Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttidcc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe From: hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (Jerry Hollombe) Newsgroups: net.misc Subject: RE: Re: Mensa and elitism Message-ID: <170@ttidcc.UUCP> Date: Thu, 27-Dec-84 23:01:23 EST Article-I.D.: ttidcc.170 Posted: Thu Dec 27 23:01:23 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 29-Dec-84 23:34:06 EST Organization: TTI, Santa Monica, CA. Lines: 105 [] Now we've got the discussion perking along nicely, I suppose it's time to turn down the flames and try to generate some light. So ... >From: barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) >Subject: Re: Mensa and elitism >Message-ID: <722@ames.UUCP> > From ttidcc!hollombe (Jerry Hollombe): >> As usual, the point has been raised that Mensa is an elitist organization. >> This is true. It is also true of highschool football teams, symphony >> orchestras, and the company you probably work for (do you seriously think >> they hire anyone who walks in the door?). Any organization which sets a >> standard for membership is an elitist organization. I don't hear anyone >> condemning the American Bar Association for being elitist (you have to pass >> a bar exam to join). I've never been able to pass a calculus course. Is >> the American Mathematical Society to be criticized for denying me >> membership? > The other organizations you mention could be called elitist, >but their standards for membership are based on *accomplishment*, not >innate ability. One doesn't usually find any "97 pound weaklings" on even a highschool football team. Neither will you find any tin ears in a symphony orchestra. These are innate abilities. Whether what intelligence tests measure is innate ability or acquired ability remains somewhat controversial. (More on this anon.) >> We live in an elitist society. To claim anything else is pure hypocrisy. >> The concept "that all men are created equal" has a fine, high-minded, >> idealistic ring to it. It is also utter nonsense. The fact is that all >> people are not created equal and they certainly don't become equal as they >> grow older. > > My precise point. The premise of mensa seems to be that you qualify >for membership by what you *are*, not what you've done. Formally, >you could argue that you qualify by the accomplishment of scoring well >on certain tests, but, as you here imply, that is not the premise >of mensa. The premise is that these tests actually measure something >meaningful about you, something innate. The question of what exactly "intelligence tests" measure is an interesting and controversial one. What follows here is my opinion, based on the knowledge and experience acquired while earning a Master's degree in Clinical Psychology. I don't think there really is such a thing as an "intelligence test". To understand why, try to think up a good definition of intelligence (yes, I know it's in the dictionary). It's difficult to devise a test for something when even the experts can't agree on a working definition of it. What IQ tests actually measure might be called "academic potential" -- how likely the person taking the test is to do well in academic activities at the time of taking the test. This was the stated purpose of the original Binet test which put the term "IQ" into our vocabulary. It is also the purpose of such tests as the SAT, ACT, GRE, etc. These tests have been refined and tuned over years of comparing test predicted performance with actual performance until they are probably the most accurate psychological instruments in existence (about 70%). There is no clear cut answer to whether what these tests measure is innate or learned. It seems intuitively obvious that both nature and nurture play a significant role in test performance. What part each plays and which is most influential remains controversial. >arbitrary measurement, and is thus a false elitism? Having just read >Gould's THE MISMEASURE OF MAN, my doubts about the worth of IQ tests >are particularly acute at the moment. I haven't read Gould's book, so I can't comment on it. There does seem to be much paranoia about "IQ" testing in the world, much of it caused by ignorance and misunderstanding of the techniques and their purpose. The tests are also misused in many cases which perhaps justifies some of the paranoia. > Actually, I don't object to mensa; even went to a mensa open >house, once, to check it out. But I do disagree with the implication >in your article that mensa members are an elite of any sort. The question >of what IQ tests actually measure (beyond one's skill at taking IQ tests) >is still far too open to permit that conclusion. Actually, it's everyone else who calls Mensa an elitist organization. I was just agreeing for the sake of argument. Certainly, the members of Mensa are a highly selected group. Whether this makes them an elite is debatable. It's the rest of the world who labels them as such and then resents them for it. Mensa per se expresses no opinion as to what the scores may actually mean (Mensa officially has no opinions at all on any subject), though its very existence implies they mean something. The sheer range of tests accepted by Mensa as evidence of qualification for membership would seem to acknowledge the uncertainty inherent in the definition and measurement of intelligence. I think that's enough for now. I'm dialing in from home this week and screen editing at 300 baud is bloody hard work. Hope everyone had a happy holiday season. -- The Polymath (Jerry Hollombe) Opinions expressed here are my own Transaction Technology, Inc. and unrelated to anyone else's. 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 United States (213) 450-9111, ext. 2483 ...{garfield,lasspvax,linus,cmcl2,seismo}!philabs!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe