Selene Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Daunce,Why would I ever get mad at you?You're a sweet respectable widow.With an improved IQ...MichaelThank you young man, you are so kind to help me down off this ladder. I can see that your mother raised you right.I guess this is a real bad time to tell you about Michael's "up skirt" camera fetish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share Posted January 18, 2011 Daunce,Why would I ever get mad at you?You're a sweet respectable widow.With an improved IQ...MichaelThank you young man, you are so kind to help me down off this ladder. I can see that your mother raised you right.I guess this is a real bad time to tell you about Michael's "up skirt" camera fetish... Oh, well. At least he isn't Swedish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 21, 2011 Author Share Posted January 21, 2011 Daunce,Why would I ever get mad at you?You're a sweet respectable widow.With an improved IQ...MichaelThank you young man, you are so kind to help me down off this ladder. I can see that your mother raised you right.I guess this is a real bad time to tell you about Michael's "up skirt" camera fetish... Oh, well. At least he isn't Swedish.Good Gord I was wrong, he is part-Swedish and could be descended from the John Stuart who landed in Boston in 1702 and might be related to me and all sorts of other awful things, I hope nobody here ever hears about certain events in Kapuskasing on Feb.13-24,1994.Oops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Thank you young man...Daunce,Young man? And a thank you to boot?!!Dayaamm!That's it.You done crossed the line.You have a friend for life.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippi Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) Thank you young man...Daunce,Young man? And a thank you to boot?!!Dayaamm!That's it.You done crossed the line.You have a friend for life.MichaelEdited to remove snarky comments. Pippi Edited January 21, 2011 by pippi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Ah, come on, Pippi.It's only one teensy-weensy, itsty-bitsy little sell-out.Imagine what would have happened if she said I was fetching to boot.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippi Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) ok Edited January 21, 2011 by pippi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted January 21, 2011 Author Share Posted January 21, 2011 Back to intelligence and IQ, a contribution to this discussion has been added by someone on Noodlefood, albeit unintentionally. What I gather from his comments on natural levels of intelligence is, that when the IQ/natural level of intelligence between an Objectivist and a non-Objectivist is equal, the difference is "mental sharpness."Guess who has it and who doesn't. I would have stayed to learn more but Comrade Sonia was inspecting the guard's tower.Maybe someone interested with good camouflage could recoinnoitre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippi Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Back to intelligence and IQ, a contribution to this discussion has been added by someone on Noodlefood, albeit unintentionally. What I gather from his comments on natural levels of intelligence is, that when the IQ/natural level of intelligence between an Objectivist and a non-Objectivist is equal, the difference is "mental sharpness."Guess who has it and who doesn't. I would have stayed to learn more but Comrade Sonia was inspecting the guard's tower.Maybe someone interested with good camouflage could recoinnoitre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Is there any evidence given by Rand that people can raise their IQ from 110 to 150?Not an iota.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Is there any evidence given by Rand that people can raise their IQ from 110 to 150?Not an iota.Ba'al ChatzafIQ tests were developed in WWI as a quick means for separating enlisted men and officer material. The tests measure some aspects of intelligence and other aspects not at all. Since 100 is average, 110 seems to be fairly smart. Subjective terms such as "brilliant" and "genius" are not revealed by IQ tests, witness all the moronic--another subjective term--college professors who made themselves stupid in important ways and other high IQers who never structured their minds to maximize their native intelligence. We cannot know Rand's real IQ unless we know the test results from her teenage years--a test given in Russian. Because she read so slowly in English, she could not have subsequently done well on a test given in English. But by reading her novels we can certainly come to the conclusion she was a genius. We just cannot objectify her genius with numbers--or anyone else's. Now, if most people were determinedly rational, really tried to be rational, really tried to do serious, critical thinking, most people's intelligence would appear to go way up, but their IQ scores would probably not change too much.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Brant,Yes, after too many instances of knowing highly intelligent people with little rationality, I think a "RQ" (Rationality Quotient), makes much more sense than IQ.And exposure to Objectivism self-evidently does improve one's RQ.Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) Brant,Yes, after too many instances of knowing highly intelligent people with little rationality, I think a "RQ" (Rationality Quotient), makes much more sense than IQ.And exposure to Objectivism self-evidently does improve one's RQ.TonyI am not so sure of that. She has a definite effect, but, on average, Rand seems to confirm as many people in their vices as she does in their virtues. Edited January 23, 2011 by Ted Keer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonrobt Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) Daunce,Why would I ever get mad at you?You're a sweet respectable widow.With an improved IQ...MichaelThank you young man, you are so kind to help me down off this ladder. I can see that your mother raised you right.I guess this is a real bad time to tell you about Michael's "up skirt" camera fetish... Oh, well. At least he isn't Swedish.Good Gord I was wrong, he is part-Swedish and could be descended from the John Stuart who landed in Boston in 1702 and might be related to me and all sorts of other awful things, I hope nobody here ever hears about certain events in Kapuskasing on Feb.13-24,1994.Oops.Hmmm... sometimes being a Scot, with Randolph English background not seem so bad... Edited January 23, 2011 by anonrobt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Brant,Yes, after too many instances of knowing highly intelligent people with little rationality, I think a "RQ" (Rationality Quotient), makes much more sense than IQ.And exposure to Objectivism self-evidently does improve one's RQ.TonyAssociate an ordinal or numerical scale with rationality. How would you do it?Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now