question: should iq scores of potential future politicians be made public prior to running for office? i'm by no means implying that a minimum score should be implemented prior to a candidate's obtaining office, just asking if the public should be made aware of their score prior to placing a vote.

Exactly lol! :laugh:

Poor polititions, most of them wouldnt even be able to get 1000 votes.

lol
exactly. i mean if these people are going to run a country, work with budgets, implement certain programs and cancel unneeded ones, and walk the fine line between peaceful diplomacy and world wide nuclear war, wouldn't u at least like to know their intelligence level before voting? so they went to harvard or yale? that makes little difference. education has nothing to do with intelligence and can often be bought!

The question of IQ as a relevant measure of intelligence is still up for debate. Some say that the intelligence quotence gives us at least an idea of the over-all brains in a person. There are 4 main types of intelligence calculated on such a test:
-visiual intelligence (the ability to see patterns in figures and shapes)
-lingual intelligence (the ability to distinguish and correctly use words)
-mathematical intelligence (the ability to crack numbers fast and see numerical patterns)
-logical intelligence (the ability to find connections in systems, and to be able to get an overview, and estimate outcomes)

I don't think the general public should be allowed to be aware of someone's IQ, even if they are running for office. Nor do I think it should be a demand... But like anyone who's ever written a dodgy resumé, it could help the candidate if he or she can boast a high score

True rubix, I challenge any, well most polititions to try and build a mini calculator, or many even work one

Over all IQ should still be highish, because look at bush... he has the verbal IQ of a goldfish, You need verbal to be quite good at politicts...
If someone runs for office, they can expect every aspect of there lifes mocked at one point and recorded, Why not add IQ to it.

The question of IQ as a relevant measure of intelligence is still up for debate.

i agree. when alfred binet was asked to how he would define intelligence, he replied with "it's what my test measures". and what does the stanford binet measure? intelligence! however, wouldn't u at least like to see how these people measure in their abilities in numerical, visual, and verbal intelligence? don't u see those as relevant to a politician's career?

also, even tho i know it's still up for debate, i do find that i am much more often able to discuss topics requiring higher thought processes with people in mensa than with rednecks at the local bar (where such topics (some of which are often posted in these forums) kind of stand out)

IQ doesnt mean how intelligent you are, its your ability to learn new things, A skil very much needed in good jobs.

Of course I do.


I agree. I'm on your side of the river here, I think that IQ gives an estimate... a likelihood of general intelligence. But I don't think it's the public's RIGHT to know something as personal as that.


Actually no, that's not what your standard IQ test determines at all. There is no learning scale on one single test. You can enhance your performance on an IQ test though, by practising on doing many. So you can enhance your abilities (listed in my previous post) by practice. That is one of the arguments against the IQ test being a reliable intelligence measurement. But if you can train a muscle to perform better, surely the mind can be taught how to think better. That's what I mean to say is what happens when you practice on IQ tests.

Don't any of you think that the testing wouldn't be grossly misconducted and biased in a situation like that?

It depends entirely on how, where, when, and who. But yes, it's another factor playing into why mandatory tests for running office is a bad idea.

well, while u may think it's a bad idea, remember colleges require college entrance exams, which all though they are not intelligence tests, they are accepted by several high iq societies such as mensa for membership qualification. now, this is a simple quasi-syllogism here, but since they disclose what college they went to and everyone has access to that colleges entrance requirements, then ??? i dunno.

MENSA is an organization that does not accept college entrance exam scores as credit enough to be accepted. To get into MENSA, you need to score higher on a certified IQ test than 98% of the population (of the country or the earth, I'm not sure). I don't know of any IQ testing society that is held in higher regard. Infact, and this is probably just my ignorance, I don't know of any other IQ testing society at all. But at any rate, one who is NOT a member isn't necessarily underqualified for it. So it doesn't really work to establish someone as not being smart enough.

IQ tests are as meaningful as a Scientology audit.

Care to elaborate?

MENSA is an organization that does not accept college entrance exam scores as credit enough to be accepted.

BUZZ! wrong. it does too. on the ACT a score of 29. it also accepts the SAT, but i was never concerned with that score because in the region of the country i'm from it's not as popular. and it's an iq score in the top 2% of the "general population". i should know i'm in it, but u can always check the site. also. i think the i.s.p.e. (international society of philosophical inquiry) accepts college entrance exam results as well. i think they require a result of 33 on the ACT. but after that, the prometheus and mega societies, i don't think they do, but not near as many people know about them either

I stand corrected. Does the same apply internationally? I was very sure IQ tests were the only way about it.

There is more to being a good politition and a good leader than IQ. Common sense is a pretty important factor in a leadership position. I bet we all know people who we know are very intelligent, that sometimes say or do the most absurd things, sometimes have absolutly no idea how to handle certain situations. Life skills and people skills and common sense are more important than IQ. A leader should seek expert advice to aid in decisions where they are unfamiliar. You cant know everything, thats why you call an expert when you don't

Does the same apply internationally?

pretty sure. but not 100% sure. i would assume so though;)

It isn't much to elaborate, but to me, IQ tests are way misunderstood as a fair and accurate measurement of intelligence when I don't necessarily believe so. It ignores the idea of different kinds of intelligence, and promotes measuring people by a test score.

Might as well mention that I've taken a few kinds of IQ tests for schools and psychiatric places over the years, and I've been measured at genius-level scores consistently. Does it mean anything? No, not really.