Should we get to vote our IQ x Age?

Question

Since religious belief goes 'poof' under the glaring light of critical thought, it is obvious that critical thinking ability is a rare commodity in the USA. In fact, I dare say that most of the adult population of the USA has never even HEARD of critical thinking... much less, actually know how to do it. This is not surprising, though... the US public education system is designed to create 'employees'... not 'thinkers'. It is even possible to get an advanced degree in a scientific discipline, and STILL never encounter the concept of critical thinking... that being in the 'fuzzy' sciences... in the 'hard' sciences, critical thinking is a necessity.

Anyway... IQ tests are an indicator of critical thinking... at least potential, if not actual ability. I think that elections would produce better results if everyone was allocated a number of votes based on this formula: Votes = IQ x Age. Heck... it might even become possible to elect an Independent as President, using this idea.

Andra wrote: "Well, as logical as that sounds, most people would not vote as many times as they could. According to your formula, I could vote a total of 2,880 times. (160 x 18.) I do not have the time or aspiration to vote that much..."

Andra... I sincerely doubt the 160... if your IQ were over 80, you should be able to figure out that the ONE vote that you cast would have a VOTE VALUE determined by the formula.

Answer 1

Egads! That sounds pretty crazy. I would get to vote a lot (since I'm really old) -- I can't believe Andra is 160y.o.! Wow!

Actually the majority have always been wrong throughout history (that is sort of why we need the Electoral votes --naw, that don't work either)

But what you are suggesting is the the Intelligentsia should rule and that really hasn't worked in history either.

I disagree about the critical thinking being incongruent with religious beliefs (but we're aloud to disgree).

Give me the checks and balance system and let every one who isn't lazy vote for their favorite candidate.

(I think we need critical thought in the candidates not the constituents)

Answer 2

What you are proposing is similar in nature to the manner in which the Greek city/states held their elections in that all 'free" and full citizens (although that would have only been the male population, which this one is not proposing here nor does this one support the same) not only voted but each had the real possiblity of being elected.
The "populo vulgaris" or common people voted and took part in the government of the state.
To be a full citizen in these states, one had to be sane as well as had to be of proven worth in regards to his judgement and abilities.

If your idea was extended so that any citizen who received the majority of votes from those whom you porpose should vote could be elected (and, thereby had to serve within the capaicty and role that was selected by the voters), it might well change this country's direction dramatically.
It will also greatly reduce the number of citizens who would be allowed to vote which would quickly lead to a minority rule rather than a majority rule.

A further problem might be that a "caste" system would or could arise based on the qualifications for voting.
Such might well lead to discriminatory practices, segregation, exploitation, etc. This country does not need more of that.

It is an intersting idea, however. Perhaps a little more tweeking might fix it up.
Those currently in power would never go for it as they would, in all likelihood, be unable to vote.

May it be well with you.

Answer 3

People posting here are not representative of American voters. Many sound too young to vote. And since YA has no IQ requirement, I'm not sure why you're using it as support for having an IQ requirement to vote. It used to be that only white male landowners could vote. Do you really want to take a step down that road?

Answer 4

As Disgustin'Justin has already pointed out, IQ tests can be an indicator of critical thinking, but they are not unequivocal. (Who gave him thumbs down for that correct statement?)

According to those who define the test the strength can be laid more on critical thinking, on logical thinking, or perhaps even on conservative thinking. Who would have the right to name the institute to make the test?

What I would be afraid of, if your formula was used: A president might be tempted to cut education down where he suspects political opponents. (Of course I know that education is not equal IQ, but there are links.)

Answer 5

I think Age should be removed from the formula. I don't believe that it follows that the older you get the better informed you are. There are people who are 80 and as dumb as a post. On the flip side their are 13 year olds who are geniuses.
So I'd say the formula should be Votes = IQ x Being Informed on Current Events.

Answer 6

I do not believe in the concept of IQ, as I have been tested on 3 occasions and the higher and lower results of the 3 were 55 points apart.

My mother was tested twice when she was a girl and the results were 50 points apart - on the same DAY.

Answer 7

Well, as logical as that sounds, most people would not vote as many times as they could. According to your formula, I could vote a total of 2,880 times. (160 x 18.) I do not have the time or aspiration to vote that much...

Answer 8

I agree with you.

So much education today it to ensure that people will be good servants of the state and good employees in the state businesses (aka socialism), not to learn about reality and how it functions.




.

Answer 9

well mmmm, i think that maybe the voters should be given an IQ test and only those with a good IQ should be able to enter

Answer 10

At least that would stop the Bible Belt from voting.