-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Darin Sunley <rsunley@escape.ca> Wrote:
> The only reason "IQ is now defined" as ANYTHING other then
>"verbal/spatial" reasoning is that a bunch of social psychologists in the mid 70s
>decided how unfair it was that only people with good spatial/verbal abilities got
>to call themselves "intelligent", as if intelligence was ever anything more then
>one's result on a spatial/verbal abilities test.
The physicist Richard Feynman was one of the greatest geniuses of the 20'th century and when he was in high school he had an IQ test. He got a mediocre 125. The best definition of intelligence that I can think of is " the sort of thing that Richard Feynman did" therefore the disgrace can not be Feynman's, it's the advocates of the test who should feel embarrassed.
Years later after he became famous and won the Nobel prize the people at Mensa wrote to him and begged him to join, he took great delight in telling them that he could not, he just wasn't smart enough.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.5
iQA/AwUBN7Gxv9+WG5eri0QzEQKT/gCg5FGolISlriTCcsJWsFT4SLBC8LAAn1ie
c0znd4joJLszs4opoZh7+HTK
=ioQ4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----