Please help me understand IQ tests and scores post Scientology.

Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by Mike Laws, Jun 13, 2013.

View Users: View Users
  1. BardoThodol

    BardoThodol Silver Meritorious Patron

    What a wonderful example of the lunacy of the entire subject.

    You're testing for....uh...leadership, but all the "correct" answers exclude anyone who is truly a leader.

    By definition, a leader doesn't just follow orders exactly; that's the balliwick of mid-level management.

    And the best leaders allow for the creative input of those who work for them.
  2. BardoThodol

    BardoThodol Silver Meritorious Patron

    Uh, I got it! I got it!

    It's two sweet girls getting their bikinis ripped off in some gnarly waves.
  3. Gadfly

    Gadfly Crusader

    I think you might be treating the images more as a Rorschach or Inkblot Test instead of an IO Test! :biggrin:

    When Bardo looks at this:


    THIS is what he SEES:

    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  4. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader


  5. BardoThodol

    BardoThodol Silver Meritorious Patron

    Oh well, I never was very good at following other's ideas about what things should be.

    Ps: wrote the above and then my mouse died, so I had to search for batteries, which I couldn't find, so I got on my wife's laptop.
  6. BardoThodol

    BardoThodol Silver Meritorious Patron

    Now that's an IQ test I'm willing to take.

    Pass. Fail. who cares.

    Just a moment's carresssssss...


    Life is bliss.
  7. Student of Trinity

    Student of Trinity Silver Meritorious Patron

    IQ tests have changed a lot over the years. They've had to change. They're supposed to be normalized so that the average score is 100. But keeping the average at 100 has required steadily revising the tests, and the way they're scored, every ten years or so. Is this because modern education has been dumbed down, and watching TV has made kids stupider? No.

    The tests have had to be made harder, the scoring tougher. The raw scores of people taking older tests are always higher than they were, on average, when the older tests were new. The effect is not huge, but it's significant, and it has been a steady trend for a century. Over two generations, it adds up to a full standard deviation (about fifteen points in fifty years). This is called the Flynn effect. You can google it; it's a well-established fact, all around the world, and has been for decades. What it means is less clear.

    I'm not a psychometrician, so I have no personal axe to grind, defending the meaningfulness of IQ tests. As far as I'm concerned, the Flynn effect proves that IQ is bunk. By today's standards, the average person in my grandparents' generation had an IQ of 85, and the average person a hundred years ago had an IQ of 70. That's supposed to be severely handicapped. But there's no way that people back then were that much dumber than we are now. So to me the conclusion is that, whatever IQ tests are measuring, they are not really measuring intelligence very well.

    I also have some personal experience. I joined Mensa once. I only sort of scraped in; I didn't do as well as I expected on their test, though I finished it fast. It seemed to over-emphasize outdated cultural awareness, and fussy attention to detail. I paid my dues in Mensa for a year, then stopped paying. The people I met didn't seem all that bright. A little full of themselves, in some cases. Reasonably articulate, on average. But I felt that the army officers I knew were on the whole a sharper bunch of people. Now that I think of it, I've been more impressed by the average intellectual level here, than I was by the Mensans.

    My opinion is that IQ tests are simply shallow. An IQ test is long series of little bite-sized intellectual challenges. It's like stand-up comedy, with rapid fire punchlines, as opposed to a feature film. You can tell a great stand-up comic pretty clearly: just count the laughs. But you can't take a great stand-up comic, throw them into a director's chair, and get Gone with the Wind. Most meaningful applications of intelligence involve much bigger, harder problems than any IQ test question; but you can take a lot more time solving them. And skill in solving the little, bite-sized problems doesn't scale. Bigger problems are not just big piles of IQ test questions. There are totally different things going on, in the bigger problems. So a high IQ score does not make a really intelligent person, and a really intelligent person won't necessarily have a high IQ.
  8. Panda Termint

    Panda Termint Cabal Of One

    Scientology Testing scored me as some kinda genius, Life taught me otherwise. :duh:
  9. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    Same here. :duh:
  10. Mest Lover

    Mest Lover Not Sea Org Qualified

    That doesn't work for me, I didn't sign a Sea Org contract but was in the SO for 2.5 years. At times that makes me realize just how stupid I really am.

    BTW the Personality test is laid out in the 8 dynamics. The questions deal with each dynamic as they go along in 8's. There is a column that goes towards how accurate you are being with your answers.
  11. BardoThodol

    BardoThodol Silver Meritorious Patron

    Because I like this picture so much...

    I noticed the WTF about "some of my best friends are rocks" comment. Remember the pet rock craze? People would buy these rocks, socialize with them, take them places, care for them.

    Friendship has a lot to do with what you're willing to invest in the object of your feelings. Some individuals invest a great deal in someone without getting anything back, but remain attached and loyal. It's all one sided.

    As for Marilyn:


    What better rock than jewelry?
  12. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    There is no correlation, or at least none that I know of, between a person's IQ and a person's capability of acting out orders and following policy in a robotic manner.

    Nor is there any correlation between a person's IQ and a person's ability to follow command intention and flow thousands of dollars towards ideal orgs and super power buildings and IAS pursuits.

    However as for jumping on couches, building Psych museums of horror and standing in front of crowds spouting out useless stats to the world, I theorize that this correlation does exist, however I also theorize that it is negatively correlated.

    Of course my theory would make use of real IQ tests and not these trolled out IQ tests that the Church uses that seems to result in a one IQ fits all.

  13. BunnySkull

    BunnySkull Silver Meritorious Patron

    Thank you for this excellent post. I was getting ready to write yet another response to uncover & gadfly defense of certain IQ tests but you just covered the topic in this comment better than I could have.
  14. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    Exactly. As a matter of fact my college Sociology professor explained to us that IQ test results tell where one is in realtion to White Middle Class.

    So what is boils down to is this...

    White Middle Class = Homo Sapians

    Scientologist with an IQ of 154 = Homo Novis

    L Ron has indeed created a new breed of man.

    I can tell that their DNA is changing just by looking at the picture of them with their OT certs and reading their Sucess Stories.

    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  15. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    I get a kick out this from Wikipedia.

    The abbreviation "IQ" comes from the German term Intelligenz-Quotient, originally coined by psychologist William Stern


    He was the inventor of the concept of the intelligence quotient, or IQ, later used by Lewis Terman and other researchers in the development of the first IQ tests, based on the work of Alfred Binet.

    Hilarious that the Church makes use of the concept of IQ which was essentially started by a Psychologist.

    Just thefact that L Ron thinks that processing improves IQ tells us that L Ron hasn't a clue about it.

    And this is the guy who claims to have given us study technology.

    Hip hip hooray!

  16. Queenmab321

    Queenmab321 Patron Meritorious

    It's funny too that in the 1966, Hitchman interview Hubbard initially rejects the IQ because he says it sets an artificial limit to human potential. (One of Hubbard's reasons for detesting psychology so much appears to have had to with its reductionist understanding of human consciousness as ultimately explicable in terms of the physical, natural world. He seems to have possessed an almost visceral horror of this proposition.) Yet, as the interview continues Hubbard routinely refers to "before and after" IQ assessments as evidence of the efficacy of his processing. Of course, an objective interviewer would have have called him on it. In fact, Hitchman's weirdly rehearsed, fawning posture toward Hubbard is almost as creepy as Hubbard himself.
  17. Enthetan

    Enthetan Master of Disaster

    Scientology is a con. One major way of conning somebody is to tell him what he wants to hear: that he can be rich and successful, and all he has to do to become rich and successful is buy this little course...

    As far as the relation between IQ and genius is concerned, having a high IQ is not enough to be considered a genius. True genius involves using intelligence to accomplish or create something of importance.
  18. Boojuum

    Boojuum Silver Meritorious Patron

    Has anyone done or know of a legitimate before/after IQ test that showed their IQ increased while in Scientology?

    The Scieno IQ test doesn't count.

  19. Queenmab321

    Queenmab321 Patron Meritorious

    I think it was Mencken who said, "There are no mute, inglorious Miltons."
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  20. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I disagree

    Attached Files:

    • iq1.jpg
      File size:
      20.1 KB