[Polpolion]

Has anyone ever bothered to take any? I know their all crap, but their still rather amusing to take. I took this one IQ test at this tickle.com place, and it said I had an IQ of 133. If I had that IQ I would not be posting here. And my keyboard would not be broken. Then you see all of those people at that one retarded quiz site, I forget what it is called, but it lets you make your own. I have never realized that so many people came up with such retarded ideas. Then there is that site that has this one "are you a nerd?" test, and an "are you stupid?" test and some other weird stuff.

And then there are the ones that make you pay! I have never done any of those, but holy crap. Why on Earth would someone pay for that garbage? Actually, most of the stuff you pay for on the internet is garbage. Does anyone here actually do that stuff? What are your opinions on them?

[karajorma]

If you pay to have an online IQ test you have already shown that they needn't bother with triple digits. If you believe the score they needn't bother with the second one either.

[Flipside]

Usually merely taking the test is implicative of the results

[wtf_cl0vvn]

Ive tried them...on whims...

When i was in JH i would do the relationship tests with me and people that i had a crush on...how incredibly lame  :

[Polpolion]

Usually merely taking the test is implicative of the results

I don't take the test expecting the results to be anywhere near accurate (and as you can see they're not).
I didn't even do it for the results. :


EDIT: wtf I spent my 1000th post on this topic?

[Flipside]

Heh, I do them too sometimes for a laugh But I can usually be pretty sure of the results before I ever started, simply by seeing if theres a 'Pay here for a breakdown of your strengths' tab at the bottom

[Rictor]

If you pay to have an online IQ test you have already shown that they needn't bother with triple digits. If you believe the score they needn't bother with the second one either.

Quoteworthy, wise sensei.

[Ford Prefect]

The only online test that was really good was the one that asks you lots of personal questions-- like how often you masturbate-- then, when you click 'submit', emails your answers to the person who gave you the link.

[Mefustae]

The only online test that was really good was the one that asks you lots of personal questions-- like how often you masturbate-- then, when you click 'submit', emails your answers to the person who gave you the link.

Forgive me for asking what might seem the obvious, but what sick, twisted son-of-a-***** would want to know how many times one of his mates masturbates?!

[Mars]

Who's to say it's a he?

[Mathwiz6]

Lol... those things are messed.

Really, 150 IQ, all the time. Comparitively, I tried one of those older tests... Bam. 100 IQ, dead on 

Though... I overstated my age by three years...

I know someone who did one and got 8.

You have the IQ of a potato  .

[Polpolion]

The only online test that was really good was the one that asks you lots of personal questions-- like how often you masturbate-- then, when you click 'submit', emails your answers to the person who gave you the link.

[karajorma]

I occasionally do them myself. I couldn't give a stuff about the score but it's good to exercise your brain once in a while and even if the test score is worthless the act of taking the test isn't.

[Quest_techie]

you can demonstrate instantly that they have no value, and are for entertainment purposes <miss chloe anyone?> simply by the absence of an "age?" query

the I.Q. is a ratio of tested intelligence v. age, if bill is 3 and has the tested intelligence of a thirty year old he has an i.q. of 200, if he is thirty and has the tested intelligence of a thirty year old his i.q. is 100, simple as that <well, okay, I'm oversimplifying, but the bell curve\cap thing sort of makes that happen>

the i.q. scale represents a bell curve, the distance between 99 and 100 is the same as the distance between 100 and 101, but the distance between 100 and 101 is not the same as the distance between 150 and 151

they represent disparate statistical groups, and they, thus, represent abstract, and disparate quantitative differences in knowledge

of course, perspective to these abstract numbers is... dependant on ones understanding of the system

I know exactly where the line genius stands, I also know exactly where the average line stands, I know for a fact I sound like a neichzhe worshipping asshole when I say I believe the only reason genius is so impressive a word or concept is that average is so bleeding stupid

just my perspective

disclosure:

156, tested at 6, 14, 17, aged 19 now <was 141 at 6 but to be fair I didn't answer any of the questions I had to even remotly think about, and 14 and 17 I got the same score, 156, and further rendering of fairness I'm autistic, think rain man, just less>

[aldo_14]

IQ tests are meaningless because you can't test obtained and applied knowledge, only abstract concepts of what might influence them.

[Kazan]

real IQ tests aren't about knowledge, they're about mental capacity

* was tested during grades 3 and 7 ... i only missed two questions on the second one...

[Deniidil]

online tests are silly.... but sometimes silly is good - like the How Jedi Are You test

[Quest_techie]

IQ tests are meaningless because you can't test obtained and applied knowledge, only abstract concepts of what might influence them.

the abstracts represent ability to aquire knowledge, I think I used the term intelligence in all of those spaces in my first post in that very reason, it isn't about knowledge, it is about rate and capacity for knowledge aquisition

if you are just testing obtained and applied knowledge you are going to get much higher scores statistically out of people who have more money, not saying you don't already do, but that is an affect of eugenics more than an affect of the test

testing aquired and applied knowledge is what the SAT is for, and unfortunatly it is biased

you have to look at the larger foundations of the concepts, think big picture

[Polpolion]

IQ = intelligence quotient

Basicly from what I understand it is how well you get things from context, interpret data, your ability to assimilate information.

Wait... yeah, it's like capacity for knowledge acquisition like Techie said.

And of course, the only ones that are possibly accurate ask you your age.


EDIT: Crap, I think someone already said that, too.

[aldo_14]

IQ tests are meaningless because you can't test obtained and applied knowledge, only abstract concepts of what might influence them.

the abstracts represent ability to aquire knowledge, I think I used the term intelligence in all of those spaces in my first post in that very reason, it isn't about knowledge, it is about rate and capacity for knowledge aquisition

if you are just testing obtained and applied knowledge you are going to get much higher scores statistically out of people who have more money, not saying you don't already do, but that is an affect of eugenics more than an affect of the test

testing aquired and applied knowledge is what the SAT is for, and unfortunatly it is biased

you have to look at the larger foundations of the concepts, think big picture

(SAT?)

I'm aware of the concept behind IQ, I just think it's wholly pointless as an actual intelligence indicator.  At best it shows potential intelligence.  Moreso, it's wholly meaningless because it's just numerical.  If my IQ goes up, say, 2 points then how much smarter am I than before?  Does it suddenly mean I can do a different job or learn faster?  Does it reflect individual ability in different areas?  What happens if I do one IQ test in a different mood or environment to the other one and get a different score?  If my IQ goes/ has gone down between, say, 18 and 24 does that mean I have become less capable of learning?  Even if I have a greater knowledge base and experience for learning? Does memory contribute to intelligence? What if I practice IQ tests - am I getting smarter, or just practiced?  If an IQ test is randomized, can I really fairly compare to the result of another randomized test?  What if some questions are simple counter-intuitive for me whilst others are very intuitive?

(NB: smarter in context of the supposedly measured learning ability)