc卡通 色妹妹情色網85cc免費影片 a片85cc 85cc亞洲東洋影片 85cc免費av影片 85cc免費a片試看 85cc觀看 85cc短片 情色視訊交友85cc 85cc亞洲東洋影片視訊交友 85cc嘟嘟影城

麗泰秋卿 said...

一元真爽黃電影一夜聊天室一夜情視訊網際論壇一夜激情聊天室一對多美女視訊一對一視訊一對一視訊聊天一對一視訊辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室一本道 a片 東京熱avdvd影片一本道 a片 東京熱av免費影片甜心寶貝直播貼片玩美女人視訊網美女短片免費試看視訊交友網50024彩虹avdvdsex888免費看影片亞亞 dvd 光碟百事免費av視訊聊天網免費線上 aa 片試看85CCsex貼片網s383情色大網咖熟女自拍sex免費成人影片情境坊歡愉用品 視訊泳裝秀拓網交友免費成人影片,104免費成人情色文學小說視訊主播脫衣秀gogo2sexplus28論壇米克綜合論壇聊天室交友av成人網g8mm 視訊壞朋友論壇視訊美女msvt中部人聊天室視訊網愛聊天室網路援交168論壇辣妹貼圖新竹援交38ga片下載全國最大俱樂部

曉豪 said...

Beauty, unaccompanied by virtue, is as a flower without perfume.

啟佐 said...

A good medicine tastes bitter. .............................................

偉誠 said...

部落格很棒唷~ 支持你歐^^..............................

怡潔向霖 said...

Virtue dwells not in the tongue but in the heart. ............................................................

walsha said...

要愛你的仇敵,為那些逼迫你的人禱告 ..................................................

則義 said...

It takes all kinds to make a world..................................................................

Elvis湘均Kasp湘均 said...

被人揭下面具是一種失敗,自己揭下面具卻是種勝利。...............................................................

祁禾 said...

nice to know you, and glad to find such a good artical!......................................................................

王瑞 said...

Poverty is stranger to industry..................................................................                           

江婷 said...

與人相處不妨多用眼睛說話,多用嘴巴思考.................................................................

AlphonseH_Va哲維 said...

一個人的價值,應該看他貢獻了什麼,而不是他取得了什麼............................................................

李威昌 said...

Practice what you preach.............................................................

吳婷婷 said...

Pay somebody back in his own coin.............................................................

雅莊王edgd春2蕙婷余惠其 said...

感謝您費心的分享您的生活!讓我也感同身受!..................................................................

原秋原秋 said...

天下沒有意把鑰匙,可以打開所有的門............................................................

萬宇萬宇 said...

你所貫徹的形象,你喜愛它有多少百分比,你就幸福多少百分比................................................

林彥以林彥以 said...

不論做什麼事,相信自己,別讓別人的一句話,把你擊倒。..................................................

潘凱花潘凱花 said...

幸福沒有鑰匙,只有梯子。.................................................................

吳庭 said...

困難的不在於新概念,而在於逃避舊有的概念。............................................................

李秀迪彭恩依 said...

我在戀愛著?--------是的,因為我在等待著.................................................................

林聿希林聿希林聿希 said...

「仁慈」二個字,就能讓冬天三個月都溫暖。..................................................

姚吳宗瑞家弘 said...

人不可以求其備,必捨其所短,取其所長............................................................

文王廷 said...

出遊不拘名勝,有景就是好的..................................................................

雅佳謙筑 said...

Prevention is better than cure.............................................................

熙筠銘筠銘筠銘辰 said...

逛街不如逛部落格,省錢又開心啊..................................................................

家陳瑞尹明 said...

超棒的,給予最大支持。(* ̄△ ̄*)............................................................

孫邦柔 said...

真是太猛了,請受小弟一拜Orz(>O<)..................................................................

佳張張張張燕張張張張張 said...

開懷幸福的生活,是每個人的夢想~~希望大家都能夠實現!...............................................................