I happened upon a competition / activist endeavor run by Best of the US. The aim of Smartest of the US: To raise public consciousness about the value of intelligence and to galvanize interest in recognizing intelligence as a valuable asset – as Kerry Grinkmeyer, the man behind both projects says:
“On January 20, 2009 a major change occurred in the White House. The IQ of the man of the house changed from 98 to 148. Wouldn’t it be great if this kind of information were recognized as important to the American voters…”
If you take the test by clicking on the banner below, I’ll get another test. If you go straight to the sight without clicking on the banner (I won’t be offended), I won’t.
I just took the test and found it tough, especially because it is time constrained. I found myself rushing a little, and when I purchased the detailed report, I found I missed on a number of questions that I kicked myself about. But such is the nature of the beast.
My SUS score was 163.5 which puts me fifth on the leader board for the year and first for this month. I fully expect that several of you guys will displace me, and enjoy doing so!! But I think I’ll be back to try again…
Lastly, I’ve proposed to Kerry that I would like to donate as prizes several copies of Brain Fitness Pro, and we’re working on the details of that…
 |
Tags: intelligence, iq, smartest of US
Martin:
Thank you for the plug, I’m glad that you found the test challenging. My goal, over time, is to get all 300 million U.S. residents to take the test and to know their SUS score. It will take time. I want to point out that as a participant you have the ability to submit a question to add to our database of 3000. When your question is presented you will be credited as the author of the question (15 seconds of fame). Look for the tag on your Profile Page.
I look forward to working with you on our common objective of promoting a Smart Nation.
Kerry J Grinkmeyer
SmartestofUS.com
I’m not sure what knowing the IQ score of all 300 million US residents is going to achieve or why one should need to know that kind of information. Sounds very Orwellian.
D
Hi there Martin:
Thanks for posting that. It’s very likely that I will take the test in the next few days, and if not the next few days, then in the next few weeks. When I do so, I will certainly use the banner you posted!
Warm regards,
Shaun
Hi David.
I understand where you’re coming from, but I believe that Kerry has a more altruistic and positive purpose in sight. I think of the Enron debacle “The Smartest in The Room” and the last eight years in which George Bush played on his lack of smarts to create a kind of folksy connection rather than being practical about the problems he just didn’t understand.
There will always be a necessary tension between the celebration of intelligence and the reaction against elitism and a lack of common sense in those otherwise “smart.”
The pendulum has been pushed for a long time in the “reactive” direction. Even Bill Clinton, an exceptionally smart man, succeeded in large part because he was charismatic and folksy.
No, we don’t want an Orwellian, IQ-based societal structure, but it might help to have people value intelligence and problem-solving ability more than they have in recent times.
Shaun / Will: You guys would enjoy this test, I think. I was quite pleased with the questions.
Martin
Hi Martin,
I value intelligence as much if not more than anyone I know. I loved Clinton’s intelligence and ability to explain complex economical concepts to laypersons of average intelligence. The fact that I keep hammering away at dual-n-back and lurk on these boards is a testament to that.
What I find disturbing is that he wants to compile a list of the entire population’s IQ without any clause stating that the results will remain confidential. Now I don’t actually believe he will ever achieve this goal, but the implications of his wanting to are disturbing. The information he would obtain could be used for all sorts of purposes people had no intention of allowing when they innocently took what they thought was just another on-line IQ test.
Furthermore, I cannot see how compiling such a list will help improve the intellectual level of the leadership in the United States, or lead people to place more value on the intelligence of their leaders. All it will do is allow people to determine whether they are “smarter” than someone else, which in itself sounds unhealthy.
People who voted for Sarah Palin will continue to do so regardless of whether they take an IQ test. Improve their intelligence or educational level however, and maybe then would we see a change.
I’m all for promoting dual n-back and taking serial IQ tests in order to gauge its effect, and I’m very much for improving the educational system, but I don’t agree with compiling a public list of people’s IQs in order to allow others to compare them.
By the way, I linked to his site via your banner.
D
In theory it’s not what you have, it’s what you do with it. Except possibly in the case of the former President, it really is what you have (or don’t have)…..
I thought it was a good test. However, an SUS score isn’t pretending to be an IQ, correct? It’s an arbitrary rating system that sort of coincidentally (or maybe not so coincidentally) falls in the range of numbers that are used to express IQ…
Hello David.
I can’t speak for Kerry. My own sense of his project is that it should help to register the idea that people who aspire to lead and hold sway over the lives of others should be measured in some part by their intellect. This strikes me as a reasonable desire. I agree that it is unlikely in the extreme that the SUS project will attain a record of the scores of 300M Americans, especially those poised to take office. But as a stimulus for encouraging people to consider intellectual capacity, I think it has a place.
Today I wrote a rebuttal to yesterday’s David Brooks NY Times Op Ed piece “The Death of Philosophy.” Brooks’ column in my opinion presents the kind of irrational argument that perpetuates the myth that smart people really don’t have anything to contribute to society. (http://rationalphilosophy.net/index.php/Philosophy/philosophy-morality-and-wind-bags.html) I find Brooks’ soap box sophistry far more threatening than an independent initiative to promote the value of intellect and intelligence.
Martin
Okay, I took the test and scored 144.25 under the name “Bill Garrison” a generic sounding alias I have used in the past. For whatever it’s worth, my rank SUS is 16.
I bought the $9.99 report and had strengths in verbal reasoning and pattern recognition with “classification” being my weak area. Agree with Martin that what makes the test devilish is the time pressure. This is the last of these reports I’ll ever buy online. No more IQ taking tests, either! Well, like the politicians, I have to be careful not to use that word never…
Overall, a challenging test that on the face seems well constructed enough; though I’m not sure what work has been done on this test to establish its legitimacy. I will lump it in with all my other sundry online IQ results.
Regarding Bush/Obama IQ: Bush has no reported IQ, but he does have SAT scores at 1206 which would seem to do away with the notion that Bush is at 98 IQ, unless he was some extraordinary over-achiever which he does not appear to be at all. Chances are that Bush is well above average intelligence despite the fact that he does not appear bright. While Obama appears intelligent and well-spoken and has an impressive background, he has not had any scores released (for whatever reason) for the public to ogle. Probably a smart thing to do to keep them concealed — given that Obama appears intelligent; ergo he does not need IQ scores to counteract what Americans (most of whom are really mixed up on what IQ is anyway) already perceive as true — that BA is smarter than most people.
So, I would object to the issue of ostensible “intelligence” versus “IQ” — while they are pretty much the same construct, one can conceal or vaunt them both to the point of meaninglessness. Going back in history a bit, if I were to tell you who was more intelligent Reagan or Carter, I might have said Reagan though obviously Carter was much more intelligent…but then
“smart” is real world manifestation of intelligence and people with far less intelligence can outmaneuver people of greater cognitive ability and thus are “smarter” in the practical sense. This is so commonplace in so many different areas of life it’s funny. High cognitive ability is vastly over-rated once a threshold is reached, especially when leaving the academic arena and entering into realms where other factors i.e. “social intelligence” is at work. (By the way I loathe Bush but that doesn’t reflect how I view his IQ).
Good morning from lovely Portland, Oregon…
What an interesting conversation you have been sharing.
Intelligence is fascinating. While I can score ok on IQ tests – I do not consider myself brilliant by any means. However, I do consider myself relatively intelligent and aware. So, what impact can intelligent people make on the world versus – the alternative? As leaders and as teachers – intelligence is seemingly important – but who really has the most sway with people? I think it is those that connect with people – those that are comfortable with whom they are and those can relate to others. Maybe it is that “folksy” term that was used in this thread.
I have been studying a new human assessment tool – a kind of personality assessment that is really interesting. It can describe individuals on many levels and it can teach us what we are – how to recognize what others are and how to integrate the two. It is really fascinating to recognize my strengths and the strengths of others and see how to have them work constructively together. I can (I would Love to) share information on this the future when I have a better handle on this knowledge.
It is overcast in Portland this morning. The fishermen are out on the Columbia trying to catch the salmon as they try to return up the river to reproduce their species…the geese and ducks are flying…and I know (because I have seen it before) the magnificent Mount Hood, covered in white snow – lies behind the veil of clouds…there… but not visible to my eyes. Intelligent presence, without fanfare, is a grounding force with great value.
nanz
Another note on Bush: His relatively low verbal/conceptual intelligence (which I think is a genuine and not a put on) has been what has hurt him with the media and perhaps what endeared him to the average person. A lot of fairly bright people from privileged backgrounds have pretty good vocabularies which is not the case with GWB (even if he was put on the test prep track, — which is likely — it didn’t boost his verbal abilities). I don’t think the “folksy” thing he did was a put on, or else most Americans would have seen through it.