Can Multiple 100 IQ Individuals Solve a 150 IQ Problem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZMacZ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Iq
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the limitations of IQ as a measure of problem-solving ability, particularly when comparing individuals with different IQ scores. Participants argue that multiple individuals with a 100 IQ do not equate to a single individual with a 150 IQ in terms of problem-solving capability. The conversation highlights that collective intelligence does not always correlate with the average IQ of a group, and that understanding the components of a problem is crucial for successful collaboration. The conclusion emphasizes that IQ is a rough estimator of academic success rather than a definitive measure of an individual's potential to innovate or solve complex problems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of IQ testing and its implications
  • Familiarity with concepts of collective intelligence
  • Knowledge of problem-solving methodologies
  • Awareness of cognitive psychology principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of collective intelligence on problem-solving outcomes
  • Explore cognitive psychology theories related to intelligence and learning
  • Study the limitations of IQ as a predictor of success in various fields
  • Investigate collaborative problem-solving techniques in diverse teams
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for psychologists, educators, team leaders, and anyone interested in understanding the dynamics of intelligence and collaboration in problem-solving scenarios.

ZMacZ
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
Let's take a 100 IQ person, called A.
Let's say there's a problem that needs solving that requires an IQ of 150, called B.

Now how many of A would be required to solve B.
(and would it actually be possible ?)

I'm pretty certain that 10 A's do not a 1000 IQ make..
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Don't mean to come off as deflecting the question but there's no answer to this... I.Q. is just a system to get a rough estimate on the ability of someone to learn new concepts. Someone with a 150 I.Q. may go their whole life without any Einstein level science breakthroughs and someone with an I.Q. of 70 may change an entire industry with an original idea and the right life experiences. I think looking at I.Q. as a potential for success is misleading unless we're specifically talking about success in academia where it's probably a better indicator.
 
I would also say I.Q. doesn't scale evenly on the individual level from my personal experiences. If it takes 100 minutes for someone with an IQ of 100 to complete a test and someone with an IQ of 110 80 minutes to complete a test I feel like someone with an IQ of 135 wouldn't be done in 60 minutes, probably closer to 70 which would actually indicate diminishing returns towards the higher end of the IQ scores. Obviously I don't know all my classmates I.Q. scores but I would say if I had to estimate what they were, my experience in tests indicated a smaller difference in the higher numbers than the lower ones. It's possible the tests weren't challenging enough to the person with a 135 I.Q. to make that call, but from what I've seen there's a more noticeable difference from 100-120 than 120-140
 
Ok then, I know that sometimes when people work together the result they have can be greater than if they both worked at the same
problem, but completely separated. But up to what level would that go..
Without the required insight one can not come up with any solution to a problem of any kind..
And how much higher could that go ?
Someone who never grasped something as mathematics (for instance), can never solve a mathematics problem.
Now if two of those (for intent and purpose, copies) would have that same mathematics problem, could they then solve it together ?
(so basically, could their 'stacked' capability come up with an answer that is correct, since they both never grasped mathmatics..)

I know in real life there's a degree to which people can grasp something and that their capabilities aren't actually
quantified very well by using such a thing as an IQ standard, but to me that's not the issue..
It's me asking whether or not people can topple a problem which each person separated can't topple..
And then if yes, by how far that can go..

I'm going to close on this, because I think it's not actually possible to work out.
I think in some cases people can get a better result by trying to topple together, but not always..

Anyway thanx..
 
Stephen Tashi said:
We gave each volunteer an individual I.Q. test, but teams with higher average I.Q.s didn’t score much higher on our collective intelligence tasks than did teams with lower average I.Q.s.

Did you try that with problems that each of the lower IQ's could not solve on their own ? But the seemingly higher IQ'ed ones could ?
That would basically mean that each of the higher IQ'ed ones could solve that task alone,
while the ones with the lower IQ's could not even do it together.
And I think this to be true..

The minimal requirement to solve a task is the ability to grasp each and every component of it,
and then solve those, and that's where group mind can overcome, where each person separate
would fail to grasp every component of said task.
 
Last edited:
We are speculating too much here. IQ was originally used as an arbitrary means of cubbyholing people, mostly students. Uninformed people often assign meanings that are not and never have been warranted. It is simply a very rough estimator of success in school for students raised in a Western culture.
Some of the posts above are, IMO, unwarranted speculation.

This thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
75K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K