Very interesting, many fascinating points, but also much misunderstanding of the nature of IQ tests and their relationship to the question of “intelligence.”
As a clinical psychologist (full disclosure—with an IQ above the one mentioned in the post) who has administered over two thousand IQ tests, AND conducted research on various topics, I can tell you, the one thing for certain (apart from the near-universal replicability crisis in psychology) is that psychologists to date have no conception as well, obviously, no way of measuring any kind of ’general” intelligence (no, the “g” factor does NOT represent general intelligence)
IQ does, however, measure a certain kind of “intelligence,” which one might refer to as quantitative rather than qualitative. It manifests most clearly in the “thinking” of “philosophers” like Daniel Dennett, who consciously deny the experience of consciousness.
Since virtually every scientific experiment ever conducted begins with experience (not measurable, empirical data, but the kind of radical empiricism, or experiential data, that William James spoke of), to deny consciousness is to deny science.
yet, that is what much of transhumanism is about, itself a form of quantitative, analytic, detached thought.
if you want to do some really hard thinking, here’s two questions:
1. What does “physical” mean (and I’m not looking for the usual tautological answer of “it’s what physics studies”)
Be careful—it took a well respected and much published philosophy professor 6 months to come up with the acknowledgement that nobody knows what it means, only what it negates.… see if you can do better!)
2. (this is ONLY to be pondered after successfully answering #1). Describe in quite precise terms what kind of scientific experiment could be conducted to provide evidence (not proof, just evidence) of something purely physical, which exists entirely apart from, independent of, any form of sentience, intelligence, awareness, consciousness, etc)
Very interesting, many fascinating points, but also much misunderstanding of the nature of IQ tests and their relationship to the question of “intelligence.”
As a clinical psychologist (full disclosure—with an IQ above the one mentioned in the post) who has administered over two thousand IQ tests, AND conducted research on various topics, I can tell you, the one thing for certain (apart from the near-universal replicability crisis in psychology) is that psychologists to date have no conception as well, obviously, no way of measuring any kind of ’general” intelligence (no, the “g” factor does NOT represent general intelligence)
IQ does, however, measure a certain kind of “intelligence,” which one might refer to as quantitative rather than qualitative. It manifests most clearly in the “thinking” of “philosophers” like Daniel Dennett, who consciously deny the experience of consciousness.
Since virtually every scientific experiment ever conducted begins with experience (not measurable, empirical data, but the kind of radical empiricism, or experiential data, that William James spoke of), to deny consciousness is to deny science.
yet, that is what much of transhumanism is about, itself a form of quantitative, analytic, detached thought.
if you want to do some really hard thinking, here’s two questions:
1. What does “physical” mean (and I’m not looking for the usual tautological answer of “it’s what physics studies”)
Be careful—it took a well respected and much published philosophy professor 6 months to come up with the acknowledgement that nobody knows what it means, only what it negates.… see if you can do better!)
2. (this is ONLY to be pondered after successfully answering #1). Describe in quite precise terms what kind of scientific experiment could be conducted to provide evidence (not proof, just evidence) of something purely physical, which exists entirely apart from, independent of, any form of sentience, intelligence, awareness, consciousness, etc)
Wow that’s impressive.