I used to read somewhere that men tend to be smarter and dumber IQ wise like extremists while woman have a more constant IQ like somewhere in between of mens IQ.All this is just generalization of course. Any correction would be helpful!
Assuming we can all actually agree on some set criteria for what you would apply to someone considered smart, I doubt we'd be able to measure enough men and women to come to a sound conclusion.
But really, what's to say that anyone's definition of "smart" takes precedence over anyone else's?
Is that enough? In every single category, except for one, men score higher.
bungie93
Um, you're using the Admissions statistics from the University of Mass-Amherst as your sample? Not appropriate at all, as it is WAAAY too narrow a sample and doesn't even represent the nation's best and brightest, were one aiming for that sample. Plus, gender stereotypes will have substantially affected learning by the high school level.
To say yes is to be a complete bias statement because I'm a man. Studies show that women are the more intelligent breed. Sometimes, I think otherwise, but it's in the records. Who am I to argue?
[QUOTE="Sajedene"]It's all subjective.TheOddQuantum
This.Exactly how is it subjective when we have a way to measure intelligence? As I stated...it varies with individual but it's not subjective as to who in life is intelligent...and who is not.
[QUOTE="TheOddQuantum"][QUOTE="Sajedene"]It's all subjective.LJS9502_basic
This.Exactly how is it subjective when we have a way to measure intelligence? As I stated...it varies with individual but it's not subjective as to who in life is intelligent...and who is not.
First off there is no real way to measure intelligence. What I mean is that people can be smart in different ways. Being a woman doesn't automatically make you less intelligent than a man and vise-versa.
I'm going to go with the same answer I would give if someone had asked me, "Do all goats smell bad?" If anyone can guess my answer, you get the unique privilege of having documented proof that you guessed my answer.
There's a lot of gender bias going on in our society. This certainly has a large impact on the education of women when compared to men. Studies may find that women have lower test scores than men or whatever but it's not as simple as saying that women are less intelligent because one, there are other factors at play, and two, as many others have pointed out, how do you measure intelligence in an objective manner?
Exactly how is it subjective when we have a way to measure intelligence? As I stated...it varies with individual but it's not subjective as to who in life is intelligent...and who is not.
First off there is no real way to measure intelligence. What I mean is that people can be smart in different ways. Being a woman doesn't automatically make you less intelligent than a man and vise-versa.
I'm not talking about gender here. I'm talking about intelligence not being subjective. It's not. We can tell the difference between those with intelligence and those lacking intelligence even without a test. However, IQ is a decent way to test. There is a difference between and IQ of 60...and IQ of 100...and an IQ of 140. There is no subjectiveness here.
Hmm... it depends on how you define "intelligence". I think women are wiser than men and perhaps smarter than men, and I don't care if people disagree. On a mere scientific standpoint, studies show that men are. It's difficult to test intelligence though.
[QUOTE="freshgman"]look at history. men have done everything.-starman-
and a global culture that oppressed women until at least the 50s in most places has had nothing to do with that? that just an excuse. balck people have been opressed yet they have invented many things and cured a lot of diseases
look at history. men have done everything.freshgman
Why is women's history so important then? Why is it even taught in schools? Women got many essential rights late in history, so obviously before that men "did everything."
[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="lilasianwonder"]Isn't that why Hillary lost? :P jk.freshgman
No, it's because the majority of Obama supporters aren't as smart as everyone else. har har. actually obama supporters are among the most educatedNot if those I've talked politics with are any indication.......:lol:
I'm not talking about gender here. I'm talking about intelligence not being subjective. It's not. We can tell the difference between those with intelligence and those lacking intelligence even without a test. However, IQ is a decent way to test. There is a difference between and IQ of 60...and IQ of 100...and an IQ of 140. There is no subjectiveness here.LJS9502_basic
*sigh* Again, it also depends and what kind of "smart" you are. That is the subjectivity, some one's perspective on what kind of smart a person is.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I'm not talking about gender here. I'm talking about intelligence not being subjective. It's not. We can tell the difference between those with intelligence and those lacking intelligence even without a test. However, IQ is a decent way to test. There is a difference between and IQ of 60...and IQ of 100...and an IQ of 140. There is no subjectiveness here.TheOddQuantum
*sigh* Again, it also depends and what kind of "smart" you are. That is the subjectivity, some one's perspective on what kind of smart a person is.
*sigh* No it doesn't depend what kind of "smart" you are. One either has intelligence or they do not. It's not subjectiive. An unintelligent person would not be able to correctly assess the intelligence of someone much more intelligent than they are because they lack the skills to do so. That DOES NOT make the intelligent person less intelligent.:roll:
*sigh* No it doesn't depend what kind of "smart" you are. One either has intelligence or they do not. It's not subjectiive. An unintelligent person would not be able to correctly assess the intelligence of someone much more intelligent than they are because they lack the skills to do so. That DOES NOT make the intelligent person less intelligent.:roll:LJS9502_basic
So, only the most intelligent person has the skills to determine who has what intelligence?
So, only the most intelligent person has the skills to determine who has what intelligence?Jandurin
The tests are fairly accurate within a range of points of determining the ability of the brain to "think". Would you say it's a subjective difference between an IQ of 50 and an IQ of 150? Using subjective as a standard means one is taking the capacity of the brain out of the equation. Let's say you have tested at 150 and you are a member of Mensa. You've furthered your education and made fantastic grades. Does that mean I can subjectively assess your intelliengence as 7th grade level based on some arbitrary schematic I created? Would I be correct?
As to my initial statement....an individual lacking intelligence would be at a disadvantage in judging intelligence...which was my point. Not the inference you came up with.;)
*sigh* No it doesn't depend what kind of "smart" you are. One either has intelligence or they do not. It's not subjective. An unintelligent person would not be able to correctly assess the intelligence of someone much more intelligent than they are because they lack the skills to do so. That DOES NOT make the intelligent person less intelligent.:roll:LJS9502_basic
You can be "smart" in different ways. And that is why I believe it to be subjective. For example some one can be smart in more than one way (How quickly one may learn, ability to solve problems, reasoning (again one may judge another on how they reason so I find this one rather important >_>.), etc.) One may judge another's intelligence on any one of those ways.
I'm very sorry if there is a misunderstanding here.:P
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]*sigh* No it doesn't depend what kind of "smart" you are. One either has intelligence or they do not. It's not subjective. An unintelligent person would not be able to correctly assess the intelligence of someone much more intelligent than they are because they lack the skills to do so. That DOES NOT make the intelligent person less intelligent.:roll:TheOddQuantum
You can be "smart" in different ways. And that is why I believe it to be subjective. For example some one can be smart in more than one way (How quickly one may learn, ability to solve problems, reasoning (again one may judge another on how they reason so I find this one rather important >_>.), etc.) One may judge another's intelligence on any one of those ways.
I'm very sorry if there is a misunderstanding here.:P
You know those are all related brain activities? Right?
Men's intelligence is distributed more widely across the bell curve: there's more highly intelligent men, but also more highly, um, not-so-intelligent men.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I'm not talking about gender here. I'm talking about intelligence not being subjective. It's not. We can tell the difference between those with intelligence and those lacking intelligence even without a test. However, IQ is a decent way to test. There is a difference between and IQ of 60...and IQ of 100...and an IQ of 140. There is no subjectiveness here.TheOddQuantum
*sigh* Again, it also depends and what kind of "smart" you are. That is the subjectivity, some one's perspective on what kind of smart a person is.
No it isn't. It just means that intelligence is represented in more than one area.
I watched a video on EVOLUTION and I heard that it was because of women choosing men for their intelligence and personality that led to the intelligence of the human race that we see today.
I watched a video on EVOLUTION and I heard that it was because of women choosing men for their intelligence and personality that led to the intelligence of the human race that we see today.
Log in to comment