From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: t-- Re: t// t// Re: REC.ORG.MENSA TODAY
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 10:13:47 GMT

Let's get to the truth, for the truth will set you free.

tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott A Tai) writes:
>
>radams@BNR.CA (Rodney Adams) writes (you ought to know better...):
>
>"Rodney":
>
>Well, I agree it was phrased in a very poor manner.  The truth be told, it
>was not the reply I had intended to post.  The intended reply was much more 
>matter-of-fact, and stated "You're not *necessarily* more intelligent..."
>Once I realized my mistake, there was no turning back, and I decided that I
>should stand by the post.
>
>|> Now, if IQ, as you assert, shows the potential for achievement (those with
>|> high IQ have the potential to succeed; those with low IQ do not), then why
>|> do you also insist that the validity of standardized tests is so questionable?
>
>No one can deny that minority groups in this country do poorly on standardized 
>intelligence tests, particularly on the SAT and PSAT.  Schools, universities, 
>and Old Guard fans everywhere use this to uphold their own racial stereotypes, 
>to label minority groups as "ineducable."  Personally, I have absolutely NO 
>doubt that blacks, hispanics, and other minorities are of EQUAL intelligence, 
>on average, to the average white.  I do not want to accuse MENSA of racism 
>here, but HOW THE HELL do you explain these testing differences?
>
>I do not believe that there *IS* a reasonable measure of intelligence.  
>But I do believe that success-in-life and overcoming adversity is a much 
>better "measure" than a test of dubious validity.

IQ tests undoubtedly favor certain sorts of intelligence over others.
I deal with the occult, and most of what I do is considered *garbage*
because it is not demonstrable. To Whom? To people who haven't the time
to invest to evaluate *what* I do and *how* I do it. They walk away,
saying "O well, it's not scientific - so it's all crap."

Walter Gieseking interprets Beethoven in a way that suggests to me he is
really in touch with the spirit of the music. How well do we think he might
do on a standardized test? He might not do so well. Yet he is a genius at
his craft. IQ tests show capacity in *certain* areas, and that is all we know.
Unfortunately, there are many right-brain aspects of human nature I suspect
we neither know how to categorize, nor how to measure.

I swear to God, I think you are making valid points (despite my treatment
of you, which I don't expect you to forgive.) - And I think you are making
them backwards. There is a thing I call a "one-way test": if it succeeds,
we know *something*; if it fails, we cannot say *anything* either way.
Your complaint seems to be that, because IQ tests validate a thing X, which
we know *not* to be the determiner of greatness, IQ tests are invalid.
Why not make the complaint - which is more to the point - that of all the
things which make a person great, we seem to know how to measure only one,
namely IQ. You cannot dispute that IQ tests do measure *potential* in
certain areas. But you are right to complain that society's dependence on
the only tests it has, is invalid.

I want to make this personal, because that is always ultimately the truth.
You seem to hold a grudge, and I infer rightly or wrongly that you feel
discriminated against. I am entirely willing, based on what I've read from
you so far, to say that I consider you intelligent - without knowing any
more about you. If you have a specific problem, which has caused *you*
injury, then why not just share that, what it is? *I* personally have no
stake in injuring you, and I doubt I would, flamed by you or not. I don't
care if you are a Mensan or not. If you are intelligent - well, I know
numbers of people more creative and more intelligent than Mensans I have
met, who could not pass the tests, for whatever reason. Your grudge would
appear to be, that Mensa being an organization of people laying claim to
being intelligent, while you know that you are intelligent, you cannot gain
admission, because they don't know how to measure *your* brand of intelligence.
Then I agree - IQ tests are arbitrarily discriminatory. I know a number of
Mensans who are socially dysfunctional; yet people of 'ordinary' intelligence,
who very exceedingly well know how to deal with other people out of deep
and innate smarts, still do not qualify to be told by 'Mensa' that they are
intelligent. Your point about achievement vs. intelligence is very well taken.
I could sit in my room all day crowing about how *smart* I am, according to
being admitted to Mensa; that doesn't mean I have the faintest clue about
negotiating ordinary reality. You may very well be an extremely competent
individual, and yet not be admissible to 'Mensa', for failing to pass their
measures. I could understand your holding a grudge, were this the case, because
there is no 'alternative' (supposedly - if they all use standardized tests.)

Rather than attack IQ tests, why not address *your* concerns and try to
explain *yourself*. "We-all" who qualify for Mensa can accept you anyway,
regardless the testing issue. I know too many people who are intelligent
who do not belong to Mensa, to think that Mensa respresents intelligent
people-at-large and can speak for them as a group. It really *is* in certain
senses just a social club. So I would not worry about it in any way.

Maybe you can be straightforward, to address your *personal* concerns.
This will be the fastest route toward integrating you into this group.
I could give a shit for qualifications.

-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.photo