Is IQ a static measurement throughout a person's life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kelvinng
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether anyone can aspire to be a physicist, referencing Richard Feynman's views on intelligence, hard work, and the challenges faced by students in physics and mathematics. Participants explore the implications of IQ, effort, and individual differences in understanding complex concepts within the field of physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants agree with Feynman that hard work and time investment are crucial for becoming a physicist, suggesting that anyone can study physics with enough dedication.
  • Others argue that while grasping ideas may be possible for many, the mathematical requirements can be a barrier for some, indicating that not everyone can succeed in physics regardless of effort.
  • One participant shares personal experiences of tutoring students who struggled despite hard work, suggesting that not all failures can be attributed to a lack of effort or interest.
  • Another participant questions the notion of equal abilities, citing examples of individuals with significantly lower IQs who may not be capable of understanding advanced physics concepts.
  • Some express skepticism about whether struggles in learning physics stem from genuine effort or a lack of interest, proposing that social pressures might influence perceived attempts at understanding.
  • A participant reflects on the variability of prior knowledge and learning styles, arguing that these factors significantly impact a student's ability to succeed in subjects like algebra and calculus, which are foundational for physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on whether anyone can become a physicist. Some believe that dedication can overcome barriers, while others maintain that inherent differences in ability and understanding exist.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various factors influencing learning, including prior knowledge, interest, and teaching methods, but do not resolve the complexities surrounding these issues.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and educators in physics and mathematics, as well as those exploring the relationship between intelligence, effort, and academic success in STEM fields.

  • #91
goingmeta said:
I can't tell if you're trolling or not.
And I'm trying to figure out if you are! Your argument style is to ask questions and imply a position without actually stating it. It makes it very difficult to tell what the point is that you are trying to make!
I asked you if you thought IQ was a static measurement. I guess I assumed you would have specified that it would be decreasing.
You didn't ask a specific question, only a vague one. Not knowing what your point and level of knowledge of the facts was, it was impossible for me to guess how specific of an answer you wanted. So since the question was framed as a yes or no, I answered a yes or no.

So now that I know what you are getting at: It really doesn't matter if it increases or decreases, only that it doesn't tend to increase by 25 points, enabling an average person to become Richard Feynman.

Moreover, there is a clear logical flaw in that reasoning of yours: Are all people able to increase their IQ only by enough to bring everyone up to exactly 125? If not, then the differences in ability and thus resulting attainment would be intact. And even if they did, the lost time would still cause differences due to starting IQ. It wouldn't make sense for that to be true/possible, even if we didn't already know that it isn't true, and even if it was, it still wouldn't produce the equality Feynman claims!

Again, the data and logic on this seems clear and simple to me. That there is argument about it is truly baffling to me.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
russ_watters said:
Again, the data and logic on this seems clear and simple to me. That there is argument about it is truly baffling to me.
Adding to the surreal-ness of this thread/argument, I'm one of the staunchest conservatives on this site, a firm believer in personal responsibility. So for me to be the one arguing that those who attain less aren't lazy is a surreal twist. Typically, I'm getting accused by others of believing the poor tend to be lazy!
 
  • #93
goingmeta said:
Is IQ a static measurement throughout a person's life?
No, it's not. If you had bothered to read about IQ tests, first you would know that that they are created to test for learning impairment. Then you would know that children under 14 tend to score higher then drop off.
If people can't bother to learn even the basics about a subject before they post, it is a waste of our time.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
8K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K