Retirement

Democracy, Hollingworth and the innovation gap

Hollingsworth’s research into intelligence has shown that the range of person-to-person connections extends about two standard deviations [Suddenly certain communications barriers you may have make perfect sense, no? ]

Of intelligence points (**).

Note that discussions of IQ rarely mention the standard deviation used, making the number almost meaningless. Typical sds used are sd=15 (Wechsler), sd=16 (Binet), and sd=24 (Cattell). Most tests and scripts these days use Binet numbers. Most ancient texts use Cattell numbers. Hence, an IQ of 145, 148, and 172 could be the same (all 3 s.d.). However, unless you have a percentage, you can never be completely sure. If you have a percentile, the IQ distribution is considered Gaussian (not quite true, it shows kurtosis), so one s.d. above the mean corresponds to the 84.1th percentile, one s.d. above the mean corresponds to the 97.8th percentile, and so on .

(**) If nothing is better, IQ is a very useful measure of intellectual ability in the same way that height is an average measure of the ability to achieve a winning goal. It is quite possible that qualitative terms are more useful than purely quantitative numbers for expressing the richness of the human brain; Some minds anyway. Additional research shows that optimal explanatory power occurs if the difference is around one standard deviation. Hence, the best person to explain something to someone of average intelligence is someone with an IQ between 115 and 120. . A person with a higher level of intelligence will be less successful despite finding better solutions and explaining them more eloquently because the ideas and solutions are simply too complex for the average person to understand.

It is interesting to note that national leaders generally tend to have an IQ around the 120 range. This also applies to hierarchies when promotion occurs through career ladders. Obviously, leaders who are chosen from among ordinary smart people must have an IQ of around 120 to be successful, not 140 which is very smart. The problem occurs when the leaders of these leaders are found in the “120” pool of candidates because no one will get the required IQ of 140 because they did not pass the first step. Therefore, the 140’s leaders must be brought in from the sidelines using another process. One solution is to start with a group that has already been filtered to exclude less than 120 but still contains 140 and then go from there to promoting 140. In fact, a lot of our selective, sorry, educational system works that way simply by not allowing people below for example Example, university certificate to join the pool of candidates. However, in a democracy the leaders are democratically elected by an average Joe. This limits people from choosing their leader with an IQ of 120, which is a problem because our world is growing exponentially more complex. It is not unlikely that problems exceed our ability to solve them and create a solution for them Dexterity gap


Especially when the IQ ceiling is set.


So, it’s a good thing that people in a representative democracy can’t really make choices, and this provides a possible way to field smarter candidates. Here, parties must be careful not to present a candidate who is more intelligent than his competitors, because this frustrates the goal of “directing” the democratic process towards a more desirable outcome.
It’s ironic isn’t it?
😉

Additional comments: IQ is a fairly one-dimensional measure of intellectual ability and complexity; It’s just one number. This number could certainly be expanded to a multi-dimensional “vector” which would be a better description (Gartner describes the Seven Intelligences). However, even a dimensional projection will not reveal the connections. The prevailing description of genius would be multi-talented and innovative, requiring a certain interconnection of intelligences. To describe this internal connection would require a matrix, for example, if there were 7 intelligences, this would be a 7×7 matrix with 7+6+5+..+2+1 numbers to describe the “two-body” connections. For anything that requires three intelligences working together, we are talking about a tensor of order 3, and so on to a tensor monster of order 7 that would provide a complete picture. I don’t know if this type of research has been pursued or not. It will be a great experience.

Copyright © 2007-2023 Earlyretirementextreme.comThis feed is intended for personal, non-commercial use only. Use of this feed on other sites violates copyright. If you see this notice anywhere other than your news reader, it makes the page you’re viewing infringing copyright. Some sites use random word replacement algorithms to hide the origin. Find the original, undamaged copy of this publication at earlyretirementextreme.com. (Digital imprint: 47d7050e5790442c7fa8cab55461e9ce)Originally published on 2009-12-27 02:11:11.


Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button