My mother has an IQ of 102. She knows more words than people supposedly smarter, due to doing crosswords, she can read a sewing pattern and whiz up a dress. She won't use a screwdriver because she's worried she'll do it the wrong way, but can feed a family of 14, with everybody getting their food hot and at the same time. She needs retraining every day on how to use the DVD player, but has beaten me in every game of scrabble we've ever played. She won't use the computer unless she has to cos she keeps locking it up, but has traced her family history back to the 1500's.
My Dad's IQ is 127. He can do anything with computers, but he's too stupid to remember my mother's birthday or their anniversary despite it being on the same date for the last 34 years. He's an electrician, and a talented one at that, but he often offends his customers due to his poor social skills. He reads encyclopedias for fun, but had no idea how to deal with me when I was dealing with a stillborn baby and divorce. He can name a song and who played it after hearing 10 seconds of it, but only if it was from the 80's or earlier because he's too stubborn to listen to anything more modern.
I have an IQ of 131. I can tell you almost anything you want to know about animal behaviour, but can't figure out why my kids behave so badly in public. I was an electrician, and did better at the course than most of the men there, but I can't turn things around in my head 3d the way they could. I can calculate doses of medication for my cattle, but can't ride a horse. I can fix almost any part of my car, but give me a different make of car to work on and I'm stumped. I know all about nutrition and make darn sure my kids eat well, but am too silly to apply it to my own overweight frame.
My partner can't read very well, but there is nothing he doesn't know about cars, tractors, horses, motorbikes etc. His father can't read at all, but if you have a question about horses or cattle, he's the one you go to.
Everybody is a dummy in one way or another, no matter what their IQ. Everybody has knowledge about something, no matter how "dumb" they are on paper. As the quote goes from one of the most famous "low IQ" characters, "stupid is as stupid does"
And that's all I'm gonna say about that!
2007-01-21 16:52:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by CheeseFest 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hey,
No, people with the IQ of 100 are definitely not dummies, they are what the number signifies, average. An IQ score is basically your mental age over your physical age multiplied by 100. Therefore, if your are say 19 and your mental age is 19, 19/19=1 1*100=100. People are also considered of average IQ if they are within 1 standard deviation of the mean. So a person with a 90 or 110 IQ is also considered average.
People with an IQ over 100 means that their mental age surpasses their physical age. For example a 10 year old with the mental age of a 15 year old would have an IQ of 150 (15/10*100=150) The mental age of a person is determined through various tests.
So in answer to your question, a person with an IQ of 100 is not a dummy, they are perfectly average. Their mental age is exactly the same as their physical age.
Hope this helps,
Suzanne
2007-01-21 14:57:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
First off, many people in social science and research debunk IQ testing because it simply measures one faction of what makes up a whole, productive person. An IQ of 100 is perfectly normal and in no way suggests any sort of developmental issues. It is considered a normal or average for the population. Now many are looking into things like emotional IQ as equally important.
As an example, I tend to score high on the standard IQ tests since they are based on logical problem solving and I have a background in mathematics. So on a conventional test I score around 125 to 130. That in no way makes me smart. I went to college and did very well, but I am not so great with real life.
So I say who cares? Average doesn't mean anything less than what is normal. I have found most IQ tests to be sketchy at best, especially if it is administered incorrectly. Give me an internet IQ test and I can get my IQ up pretty high with simple practice.
Plus, I don't believe people are dumb. If you think it, it will be, so I don't think it is productive to even go that route.
2007-01-21 16:52:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Christine L W 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
No! I have a son with an IQ of about 90 which was assessed by a written test. The problem is that he has a learning disability that causes comprehension problems with written words. He excels at math and has great common sense. You should never judge a person by a test score.
2007-01-21 19:38:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by barbarast59 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is evidence for a genetic component to intelligence; e.g., selective pressures on Ashkenazim Jews over many centuries increased that group's intelligence, according to mainstream medical researchers. There are definite differences in various racial groups: fast-twitch muscles and bone structure facilitate sprinting and jumping among African groups, etc. The larger cranial size among Asians selects for wider pelvises, as compared with Africans. Hence, sprinting among Asians is slowed down, as a group, due to the wider pelvises. Then there is a cultural component, as given by e.g. Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Race and Culture: A World View." After all that, if a person's "lack of brightness" or other abilities lead to substandard job performances, is that fair and just to the patients and clients? Better, affirmative action for the poor of any color, etc., toward genuine attainment, merit-based hiring, etc. Then everyone wins. As to the stigma of being less valuable, perhaps society ought look to the dignity of all work and the sanctity of all human life. "A Philosophy of Universality," O. M. Aivanhov, "Liberal Fascism," Jonah Goldberg.
2016-05-24 11:35:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Average is average, not on either extreme of the bell curve. It does not matter where average falls it will never be stupid. And by the way, in my opinion, standardized tests are terrible. These are not supposed to measure what you already know but your potential. A basic requirement for these tests are that you can read and already it is measuring what you know rather than your potential for ability to learn how to read.
2007-01-21 16:17:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by fluffybunny 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
No, but, by definition, half the population is of below average intelligence. Please simplify your sentences from now on.
2007-01-21 23:06:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Labsci 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
NO
2007-01-21 15:46:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by mrinal1976 3
·
0⤊
1⤋