The Flynn Effect

[peritonlogon]

This is (I think) one of the strangest phenomena that the social sciences have uncovored. I highly suggest everyone read this article Linky and maybe thisother link

Not only does this seriously question the validity of the assertion that IQ tests test "innate intelligence," it also really alters the conception of what intelligence is.

Also, it really drives home the interconnectedness of a people, since, evidently, there is a type of group learning taking place on a very large scale.

[Trantor]

[ QUOTE ]
This is (I think) one of the strangest phenomena that the social sciences have uncovored. I highly suggest everyone read this article Linky and maybe thisother link

Not only does this seriously question the validity of the assertion that IQ tests test "innate intelligence," it also really alters the conception of what intelligence is.

Also, it really drives home the interconnectedness of a people, since, evidently, there is a type of group learning taking place on a very large scale.

[/ QUOTE ]
Accepting the point that people have higher IQ's, arguenda, why does that lead you to a conclusion that there is some "group learning" going on?

[peritonlogon]

[ QUOTE ]
Accepting the point that people have higher IQ's, arguenda, why does that lead you to a conclusion that there is some "group learning" going on?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because one very plausible idea to explain this involves invoking the old "mass consciousness" idea. I think this and "group learning" are pretty similar. Another involves the role of media.... media in the sense of "extensions of man." The odd thing is that most things that one would think would have caused this, time in school, proporiton of educated people, educational attainment, nutrition and etc. have been eliminated because they're fairly negligible.

Uhh, I think that's one very implausible idea. The links you put in talk about several reasonable hypotheses. None of them can explain the whole effect by themselves, but changes in nutrition and education would certainly contribute to IQ changes.

Flynn talks about IQ tests being a measure of abstract problem solving and symbolic thinking. Well, over the last 100 years, people have learned to deal with increasingly complicated machines in their daily lives, and we've better and better at interacting with them. Ever see comedians in the 80's joke about not being able to program their VCRs? When I see that now, I just think they're idiots, because that's a trivial task for most people who grew up with the technology. Similarly, my kids will probably think I'm stupid for needing to read the manual to set up a firewall on my computer.

[peritonlogon]

the main reason you're objecting to my statement is because the terms are very murky...'abstract problem sloving and symbolic thinking' are not all that different from 'group learning' and 'mass consciousness' when considered in context. Usually ways of explaining things and understanding things simplify and make intuitive certain ideas or phenomena. This is an example of 'symbolic thinking and abstract problem solving' changing en mass, but could just as easily because called group learing or mass consciousness. The difference is mostly semantic.

And, people dealing with VCRs and the Internet and using both, as well as some other new ones, as tools to expedite the learning process, is an example of media as an 'extention of man.'

The difference is more than semantic. You're hypothesizing that there is a huge, fuzzy, ethereal connection between all people that causes them to learn at the same time. I'm saying that there is a common external, physical cause that explains the observed phenomenon without resort to supernatural processes.

[gumpzilla]

One conjecture that I have is that the kinds of questions that you see on IQ tests now show up frequently in puzzle magazines, calendars, the Internet, etc. It could very well be that people are getting more practice with a certain type of question, and thus just perform better on the test, while not being any more intelligent.

[jthegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
It could very well be that people are getting more practice with a certain type of question, and thus just perform better on the test, while not being any more intelligent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the questions are designed to test certain aspects of intelligence, if people are getting better at answering the questions, then they ARE becoming more intelligent, at least in that specific area.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Since the questions are designed to test certain aspects of intelligence, if people are getting better at answering the questions, then they ARE becoming more intelligent, at least in that specific area.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not convinced. To make an analogy, I might be a better ultimate frisbee player than many because I have substantial experience at it, but I'm pretty out of shape and not the world's finest athletic specimen even when well-conditioned. There are plenty of people who are likely to have better natural inclination for the game, but just aren't as good at it yet. I think intelligence is better defined as being analogous to the natural inclination rather than the acquired skill, and I think that more familiarity with the brand of questions offered suggests skill, instead.

[FlFishOn]

Ah, Social Science, the last refuge of some real scoundrels.

The Flynn Effect is debatable from any direction. In such matters the spin is so entrenched the facts are beyond view. A layman like myself is left never really knowing what research is to be believed, what conclusion is apolitical.