Duns, et al, Free Will Vs. Determinism

by larc 58 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  dunsscot

  Larc,

  :Duns,
  I spent considerable time giving you a history of IQ testing and a good working definition, and you blow it off with a causal remark that you are critical of IQ tests because they don't measure every unique aspect of intelligence. They weren't designed for that purpose!!:

  I appreciate the history and working definition that you provided, Larc. And if you will notice, I did not simply 'blow off' your comments with "a causal remark." I am well aware of what IQ tests were designed to measure. The problem is that many psychometricians do not use IQ tests for the said original purpose. What is more, I am arguing that IQ tests only measure certain types of intelligence, but certain folks in the Academy act like such tests can somehow tell us something about biological or innate intelligence. That simply is not true in light of sociological evidence that tells us one's culture and one's emotional state have a lot to do with one's IQ score:

  "According to F.A. Hanson, intelligence tests are supposed to measure a person's ability to define words or solve problems that appear on standardized examinations. The drawback to this process, however, is that every 'correct' answer on an intelligence test is based on a person's previous didactical training as well as his or her particular cultural experiences. If the individual taking the test is proficient in a certain scholastic area, or if he or she is thoroughly familiar with Western culture, the said test-taker will probably do well on a standardized test. Alternately, if one has not learned certain academic subjects, how can we expect him or her to do well on such intelligence tests?"

  Stephen J. Gould writes: "IQ is a helpful device for identifying children in need of aid, not a dictate of inevitable biology" (Gould 12+). Lest one misconstrue Gould’s observation, it is important to realize that he does not believe we should abolish intelligence testing altogether. Nevertheless, he does think that those who use standardized tests to measure human intelligence have oftentimes abused the utility of such tests.

  :Nonetheless, they are the best single predictor of occupational advancement and academic success e.g. graduate school.:

  Both Plotnik and Sternberg question these assumptions and provide evidence to the contrary.

  :I also provided you with descriptions in the differences in the ability level on the IQ continuum, which are striking. As far as I am concerned you are just spouting the acedemic Zeitgeist which is the popular opinion to take.:

  I will get to those comments tonight. I am trying to do so before I leave this board.

  :Since you are into the books, you might specify the aspects of intelligence that are not measured by standard tests. For the test that measure the unique factors, also specify how large the "g" factor is in each case. If you decide to take on this task, you can skip one distinction - crystalized versus fluid intelligence. IQ tests measure crystalized intelligence.:

  Gardner, Sternberg and others have already delienated the aspects of intelligence that are not measured by standard tests. So have the authors of _Inequality by Design_. That is old news. :-)

  By the way, did you find a quote for me re: Ellis, and did you read the thread re: Ellis?

  I have not looked at Ellis yet. I was trying to reply to your thoughts on IQ tests. This is my last night (for real!) on this board. I no longer have time to spend hours on this forum.

  Duns the Scot

  "Nobody is taller than himself or herself."
• 

  larc

  Duns,

  There is so much foolishness in these quotes, I don't know where to begin. First of all, I am on webtv with no printer so I can't read this while posting, so I will respond to a few major points.

  One correction: Psychometricians don't administer tests. They design them and develope statisical methodology to evaluate them. Clinical and School Psychologists administer them. By the way, what are the purposes that they are being used for now, that were not intended in the first place? That is a very vague comment.

  Cultural and Emotional factors: The effects on a test like the WAIS are minimal. Some of the 11 subtests can be used in different cultures with different language with no change whatsoever in content. Since the test is given by a trained professional, they would not administer the test to someone who was highly emotional. When you say culture and emotion has "a lot" to do with the score, how much is a lot?

  Gould states that "oftimes" the test utility is abused. How often is oftimes. Amongst trained professionals, I would say almost never. These are highly insulting and unproven assertions by academics who have never functioned as a practitioner. (If they can make assertions, so can I).

  Role of education: One some WAIS subtest, none - on others some. A profile analysis of the subtests can in fact, determine things like possible cultural deprivation.

  Next time you are at the library for Psychological Bulletin and read the article my Hunter and Schmidt. They know a hell of a lot more about this subject than the textbook writers, believe me.
• 

  larc

  Duns,

  Since you are leaving soon I will leave you with some parting questions. Name a test or any other assessment device that predicts success better than an IQ test for college and work. I mentioned Hunter and Schmidt before. They proved conclusively that tests are not culturally biased when it comes to predicting occupational success. They won a scientific award for their classic work on the subject.
• 

  dunsscot

  Larc:

  :Duns,

  :Further IQ facts. The average score is a hundred with a standard deviation of 15. This means that 2/3rds of the population have scores between 85 and 115. Do scores along this continuum make a difference? You bet. An adult with a verbal IQ [of 70] on the WAIS can read at the third grade level at best. Most are functionaly illiterate.:

  There are a number of factors that we must consider when evaluating scores on the WAIS. What if a person taking the test speaks English as a second language? What if the one taking the test is a poor test taker or suffers from test anxiety? Both Kaplan and Saccuzzo have found that certain "nonintellectual factors" (cultural, scholastic, or emotional) influence one's score on the WAIS. What is more, I personally know a young man who has been told he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome. He normally scores 70 on IQ tests, but he reads better than most of his middle school peers and he has made several 100s on spelling tests. Furthermore, his speech is quite articulate, despite his handicap. He is not the only person in this situation who has accomplished such tasks, however. Plotnik also relates the story of an autistic girl, who authors books. She obviously has to have a certain command of language to perform this task. Admittedly, I have not conducted a scientific study to verify my intuitions here. But I think one could find examples of folks with IQs of 70, who do not conform to your description above in the least. I might lastly mention kids who suffer from ADD or ADHD. At least some of these children score 70s on IQ tests. But they may read much better than their peers.

  :At the other extreme, Terman's classic study with people in the top one percent have productivity levels in terms of patents and copywrights that are ten times higher than those that are above average but not that gifted. Obviously, someone with an IQ of 70 can barely write a sentence let alone write a book. Is IQ an important construct? No question about it.:

  As I noted above, there are people with IQ scores of 70 that do write books and outperform their peers in certain academic areas. As for those in the upper one percent, what about the fact that researchers who succeeded Terman found that out of the 1500 gifted children that Terman tested, 10-30% obtained advanced degrees, whereas 30% never finished college and 2% flunked out. Researchers also found that 9% of these subjects had serious emotional problems and 7% committed suicide.

  Rod Plotnik thus concludes that "As a group, these gifted individuals were generally very successful in life but not at the extraordinary level that might have been expected or predicted from their very high IQ scores (Colangelo 1997). For example, do you think Marilyn vos Savant's achievement as magazine writer matchhes her extraordinary score?" (Plotnik 289).

  :Since I had to come back to explain this, I will mention that this is based on a study I conducted many years ago that was in the Journal of Rehabilitation. I compared WAIS verbal IQ with reading comphrension as measured by the Nelson Reading Test. The sample size was about 300. The data also showed that verbal IQ set an upper limit for reading comprehenion in the IQ range from 70 to 100. Above 100, IQ didn't make a diference up through a reading level of 11th grade.This raises another interesting question. Does IQ affect free will? I would say that people with very low IQs also have a narrower range of free will than someone like you or me.:

  I will concur with you on the reading comprehension level issue. The individuals that I talked about with IQs of 70 read well (i.e., articulately and rapidly), but they have trouble comprehending what they read. But as I mentioned earlier, they do well in spelling and articulation of speech.

  Concerning my IQ and yours: That is just it. You do not know what my IQ score is, do you? What if I told you that my IQ score was below 100? What would you say? What if it was well below 100? Maybe one SD below?

  Duns the Scot

  "Nobody is taller than himself or herself."
• 

  larc

  Duns,

  Let's start with the last question first. Your verbal IQ is 132 plus or minus 7 points. I would guess that your performance IQ is about 125 based on normative data for people like yourself. To assert that your IQ is 100 is just a matter of blowing smoke.
  If you provide your SAT or GRE scores, I will convert it to a verbal IQ for you.

  English as a second language: On two occassions, I was asked to adiminister the WAIS to managers from South America who worked for a major US corporation. The reason I was asked to test them was because their scores on a group administered test did not jive with their level of occupational success, and the assessors brought me in to give a more precise measure. On the WAIS, they scored a full standard deviation higher than they did on the previous tests. Since the verbal section of the WAIS is not timed, they were able to take the time to translate my question into Spanish, retrieve the answer in Sanish and translate into English. No, language is not a problem with the WAIS.

  Social, emotional, and cultural factors: specificly, how many points will be shaved from the score? I already told you that tests are not culturally biased in predicting job success.

  Aspergis Syndrome: Don't know anything about it, but it sounds like the person you described can read the words, but doesn't understand or learn from them.

  The autistic book writer: Most of the time autism is associated with a low IQ, but apparently not in this case. You did not say what this person's IQ was.

  You say you might find some exceptions to my statements. Perhaps, I have given WAISes to about 200 people with IQ's around 70 and haven't seen any yet.

  Termen's study: Some were maladjusted, but that is true of any group. As a group they were healthier than average.
  Again I ask: name a better predictor of occupational and academic success.
• 

  dunsscot

  :One correction: Psychometricians don't administer tests. They design them and develope statisical methodology to evaluate them. Clinical and School Psychologists administer them. By the way, what are the purposes that they are being used for now, that were not intended in the first place? That is a very vague comment.:

  Did I say that psychometricians administer tests? I don't think so. I looked back through the posts and this is what I found:

  "The problem is that many psychometricians do not USE IQ tests for the said original purpose. What is more, I am arguing that IQ tests only measure certain types of intelligence, but certain folks in the Academy act like such tests can somehow tell us something about biological or innate intelligence. That simply is not true in light of sociological evidence that tells us one's culture and one's emotional state have a lot to do with one's IQ score."

  By USE, I am referring to such examples as the 845-page tome by Murray and Herrnstein that appeals to IQ scores when suggesting the notion of genetic intellectual inferiority. Do you think that IQ tests were originally designed to measure innate intelligence? Do you think that (as Murray and Herrnstein also contend) IQ tests were originally designed to explain social stratification? A number of psychologists have rightly taken Murray and Herrnstein's USE of IQ tests to task, both literally and figuratively. The APA Task force did so literally. The six sociologists from Stanford that I mentioned earlier have done so figuratively.

  :Cultural and Emotional factors: The effects on a test like the WAIS are minimal. Some of the 11 subtests can be used in different cultures with different language with no change whatsoever in content. Since the test is given by a trained professional, they would not administer the test to someone who was highly emotional. When you say culture and emotion has "a lot" to do with the score, how much is a lot?:

  I did not say a test taker has to be "highly emotional" to perform poorly on a test. But the person could be suffering from test anxiety and not make it known to the examiner. He or she (the test taker) may also be a poor test taker. Additionally, by emotional, there are certainly numerous factors here. But anxiety could certainly be included here. Lastly, it seems that young African-Americans have to contend with a persistent inferiority complex. A lack of self-worth or certain dysfunctional home conditions can also affect one's test scores. Humanistic psychologists and sociologists like Jane Mercer have further shown that environment also plays a large role in IQ test scores. See Mercer's study involving Chicano children and improved IQ scores after the adjustment of five cultural variables.

  :Gould states that "oftimes" the test utility is abused. How often is oftimes. Amongst trained professionals, I would say almost never. These are highly insulting and unproven assertions by academics who have never functioned as a practitioner. (If they can make assertions, so can I).:

  It has been about five years or more since I read Gould's works and included them in my research on the quiddity of intelligence. So I cannot at this point provide any proofs to back up Gould's contention. But when he indicates that the UTILITY of such tests have often been abused, I think he is referring to books like _The Bell Curve_ and the way that the Academy in general uses standardized tests. He covers this point in his work on craniometry. If I find anything tonight, I will let you know.

  :Role of education: One some WAIS subtest, none - on others some. A profile analysis of the subtests can in fact, determine things like possible cultural deprivation.:

  True.

  :Next time you are at the library for Psychological Bulletin and read the article my Hunter and Schmidt. They know a hell of a lot more about this subject than the textbook writers, believe me.:

  Not only have I read "textbook writers," I have also read the books by Sternberg, Gardner, the six sociologists from Stanford, and a number of other works dealing with this issue. But my paper was written years ago and I am now in the process of revising it. I am now approaching the question of intelligence from a philosophical perspective.

  Duns the Scot

  "Nobody is taller than himself or herself."
• 

  larc

  Duns,

  The factors that affect lowered tests scores, e.g. poverty, a rotten home life, poor nutrition, low self esteem, etc. also affect mental ability, the ability to learn, and grades in school. A test is a measurement device, no different than a thermometer. Don't blame the test. Blame the factors that create low scores.
• 

  dunsscot

  Dear larc,

  This will be my next to last post on this forum. I will probably visit when I get a break from study and writing and I am also going to say good-bye to everyone else. But I just wanted to thank you for the stimulating discussion, though we obviously are on two different sides of the "aisle." I will try and email you the information on Ellis.

  :Duns,
  Let's start with the last question first. Your verbal IQ is 132 plus or minus 7 points. I would guess that your performance IQ is about 125 based on normative data for people like yourself. To assert that your IQ is 100 is just a matter of blowing smoke.
  If you provide your SAT or GRE scores, I will convert it to a verbal IQ for you.:

  Years ago, I actually took IQ tests and scored relatively low on them. I took one a few months ago and my score had seemingly risen. I attribute it to increased confidence and a larger database of knowledge. (I.e., more sophisticated didactical training. Jane Mercer's study certainly allows for this conclusion.) Maybe I am wrong. But how would you explain a difference of at least one SD between two different tests?

  :Social, emotional, and cultural factors: specificly, how many points will be shaved from the score? I already told you that tests are not culturally biased in predicting job success.:

  Minority children (blacks and Hispanics generally score one SD lower than their Caucasian peers). That is a significant difference. BTW, what do you think of the Flynn effect? :-)

  :Aspergis Syndrome: Don't know anything about it, but it sounds like the person you described can read the words, but doesn't understand or learn from them.:

  Exactly! Asperger's syndrome is a milder form of autism.

  :The autistic book writer: Most of the time autism is associated with a low IQ, but apparently not in this case. You did not say what this person's IQ was.:

  The girl's name is Donna Williams. She has been called a "savant," so it seems that her IQ is not that high. She has actually written a 500-page book about her condition. But I do not know what her IQ is.

  :You say you might find some exceptions to my statements. Perhaps, I have given WAISes to about 200 people with IQ's around 70 and haven't seen any yet.:

  Perhaps, you have not. But I personally know some living and breathing exceptions to your rule.
  
  :Again I ask: name a better predictor of occupational and academic success.:

  I do not think that is my job. Besides, I think IQ tests scores may do better at predicting academic scores than they do at predicting job performance.

  I will just say in closing, I think that psychometricians often ask the wrong question. I favor abolishing testing in all forms (occupational and academic). In the academic realm, I think one must first define intelligence and make sure that the said definition adequately explains our experiential existence BEFORE we talk about testing intelligence. I do not believe that intelligence can be circumscribed by G and I am highly suspicious of any attempt to determine intelligence in terms of the mathematical-science ideal (so Dooyeweerd). Thanks once again. I will resume my studies of the nature of intelligence and report back to you.

  Take care!

  Duns the Scot

  "Nobody is taller than himself or herself."
• 

  larc

  Recently, someone put up a lyrical discussion of free will. For those of you who like a more chewy discussion, I put this back up top.
• 

  DCs Ghost

  Hey Larc,
  took me a few days, but at your request i came over to this thread, i hadn't been on in a while so i had no idea this one was going on, gotta say there are lots of interesting ideas being thrown back and forth,

  and being that i am coming in late to this discussion, i will first address the original question of the thread,
  free will vs. determinism,

  prior to this thread i had never heard the psychological term 'determinism' , so asfar as giving you my stance on it, the best i can do is respond by inference from what i understand it to be from your posts, and my perspective of the world. . .

  a little insight to my train of thoughts,
  i pretty much have come to the conclusion that there are no absolutes, with the exception of absolute zero of course, the speed of light and photosynthesis,
  many factors have taken me to this stand,

  among those are: being raised as a dub, and having to trade in my beliefs, in order to find myself and in order to create a real view of the future not the fairy tale one that was fed to me growing up,

  the changes in technology,
  one example, cds were the ultimate in sound reproduction but now we have dvdas which hold a many more ridiculous amounts of megabytes which allows sound engineers much more flexibility and possibilities on what can be produced as far as a cd in both quality of sound and speed in recording,

  and back to the church,
  how many times they change their minds about what exactly is the truth, ie heliocentric vs. geocentric, disposing of witches, and their stand on birth control,

  so before i drift away from the subject at hand, at some point my mind tweaked and i realized that i pretty much couldn't hold anything as an absolute because sooner or later something would affect it and change it, a new theory would evolve and replace,

  with that said, i have come to accept, acknowledge, and learn thru and by experience, (quite the continous and ongoing process) for that is the ultimate truth IMO, nothing is learned better than by pesonally undergoing and exposing oneself - whether by will or by chance - to anything that will alter one's perspective and through these gain insight into a realm that at one time was unfamiliar . . . .

  determinism from what i understand, works within our cells genes, dna, and these determine our personality and such and because of these, they influence our actions. . .

  ok first off, if i have understood this correctly on a very basic level,
  being that psychology is a soft science and that theories are constantly evolving, this theory of determinism because it is a theory, it is open to being questioned regardless of how much may be written for and against, likewise as with free will,

  this is where the previous ramble ties in, as far as i know and my family knows there are no musicians in my family with the exception of me, so as to how this came about, it would be unlikely for me to say that it was in my genes, but at the same time i can vouche that it was not a choice in the matter, i have always wanted to be a musician always been drawn to music as far back as i can remember, how this suports or negates the theory of determinism, i am not sure, the closest thing to having any ties with art in my family is the fact the fact that my mom is a seamstress, granted it is an art form but far from music,

  growing up in the borg this "gift" was frowned upon but knowing that it was a passion i pursued it, that was a conscious choice, i could have chosen to ignore and obey, but i would not have been true to myself, thus again a matter of choice, and as far as i know as long as i can make choices, regardless what they may be, i do as i will, within certain guidelines i am free to do what i want, whenever i want and as long as the cash flow allows it, thus giving me free will, no negative consequenquences followed my choice, fire didn't fall from the sky, etc.

  if indeed we are predisposed to certain influences, because our dna sais so, that is all fine and dandy but the fact that our dna is a certain way is because of the two individuals that bonded and created us. . .
  more in the next box i dont want ot loose this

  "we do not see the world as it is,
  we see the world as we are. . ." Anais Nin