Go Back   INTP Forum > Within > The Lounge > The Lounge Archive

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 29th-March-2012, 04:46 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 10:46 AM    #1
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Women historically have been intellectually inferior to their male counterparts. Simply, why? The reasons could conceivably range from disenfranchisement to innate feebleness of mind.

There are merely one/three truly superlative females for every one/three hundred males in any domain in which comprehension, reasoning ability and knowledge are brought to bear. Do women covet these skills/professions less?

Judit Polgár, Marie Curie and Hypatia do quite well, among chess players, scientists and philosophers, respectively. However, they certainly are the exceptions. Let's see some facts.

Women actually show a four point decrement in average IQ compared to men. There are further and predictable psychometrically informed gender nuances but let's stick to the big picture.

Women, indeed, feature a smaller standard deviation than men. Perhaps most surprising, men outnumber women at the IQ 125 level 2:1 and at the IQ 155 level an astonishing 5:1; again, why?

I am fully cognizant of the cultural precedence for a handful of historical female geniuses, but their numbers are underwhelming.

In closing, I should perhaps add that one benefit for women having a smaller standard deviation than men is that women have fewer retarded folks among their ranks.

For my next thread: why blacks show, on average, a twelve point composite IQ handicap compared to whites, and how that handicap used to be higher!

Edit: Moderators are tampering with my posts now. This lack of autonomy is unromantic and unjustified. Maybe I should leave soon.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 05:23 PM   Artsu Tharaz's time 30th-March-2012, 03:23 AM    #2
Artsu Tharaz
easily entertained
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 1,187
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
For my next thread: why blacks show, on average, a twelve point composite IQ handicap compared to whites, and how that handicap used to be higher!



By the turn of the century we will run the world.
__________________
kick it old school

Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 05:28 PM   SandMizzle's time 29th-March-2012, 06:28 PM    #3
SandMizzle
Cyber Member
 
SandMizzle's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Total Perspective Vortex
Posts: 118
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Maybe the differences between the genders are more about motivation than ability.

Source:

http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

Just read this article today, don't know if you wanted somethinglike that as an answer but one passage is about your topic. Enjoy


Quote:
By the turn of the century we will run the world.
I hope so!!
__________________
I proclaim the Future. Everything is cyber now!
SandMizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 05:34 PM   Artsu Tharaz's time 30th-March-2012, 03:35 AM    #4
Artsu Tharaz
easily entertained
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 1,187
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
I hope so!!
racits!!!1
__________________
kick it old school

Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 05:53 PM   Jennywocky's time 29th-March-2012, 12:53 PM    #5
Jennywocky
Last Survivor of the Nostrilmo
 
Jennywocky's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Twisted halls of broken minds
Posts: 5,896
windows_98_nt_2000ie
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

It's also far more common for men to be autistic and other similar issues.
I assume it's just a matter of wiring.

At the same time, maybe the IQ test is just scaled toward white males and toward a more impersonal view of the world than is allowed females through standard biological and biochemical roles?
__________________
"I could never again be an angel … innocence, once lost, can never be regained." ~ Seasons of Mist

"It has always been the perogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But the half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor." ~ The Kindly Ones
Jennywocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 05:55 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 11:55 AM    #6
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by SandMizzle View Post
Maybe the differences between the genders are more about motivation than ability.

Source:

http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

Just read this article today, don't know if you wanted somethinglike that as an answer but one passage is about your topic. Enjoy




I hope so!!

Theoretically the tests gauge reasoning ability, through Arithmetic subtests and so forth, and refrain from tapping math achievement per se.

The scope of the gender IQ disparity polemic is left alone with that argument. Embedded in the argument is that men are poor at changing diapers and vacuuming rooms. All right, but how does that relate to reasoning ability?

Even when average differences are found, they tend to be extremely small. As reasonable as that sounds, there is little basis in fact for this claim with higher IQ levels.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:00 PM   BigApplePi's time 29th-March-2012, 01:00 PM    #7
BigApplePi
Banned
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Posts: 8,988
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

I happened across this article just today, but before I give it, if intelligence (not I.Q.) has to do with furthering the human race, women are more intelligent. They tend to pick and choose the men who would fertilize them and once fertilized take better care of their offspring. Men will help out but they are not in the end the best caretakers.

The Mighty Mathematician You’ve Never Heard Of

By NATALIE ANGIER

Published: March 26, 2012

Scientists are a famously anonymous lot, but few can match in the depths of her perverse and unmerited obscurity the 20th-century mathematical genius Amalie Noether.

Enlarge This Image

SPL/Photo Researchers

GROUNDBREAKING Emmy Noether’s theorem united two pillars of physics: symmetry in nature and the universal laws of conservation.

Albert Einstein called her the most “significant” and “creative” female mathematician of all time, and others of her contemporaries were inclined to drop the modification by sex. She invented a theorem that united with magisterial concision two conceptual pillars of physics: symmetry in nature and the universal laws of conservation. Some consider Noether’s theorem, as it is now called, as important as Einstein’s theory of relativity; it undergirds much of today’s vanguard research in physics, including the hunt for the almighty Higgs boson. Yet Noether herself remains utterly unknown, not only to the general public, but to many members of the scientific community as well.
When Dave Goldberg, a physicist at Drexel University who has written about her work, recently took a little “Noether poll” of several dozen colleagues, students and online followers, he was taken aback by the results. “Surprisingly few could say exactly who she was or why she was important,” he said. “A few others knew her name but couldn’t recall what she’d done, and the majority had never heard of her.”
Noether (pronounced NER-ter) was born in Erlangen, Germany, 130 years ago this month. So it’s a fine time to counter the chronic neglect and celebrate the life and work of a brilliant theorist whose unshakable number love and irrationally robust sense of humor helped her overcome severe handicaps — first, being female in Germany at a time when most German universities didn’t accept female students or hire female professors, and then being a Jewish pacifist in the midst of the Nazis’ rise to power.
Through it all, Noether was a highly prolific mathematician, publishing groundbreaking papers, sometimes under a man’s name, in rarefied fields of abstract algebra and ring theory. And when she applied her equations to the universe around her, she discovered some of its basic rules, like how time and energy are related, and why it is, as the physicist Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute put it, “that riding a bicycle is safe.”
Ransom Stephens, a physicist and novelist who has lectured widely on Noether, said, “You can make a strong case that her theorem is the backbone on which all of modern physics is built.”
Noether came from a mathematical family. Her father was a distinguished math professor at the universities of Heidelberg and Erlangen, and her brother Fritz won some renown as an applied mathematician. Emmy, as she was known throughout her life, started out studying English, French and piano — subjects more socially acceptable for a girl — but her interests soon turned to math. Barred from matriculating formally at the University of Erlangen, Emmy simply audited all the courses, and she ended up doing so well on her final exams that she was granted the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree.
She went on to graduate school at the University of Göttingen before returning to the University of Erlangen, where she earned her doctorate summa cum laude. She met many of the leading mathematicians of the day, including David Hilbert and Felix Klein, who did for the bottle what August Ferdinand Möbius had done for the strip. Noether’s brilliance was obvious to all who worked with her, and her male mentors repeatedly took up her cause, seeking to find her a teaching position — better still, one that paid.
“I do not see that the sex of the candidate is an argument against her,” Hilbert said indignantly to the administration at Göttingen, where he sought to have Noether appointed as the equivalent of an associate professor. “After all, we are a university, not a bathhouse.” Hilbert failed to make his case, so instead brought her on staff as a more or less permanent “guest lecturer”; and Noether, fittingly enough, later took up swimming at a men-only pool.
At Göttingen, she pursued her passion for mathematical invariance, the study of numbers that can be manipulated in various ways and still remain constant. In the relationship between a star and its planet, for example, the shape and radius of the planetary orbit may change, but the gravitational attraction conjoining one to the other remains the same — and there’s your invariance.



The Mighty Mathematician You’ve Never Heard Of

Published: March 26, 2012

(Page 2 of 2)
In 1915 Einstein published his general theory of relativity. The Göttingen math department fell “head over ear” with it, in the words of one observer, and Noether began applying her invariance work to some of the complexities of the theory. That exercise eventually inspired her to formulate what is now called Noether’s theorem, an expression of the deep tie between the underlying geometry of the universe and the behavior of the mass and energy that call the universe home.

What the revolutionary theorem says, in cartoon essence, is the following: Wherever you find some sort of symmetry in nature, some predictability or homogeneity of parts, you’ll find lurking in the background a corresponding conservation — of momentum, electric charge, energy or the like. If a bicycle wheel is radially symmetric, if you can spin it on its axis and it still looks the same in all directions, well, then, that symmetric translation must yield a corresponding conservation. By applying the principles and calculations embodied in Noether’s theorem, you’ll see that it is angular momentum, the Newtonian impulse that keeps bicyclists upright and on the move.
Some of the relationships to pop out of the theorem are startling, the most profound one linking time and energy. Noether’s theorem shows that a symmetry of time — like the fact that whether you throw a ball in the air tomorrow or make the same toss next week will have no effect on the ball’s trajectory — is directly related to the conservation of energy, our old homily that energy can be neither created nor destroyed but merely changes form.
The connections that Noether forged are “critical” to modern physics, said Lisa Randall, a professor of theoretical particle physics and cosmology at Harvard. “Energy, momentum and other quantities we take for granted gain meaning and even greater value when we understand how these quantities follow from symmetry in time and space.”
Dr. Randall, the author of the newly published “Knocking on Heaven’s Door,” recalled the moment in college when she happened to learn that the author of Noether’s theorem was a she. “It was striking and even exciting and inspirational,” Dr. Randall said, admitting, “I was surprised by my reaction.”
For her part, Noether left little record of how she felt about the difficulties she faced as a woman, or of her personal and emotional life generally. She never married, and if she had love affairs she didn’t trumpet them. After meeting the young Czech math star Olga Taussky in 1930, Noether told friends how happy she was that women were finally gaining acceptance in the field, but she herself had so few female students that her many devoted pupils were known around town as Noether’s boys.
Noether lived for math and cared nothing for housework or possessions, and if her long, unruly hair began falling from its pins as she talked excitedly about math, she let it fall. She laughed often and in photos is always smiling.
When a couple of students started showing up to class wearing Hitler’s brownshirts, she laughed at that, too. But not for long. Noether was one of the first Jewish scientists to be fired from her post and forced to flee Germany. In 1933, with the help of Einstein, she was given a job at Bryn Mawr College, where she said she felt deeply appreciated as she never had been in Germany.
That didn’t last long, either. Only 18 months after her arrival in the United States, at the age of 53, Noether was operated on for an ovarian cyst, and died within days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/sc...=1&ref=science
BigApplePi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:03 PM   Fukyo's time 29th-March-2012, 07:03 PM    #8
Fukyo
internet bully & witch
 
Fukyo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,613
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
We've all heard it. Many of us in fact believe it. Girls just aren't as good at math as boys

After sifting through mountains of data - including SAT results and math scores from 7 million students who were tested in accordance with the No Child Left Behind Act - a team of scientists says the answer is no. Whether they looked at average performance, the scores of the most gifted children or students' ability to solve complex math problems, girls measured up to boys.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0724192258.htm


Quote:
"Stereotypes about female inferiority in mathematics are a distinct contrast to the actual scientific data," said Nicole Else-Quest, PhD, a psychology professor at Villanova University, and lead author of the meta-analysis. "These results show that girls will perform at the same level as the boys when they are given the right educational tools and have visible female role models excelling in mathematics."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0105112303.htm


Quote:
These findings are the product of a year-long study on 17 first- and second-grade teachers and 52 boys and 65 girls who were their students. The researchers found that boys' math performance was not related to their teacher's math anxiety while girls' math achievement was affected.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0125172940.htm

Quote:
Girls in high school take as many math courses as boys, influenced by close friends and peers who are doing well in school. More than boys, girls look to their close friends when they make important decisions, such as whether to take math and what math classes to take, confirming how significant peers are during adolescence.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0207085618.htm


Quote:
About 70% of more than half a million Implicit Association Tests
completed by citizens of 34 countries revealed expected implicit
stereotypes associating science with males more than with females.
We discovered that nation-level implicit stereotypes predicted
nation-level sex differences in 8th-grade science and mathematics
achievement. Self-reported stereotypes did not provide
additional predictive validity of the achievement gap. We suggest
that implicit stereotypes and sex differences in science participation
and performance are mutually reinforcing, contributing to the
persistent gender gap in science engagement.

http://faculty.washington.edu/agg/pd....PNAS.2009.pdf


....etc.
__________________
Get a little bit of bourbon in ya,
Go a little bit suburban and go crazy.
Fukyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:04 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 12:04 PM    #9
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigApplePi View Post
I happened across this article just today, but before I give it, if intelligence (not I.Q.) has to do with furthering the human race, women are more intelligent. They tend to pick and choose the men who would fertilize them and once fertilized take better care of their offspring. Men will help out but they are not in the end the best caretakers.

The Mighty Mathematician You’ve Never Heard Of

By NATALIE ANGIER

Published: March 26, 2012

Scientists are a famously anonymous lot, but few can match in the depths of her perverse and unmerited obscurity the 20th-century mathematical genius Amalie Noether.

Enlarge This Image

SPL/Photo Researchers

GROUNDBREAKING Emmy Noether’s theorem united two pillars of physics: symmetry in nature and the universal laws of conservation.

Albert Einstein called her the most “significant” and “creative” female mathematician of all time, and others of her contemporaries were inclined to drop the modification by sex. She invented a theorem that united with magisterial concision two conceptual pillars of physics: symmetry in nature and the universal laws of conservation. Some consider Noether’s theorem, as it is now called, as important as Einstein’s theory of relativity; it undergirds much of today’s vanguard research in physics, including the hunt for the almighty Higgs boson. Yet Noether herself remains utterly unknown, not only to the general public, but to many members of the scientific community as well.
When Dave Goldberg, a physicist at Drexel University who has written about her work, recently took a little “Noether poll” of several dozen colleagues, students and online followers, he was taken aback by the results. “Surprisingly few could say exactly who she was or why she was important,” he said. “A few others knew her name but couldn’t recall what she’d done, and the majority had never heard of her.”
Noether (pronounced NER-ter) was born in Erlangen, Germany, 130 years ago this month. So it’s a fine time to counter the chronic neglect and celebrate the life and work of a brilliant theorist whose unshakable number love and irrationally robust sense of humor helped her overcome severe handicaps — first, being female in Germany at a time when most German universities didn’t accept female students or hire female professors, and then being a Jewish pacifist in the midst of the Nazis’ rise to power.
Through it all, Noether was a highly prolific mathematician, publishing groundbreaking papers, sometimes under a man’s name, in rarefied fields of abstract algebra and ring theory. And when she applied her equations to the universe around her, she discovered some of its basic rules, like how time and energy are related, and why it is, as the physicist Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute put it, “that riding a bicycle is safe.”
Ransom Stephens, a physicist and novelist who has lectured widely on Noether, said, “You can make a strong case that her theorem is the backbone on which all of modern physics is built.”
Noether came from a mathematical family. Her father was a distinguished math professor at the universities of Heidelberg and Erlangen, and her brother Fritz won some renown as an applied mathematician. Emmy, as she was known throughout her life, started out studying English, French and piano — subjects more socially acceptable for a girl — but her interests soon turned to math. Barred from matriculating formally at the University of Erlangen, Emmy simply audited all the courses, and she ended up doing so well on her final exams that she was granted the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree.
She went on to graduate school at the University of Göttingen before returning to the University of Erlangen, where she earned her doctorate summa cum laude. She met many of the leading mathematicians of the day, including David Hilbert and Felix Klein, who did for the bottle what August Ferdinand Möbius had done for the strip. Noether’s brilliance was obvious to all who worked with her, and her male mentors repeatedly took up her cause, seeking to find her a teaching position — better still, one that paid.
“I do not see that the sex of the candidate is an argument against her,” Hilbert said indignantly to the administration at Göttingen, where he sought to have Noether appointed as the equivalent of an associate professor. “After all, we are a university, not a bathhouse.” Hilbert failed to make his case, so instead brought her on staff as a more or less permanent “guest lecturer”; and Noether, fittingly enough, later took up swimming at a men-only pool.
At Göttingen, she pursued her passion for mathematical invariance, the study of numbers that can be manipulated in various ways and still remain constant. In the relationship between a star and its planet, for example, the shape and radius of the planetary orbit may change, but the gravitational attraction conjoining one to the other remains the same — and there’s your invariance.



The Mighty Mathematician You’ve Never Heard Of

Published: March 26, 2012

(Page 2 of 2)
In 1915 Einstein published his general theory of relativity. The Göttingen math department fell “head over ear” with it, in the words of one observer, and Noether began applying her invariance work to some of the complexities of the theory. That exercise eventually inspired her to formulate what is now called Noether’s theorem, an expression of the deep tie between the underlying geometry of the universe and the behavior of the mass and energy that call the universe home.

What the revolutionary theorem says, in cartoon essence, is the following: Wherever you find some sort of symmetry in nature, some predictability or homogeneity of parts, you’ll find lurking in the background a corresponding conservation — of momentum, electric charge, energy or the like. If a bicycle wheel is radially symmetric, if you can spin it on its axis and it still looks the same in all directions, well, then, that symmetric translation must yield a corresponding conservation. By applying the principles and calculations embodied in Noether’s theorem, you’ll see that it is angular momentum, the Newtonian impulse that keeps bicyclists upright and on the move.
Some of the relationships to pop out of the theorem are startling, the most profound one linking time and energy. Noether’s theorem shows that a symmetry of time — like the fact that whether you throw a ball in the air tomorrow or make the same toss next week will have no effect on the ball’s trajectory — is directly related to the conservation of energy, our old homily that energy can be neither created nor destroyed but merely changes form.
The connections that Noether forged are “critical” to modern physics, said Lisa Randall, a professor of theoretical particle physics and cosmology at Harvard. “Energy, momentum and other quantities we take for granted gain meaning and even greater value when we understand how these quantities follow from symmetry in time and space.”
Dr. Randall, the author of the newly published “Knocking on Heaven’s Door,” recalled the moment in college when she happened to learn that the author of Noether’s theorem was a she. “It was striking and even exciting and inspirational,” Dr. Randall said, admitting, “I was surprised by my reaction.”
For her part, Noether left little record of how she felt about the difficulties she faced as a woman, or of her personal and emotional life generally. She never married, and if she had love affairs she didn’t trumpet them. After meeting the young Czech math star Olga Taussky in 1930, Noether told friends how happy she was that women were finally gaining acceptance in the field, but she herself had so few female students that her many devoted pupils were known around town as Noether’s boys.
Noether lived for math and cared nothing for housework or possessions, and if her long, unruly hair began falling from its pins as she talked excitedly about math, she let it fall. She laughed often and in photos is always smiling.
When a couple of students started showing up to class wearing Hitler’s brownshirts, she laughed at that, too. But not for long. Noether was one of the first Jewish scientists to be fired from her post and forced to flee Germany. In 1933, with the help of Einstein, she was given a job at Bryn Mawr College, where she said she felt deeply appreciated as she never had been in Germany.
That didn’t last long, either. Only 18 months after her arrival in the United States, at the age of 53, Noether was operated on for an ovarian cyst, and died within days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/sc...=1&ref=science
Intelligence is more akin to reasoning ability than mating prowess and domestic skills.

I also wouldn't characterize the incontinent perpetuation of the species as an intelligent activity.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:08 PM   Minuend's time 29th-March-2012, 07:08 PM    #10
Minuend
is actually a potato- a kawaii potato
 
Minuend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,802
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and...y#Intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_science
http://womenshistorymonth.wordpress....n-and-science/

But women have always participated in science and have made discoveries, experimented in laboratories; studied nature and even designed scientific apparatus. But the reason why these women scientists’ names are not well-known compared to male scientists such as Aristotle, Isaac Newton and Robert Hook, to name just three, is because male-centric scientific historians have deliberately written out and/or ignored the achievements of women scientists.

However, girls were excluded from male-only formal educational facilities as were female scientists excluded from male only scientific fraternities.


http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/EKNU.html

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...e-bright-girls

Studies show that women need to perform at extraordinarily high levels, just to appear moderately competent compared to our male coworkers.
__________________
I think minuend is actually a balloon disguised as a human

Man, I knew he was nuts, but goddamn
Minuend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:08 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 12:08 PM    #11
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Aptitude tests theoretically measure reasoning ability and knowledge. What has math achievement got to with anything? If you're loosely positing that environment impacts aptitude, I agree.

All right, this is getting out of hand. Answer me this question: why do women report less numbers three/four/five standard deviations above the mean compared to men?
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:09 PM   Fukyo's time 29th-March-2012, 07:09 PM    #12
Fukyo
internet bully & witch
 
Fukyo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,613
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
Edit: Moderators are tampering with my posts now. This lack of autonomy is unromantic and unjustified. Maybe I should leave soon.

I'm approving the posts as soon as I see them.

Your post was caught because you quoted SandMizzle, whose post was also had to be approved, probably has to do with the link.
__________________
Get a little bit of bourbon in ya,
Go a little bit suburban and go crazy.
Fukyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:11 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 12:11 PM    #13
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minuend View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and...y#Intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_science

http://womenshistorymonth.wordpress....n-and-science/

But women have always participated in science and have made discoveries, experimented in laboratories; studied nature and even designed scientific apparatus. But the reason why these women scientists’ names are not well-known compared to male scientists such as Aristotle, Isaac Newton and Robert Hook, to name just three, is because male-centric scientific historians have deliberately written out and/or ignored the achievements of women scientists.

However, girls were excluded from male-only formal educational facilities as were female scientists excluded from male only scientific fraternities.


http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/EKNU.html

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...e-bright-girls

Studies show that women need to perform at extraordinarily high levels, just to appear moderately competent compared to our male coworkers.
That's a decent argument, and the same may apply for blacks, but why then do females show diminished IQs at the higher ranges compared to men?

My argument against that is this: why weren't there more women like Hypatia? There are/were myriad instances in which ability trumps/trumped societal institutions.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:13 PM   Cognisant's time 30th-March-2012, 04:13 AM    #14
Cognisant
Condescending Bastard
 
Cognisant's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,238
windows_xp_2003ie
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
I assume it's just a matter of wiring.
Exactly.

Men are expendable, as I've said before 90% of a given male population can die and the overall population will be back up within a couple of decades, this is true even if 90% of the entire male population of the world died overnight, we really are THAT expendable. As such it only makes sense that males are the genetic testing ground of the species, if X-men was realistic all but the most rare exception of first generation mutants would be male, with a subsequent explosion of female mutants in the next generation, their daughters.

That's why almost all female mutants have powers that are sexy in some way
Those genes had to have been passed on...

I wonder if this would eventually result in the people of the X-men universe having universally sexy appearances.

Spoiler:
Oh gee those poor ostracized weirdos.

WHERE ARE HER PANTS?
__________________
Evolution makes things stronger, deadlier, sillier and more perverted.
Cognisant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:14 PM   Fukyo's time 29th-March-2012, 07:14 PM    #15
Fukyo
internet bully & witch
 
Fukyo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,613
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
Aptitude tests theoretically measure reasoning ability and knowledge. What has math achievement got to with anything? If you're loosely positing that environment impacts aptitude, I agree.

All right, this is getting out of hand. Answer me this question: why do women report less numbers three/four/five standard deviations above the mean compared to men?
Why do some people perform poorly on timed IQ tests? Because anxiety tampers with their cognitive functioning. The links carry relevant implications for possible explanations relevant to your question; furthermore IQ tests often strongly favor spatial reasoning and reasoning with numbers, all integral to mathematics.
__________________
Get a little bit of bourbon in ya,
Go a little bit suburban and go crazy.
Fukyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:15 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 12:15 PM    #16
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fukyo View Post
Why do some people perform poorly on timed IQ tests? Because anxiety tampers with their cognitive functioning. The links carry relevant implications for possible explanations relevant to your question; furthermore IQ tests often strongly favor spatial reasoning and reasoning with numbers, all integral to mathematics.
That's better; anxiety during test administration is a valid answer in so far as you can prove that this applies more to women and this phenomenon hampers their performance. Your last assertion is unfounded though.

The correlations between achievement and aptitude tests are overstated and extremely misapplied. Postulating spatial reasoning is the cornerstone of all tests is a stretch as well.

There are some tests, for instance, which are entirely composed of words, and correlate at the .88 level with comprehensive aptitude batteries.

Highlighted area: weak sauce.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:30 PM   Minuend's time 29th-March-2012, 07:30 PM    #17
Minuend
is actually a potato- a kawaii potato
 
Minuend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,802
windows_vistasafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
That's a decent argument, and the same may apply for blacks, but why then do females show diminished IQs at the higher ranges compared to men?


They don't

Quote:
My argument against that is this: why weren't there more women like Hypatia?
Read the links.

Quote:
There are/were myriad instances in which ability trumps/trumped societal institutions.
No, there was not. Even the most brilliant, world changing female scientists were denied entrance the the scientific community.
__________________
I think minuend is actually a balloon disguised as a human

Man, I knew he was nuts, but goddamn
Minuend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:41 PM   Fukyo's time 29th-March-2012, 07:41 PM    #18
Fukyo
internet bully & witch
 
Fukyo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,613
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
That's better; anxiety during test administration is a valid answer in so far as you can prove that this applies more to women and this phenomenon hampers their performance.
I don't think you've read those links, or are severely failing to put them into context. If girls are essentially prejudiced against themselves and believe they will do poorly, it will likely trigger performance anxiety, or simple resignation, as I believe it tends to do with people, perhaps not all though, which would contribute to a self fulfilling prophecy.

For the record, I'm providing possibilities here, not absolutes. I don't have the definite answer to your questions.
Quote:
The correlations between achievement and aptitude tests are overstated and extremely misapplied.
Uh, okay. Not the point I made, but I guess you can make that connection from the links.

Quote:
Postulating spatial reasoning is the cornerstone of all tests is a stretch as well.
Oh, I never said this, I said it favors such reasoning, and it's definitely true insofar my knowledge of Mensa IQ test goes, as this sample can testify.

Quote:
There are some tests, for instance, which are entirely composed of words, and correlate at the .88 level with comprehensive aptitude batteries.
Wait, I though it was a know fact women are better at verbal stuff.


Okay, on a serious side. You should make a bit of a more detailed investigation, just saying IQ tests is a bit ambiguous, we should review varies types of aptitude tests and how genders perform on them to get to the bottom of it, putting it all in the same basket is prob. no good if you seriously want to figure it out Just saying.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cognisant
Men are expendable, as I've said before 90% of a given male population can die and the overall population will be back up within a couple of decades, this is true even if 90% of the entire male population of the world died overnight, we really are THAT expendable.
Yeah, I don't really believe in this. It would keep the race alive in short term, but if only a small pool of men impregnated so many women, a greater number of following generations would be more closely related, making the mating pool smaller. (although for some reason 3rd cousin's reproducing tend to have more offspring) The whole point of sexual reproduction is creating more genetic variance and diversity, supporting evolution.
__________________
Get a little bit of bourbon in ya,
Go a little bit suburban and go crazy.
Fukyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 06:47 PM   BigApplePi's time 29th-March-2012, 01:47 PM    #19
BigApplePi
Banned
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Posts: 8,988
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

This doesn't answer the Q, but if men do occupy the extreme of higher, the cause would have to be extreme as well I would think. SandMizzle mentioned motivation. Think sports. Are men more competitive? Many women are highly competitive but from a smaller population. Men need not be weeded out; women are. So there's a better chance for an extreme at the higher end.
BigApplePi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:04 PM   Amagi82's time 29th-March-2012, 02:04 PM    #20
Amagi82
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!
 
Amagi82's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 407
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Antecedent to the subject of intelligence differential due to race and sex is the powerful influence culture has on the numbers. Our IQ is not written in stone from when we were born, though, like any other ability, we may have a predisposition to high or low intelligence. My personal belief is that both sexes and every race have roughly equivalent intelligence potential (whether or not this is true is up to debate, but I think it's a positive assumption).

What matters to me, far more so than the end differences in intelligence, is why the discrepancy exists. And, as usual, the culture the person was raised in is vastly more important than any minor genetic predisposition in the individual. In this society, it was only very recently that women had anything resembling equal rights, and the same goes for blacks. If you are raised in a society that teaches you that your purpose is to bear children, raise them, and keep the house tidy, while telling you you're stupid and need a man's help to get through life, it's no surprise that the lack of emphasis on intellectual pursuits would lead to lower IQ. Black culture in America is fairly horrifying with its encouragement of prideful ignorance, glorification of the material, and violence, and again, it's no shock that overall intelligence is vastly lower than average.

What's truly important about these studies is identifying the "why" and making changes in our culture that encourage improvement.
__________________
Spoiler:
Amagi82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:06 PM   Amagi82's time 29th-March-2012, 02:06 PM    #21
Amagi82
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!
 
Amagi82's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 407
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fukyo View Post
Yeah, I don't really believe in this. It would keep the race alive in short term, but if only a small pool of men impregnated so many women, a greater number of following generations would be more closely related, making the mating pool smaller. (although for some reason 3rd cousin's reproducing tend to have more offspring) The whole point of sexual reproduction is creating more genetic variance and diversity, supporting evolution.
The loss of genetic diversity would be a problem, but removing 90% of the female population would have exponentially more disastrous effects than removing the males.
__________________
Spoiler:
Amagi82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:10 PM   Cognisant's time 30th-March-2012, 05:10 AM    #22
Cognisant
Condescending Bastard
 
Cognisant's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,238
windows_xp_2003ie
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Yeah, I don't really believe in this. It would keep the race alive in short term, but if only a small pool of men impregnated so many women, a greater number of following generations would be more closely related, making the mating pool smaller. (although for some reason 3rd cousin's reproducing tend to have more offspring) The whole point of sexual reproduction is creating more genetic variance and diversity, supporting evolution.
I'm not saying it's a good idea, and certainly not that 10% of males sire all the offspring, my point is simply that the species could survive the event, whereas a 90% loss of females would drastically affect the population (and diversity for that matter) for hundreds if not thousands of years.

Edit: Ninja'ed
__________________
Evolution makes things stronger, deadlier, sillier and more perverted.
Cognisant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:15 PM   Mello's time 29th-March-2012, 11:15 AM    #23
Mello
Gone.
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,041
macosfirefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Better question: Why do you care?
Mello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:37 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 01:37 PM    #24
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigApplePi View Post
This doesn't answer the Q, but if men do occupy the extreme of higher, the cause would have to be extreme as well I would think. SandMizzle mentioned motivation. Think sports. Are men more competitive? Many women are highly competitive but from a smaller population. Men need not be weeded out; women are. So there's a better chance for an extreme at the higher end.
At least you recognize that. Sports may prove a dubious/controversial analogy, though, because men are inherently/on average stronger than women.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:41 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 01:41 PM    #25
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amagi82 View Post
Antecedent to the subject of intelligence differential due to race and sex is the powerful influence culture has on the numbers. Our IQ is not written in stone from when we were born, though, like any other ability, we may have a predisposition to high or low intelligence. My personal belief is that both sexes and every race have roughly equivalent intelligence potential (whether or not this is true is up to debate, but I think it's a positive assumption).

What matters to me, far more so than the end differences in intelligence, is why the discrepancy exists. And, as usual, the culture the person was raised in is vastly more important than any minor genetic predisposition in the individual. In this society, it was only very recently that women had anything resembling equal rights, and the same goes for blacks. If you are raised in a society that teaches you that your purpose is to bear children, raise them, and keep the house tidy, while telling you you're stupid and need a man's help to get through life, it's no surprise that the lack of emphasis on intellectual pursuits would lead to lower IQ. Black culture in America is fairly horrifying with its encouragement of prideful ignorance, glorification of the material, and violence, and again, it's no shock that overall intelligence is vastly lower than average.

What's truly important about these studies is identifying the "why" and making changes in our culture that encourage improvement.
The data corroborates that belief, for the most part. My contention is with the higher performing. Why are women outnumbered five/one near four standard deviations above the mean?

Folks are trotting out historical arguments but that tack fails to address the current/severe minority of women at the higher ability levels.

Good conclusion. The ultimate goal to psychometric/ecological analysis should be identifying weaknesses and ameliorating decayed parts of society.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:45 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 01:45 PM    #26
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mello View Post
Better question: Why do you care?
That is not a better question.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:48 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 01:48 PM    #27
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fukyo View Post
I don't think you've read those links, or are severely failing to put them into context. If girls are essentially prejudiced against themselves and believe they will do poorly, it will likely trigger performance anxiety, or simple resignation, as I believe it tends to do with people, perhaps not all though, which would contribute to a self fulfilling prophecy.

For the record, I'm providing possibilities here, not absolutes. I don't have the definite answer to your questions.


Uh, okay. Not the point I made, but I guess you can make that connection from the links.



Oh, I never said this, I said it favors such reasoning, and it's definitely true insofar my knowledge of Mensa IQ test goes, as this sample can testify.



Wait, I though it was a know fact women are better at verbal stuff.



Okay, on a serious side. You should make a bit of a more detailed investigation, just saying IQ tests is a bit ambiguous, we should review varies types of aptitude tests and how genders perform on them to get to the bottom of it, putting it all in the same basket is prob. no good if you seriously want to figure it out Just saying.




Yeah, I don't really believe in this. It would keep the race alive in short term, but if only a small pool of men impregnated so many women, a greater number of following generations would be more closely related, making the mating pool smaller. (although for some reason 3rd cousin's reproducing tend to have more offspring) The whole point of sexual reproduction is creating more genetic variance and diversity, supporting evolution.
That's a somewhat simplistic interpretation of what we're looking at. Little girls tend to do better on expressive vocabulary tasks on the WISC but that seems isolated to a few studies.

According to researchers like Alan Kaufman females also enjoy an advantage on long-term storage and retrieval tasks. There are undoubtedly more tasks in which females show a meager advantage.

In some sense I agree that IQ is ambiguous but that still seems like generalization. The tests correlate amazingly well with one another in spite of wildly varying methodology.

So, for the record, your explication is that females tend to have tighter standard deviations and report less scores in the higher strata because of performance anxiety and "simple resignation" and this notion of a self-fulfilling prophesy?
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:51 PM   Minuend's time 29th-March-2012, 08:51 PM    #28
Minuend
is actually a potato- a kawaii potato
 
Minuend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,802
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

You have not provided a single source for your claim. As Fukyo said, IQ test are not final things. I quote my first link.

Several meta-studies by Richard Lynn between 1999 and 2005 found mean IQ of men exceeding that of women by a range of 3-5 points.[41][42][43] Lynn's findings were debated in a series of articles for Nature.[44][45] Jackson and Rushton found males aged 17–18 years had average of 3.63 IQ points in excess of their female equivalents.[46] A 2005 study by Helmuth Nyborg found an average advantage for males of 3.8 IQ points.[47] One study concluded that after controlling for sociodemographic and health varia

bles, "gender differences tended to disappear on tests for which there was a male advantage and to magnify on tests for which there was a female advantage."[48] A study from 2007 found a 2-4 IQ point advantage for females in later life.[49] One study investigated the differences in IQ between the sexes in relation to age, finding that girls do better at younger ages but that their performance declines relative to boys with age.[50] Colom et al. (2002) found 3.16 higher IQ points for males but no difference on the general intelligence factor (g) and therefore explained the differences as due to non-g factors such as specific group factors and test specificity.[51]


As you can see, big variations
__________________
I think minuend is actually a balloon disguised as a human

Man, I knew he was nuts, but goddamn
Minuend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 07:56 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 01:57 PM    #29
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minuend View Post
You have not provided a single source for your claim. As Fukyo said, IQ test are not final things. I quote my first link.

Several meta-studies by Richard Lynn between 1999 and 2005 found mean IQ of men exceeding that of women by a range of 3-5 points.[41][42][43] Lynn's findings were debated in a series of articles for Nature.[44][45] Jackson and Rushton found males aged 17–18 years had average of 3.63 IQ points in excess of their female equivalents.[46] A 2005 study by Helmuth Nyborg found an average advantage for males of 3.8 IQ points.[47] One study concluded that after controlling for sociodemographic and health varia

bles, "gender differences tended to disappear on tests for which there was a male advantage and to magnify on tests for which there was a female advantage."[48] A study from 2007 found a 2-4 IQ point advantage for females in later life.[49] One study investigated the differences in IQ between the sexes in relation to age, finding that girls do better at younger ages but that their performance declines relative to boys with age.[50] Colom et al. (2002) found 3.16 higher IQ points for males but no difference on the general intelligence factor (g) and therefore explained the differences as due to non-g factors such as specific group factors and test specificity.[51]


As you can see, big variations
Meta-analysis takes these big variations into account and presents a comprehensive picture across ages and genders and hundreds of other factors. The crux of the issue is why women report fewer scores in the highest ranges. I am not going to quibble over two/five points near the mean.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 08:07 PM   Adaire's time 29th-March-2012, 01:07 PM    #30
Adaire
Resident Member
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,968
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

There are fewer in high academic positions now
There used to be next to none.

Statistically women are now getting more advanced degrees than men. For wide variety of reasons I'm sure, but this likely to cause changes. Perhaps? Perhaps not? You cannot deny that there have been significant social upheavals, the ultimate consequences of which are not yet visible.

Who's to say what the equilibrium will look like.

[MENTION=6017]SandMizzle[/MENTION]
Very nice link.

Quote:
The crux of the issue is why women report fewer scores in the highest ranges. I am not going to quibble over two/five points near the mean.
Dude....
This has been explained a dozen times over already. >.>
Adaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 08:16 PM   BigApplePi's time 29th-March-2012, 03:16 PM    #31
BigApplePi
Banned
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Posts: 8,988
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

I wonder if this Q is being asked because the present world is bringing it into doubt? Historically men have been the breadwinners and have been expected to do so. This operates in conjunction with a tremendous drive for achievement. Why should a woman have to achieve outside of the family if she is going to be close to the center of the family? So she doesn't HAVE to achieve. Men think they do.

The present world is changing.
BigApplePi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 08:20 PM   Mello's time 29th-March-2012, 12:20 PM    #32
Mello
Gone.
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,041
macosfirefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
That is not a better question.
That is not a better answer.
Mello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 08:33 PM   Fukyo's time 29th-March-2012, 09:33 PM    #33
Fukyo
internet bully & witch
 
Fukyo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,613
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
That's a somewhat simplistic interpretation of what we're looking at.
I'm extrapolating on what I've read, and summarizing it since I have no intention of quoting walls of text; it's probably better explained in the sources. If there's evidence for different influencing factors like biological features creating the difference, well, providing them would be conductive to reaching the answer, but for now I'm working with what's available.

Quote:
In some sense I agree that IQ is ambiguous but that still seems like generalization. The tests correlate amazingly well with one another in spite of wildly varying methodology.
I wasn't referring to the concept of IQ (although that is also a subject to discussion), but to your choice of words, that is calling all kinds of aptitude tests IQ tests. I'm not aware of these correlations and if the rule of distribution of IQ results among men and women actually holds up to a significant degree across all kinds of aptitude tests.

Quote:
So, for the record, your explication is that females tend to have tighter standard deviations and report less scores in the higher strata because of performance anxiety and "simple resignation" and this notion of a self-fulfilling prophesy?
In short: no.

I think similar factor affecting mathematics performance may be affecting general IQ performance, but not necessary producing the specific deviations you mention.

You may have missed the part where I said possibilities.
__________________
Get a little bit of bourbon in ya,
Go a little bit suburban and go crazy.
Fukyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 08:45 PM   Cognisant's time 30th-March-2012, 06:45 AM    #34
Cognisant
Condescending Bastard
 
Cognisant's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,238
windows_xp_2003ie
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Zzzzzzzzz snch wha? oh, still at it... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
__________________
Evolution makes things stronger, deadlier, sillier and more perverted.
Cognisant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 08:49 PM   Fukyo's time 29th-March-2012, 09:49 PM    #35
Fukyo
internet bully & witch
 
Fukyo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,613
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cognisant View Post
Zzzzzzzzz snch wha? oh, still at it... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
What was that Cog?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cognisant View Post
I don't want snarky commentary and clowning around is only mildly amusing, what I really want is a series of long rants from different people detailing their opinions and why each others opinions are wrong.

Y'know a debate.
__________________
Get a little bit of bourbon in ya,
Go a little bit suburban and go crazy.
Fukyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 09:57 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 03:57 PM    #36
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mello View Post
That is not a better answer.
I never promised good answers. You promised a better question, and failed to deliver.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 10:07 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 04:07 PM    #37
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fukyo View Post
I'm extrapolating on what I've read, and summarizing it since I have no intention of quoting walls of text; it's probably better explained in the sources. If there's evidence for different influencing factors like biological features creating the difference, well, providing them would be conductive to reaching the answer, but for now I'm working with what's available.



I wasn't referring to the concept of IQ (although that is also a subject to discussion), but to your choice of words, that is calling all kinds of aptitude tests IQ tests. I'm not aware of these correlations and if the rule of distribution of IQ results among men and women actually holds up to a significant degree across all kinds of aptitude tests.



In short: no.

I think similar factor affecting mathematics performance may be affecting general IQ performance, but not necessary producing the specific deviations you mention.

You may have missed the part where I said possibilities.

Nope, I saw that and the word "if," but I wanted you to take a firmer stance.

I might send you some attachments which delineate the correlations among achievement tests (e.g., WIAT), school aptitude tests (e.g., ACT), traditional IQ tests (WAIS) and high-range tests (CCAT).

Unfortunately gender disparities at the higher ranges are seldom discussed in the literature. For that matter, high scores are seldom discussed in the literature.

The reason for this probably lies with IDEA and similar federal acts in Education which focus on low abilities and handicaps to the detriment of the gifted and academically talented.

Another reason could be America's unwillingness to admit manifest cognitive differences among people, races, and perhaps genders and general political correctness.

Off the record, you can contact organization like the Prometheus Society and discover their paltry numbers regarding women. They're desperate for any they can scoop up.

The trend circumscribing women becomes more psychometrically pronounced, as described earlier, the further one digresses from the norm.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 10:18 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 04:18 PM    #38
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigApplePi View Post
I wonder if this Q is being asked because the present world is bringing it into doubt? Historically men have been the breadwinners and have been expected to do so. This operates in conjunction with a tremendous drive for achievement. Why should a woman have to achieve outside of the family if she is going to be close to the center of the family? So she doesn't HAVE to achieve. Men think they do.

The present world is changing.
I love your equanimity. While everyone is hooting and hollering and slinging mud, you're casually asking these questions. Love that.

The reason I asked the question about the dearth of high scoring women was that average female abilities seemed to encapsulate the literature and my experience and observations.

Realize, however, that there is theoretically a difference between achievement and aptitude. Someone could have the highest IQ ever and be an abject failure in life due to extraneous factors; the opposite, unfortunately, is seldom the case.

There could be a perfectly valid reason why women, as a pandemic wave, score lower. This validated psychometric phenomenon is my main window of inquiry.

You seem to get mired in the same place as Minuend. This isn't about drive, breadwinners and achievement. Rather this is about mental ability apart from these things.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 10:22 PM   negativemotivation's time 29th-March-2012, 05:22 PM    #39
negativemotivation
Redshirt
 
negativemotivation's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 25
windows_vistafirefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

I was recently reading an article about intelligence generally staying the same from adolescence to full maturity. I got curious and dug up a gifted test from kinder-garden. My sisters test was in the general area so I couldn't help but compare. The test was on seven different subjects with a total of 205 points. I scored 191 and my sister scored 195, she beat me in every subject but mathematics which I aced. We are now 21 and 22 and both fall into the 125-150 IQ range. I think this shows similar genetics and environments lead to similar IQs. [MENTION=1005]Fukyo[/MENTION] there are specific IQ tests now that don't dominantly involve mathematics.
negativemotivation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 10:26 PM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 04:26 PM    #40
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by negativemotivation View Post
I was recently reading an article about intelligence generally staying the same from adolescence to full maturity. I got curious and dug up a gifted test from kinder-garden. My sisters test was in the general area so I couldn't help but compare. The test was on seven different subjects with a total of 205 points. I scored 191 and my sister scored 195, she beat me in every subject but mathematics which I aced. We are now 21 and 22 and both fall into the 125-150 IQ range. I think this shows similar genetics and environments lead to similar IQs. [MENTION=1005]Fukyo[/MENTION] there are specific IQ tests now that don't dominantly involve mathematics.
You may have taken the Cattell Culture Fair test, which has an unorthodox standard deviation of twenty four points and a similar ceiling. My experience with this test, however, is limited.

I agree with your highlighted point. Children separated at birth and given different environments often show similar IQ levels and appallingly similar outcomes decades later. IQ: the great equalizer.

There are so many factors to consider with IQ, and these tend to be most salient early in life. To name a few factors: nutrition, early stimulation, parental education and health.

Our parents never really pushed us, but both of my younger sisters have scores hovering around one thirty five and I last tested at one sixty five. My dad is this Aspergers-like INTJ computer programmer so that's partly where it comes from maybe. Who can be sure?

I say this to illustrate a point; I find talking about scores mildly pretentious because of the immutability and genetic endowment argument.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th-March-2012, 10:35 PM   Reluctantly's time 29th-March-2012, 05:35 PM    #41
Reluctantly
Morbidly Insane
 
Reluctantly's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,336
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

There are some people that think if they have a high IQ, that excuses them from teaching others with a lower IQ to learn and understand from them; but even so, people that assume another person can't teach them anything because that other person has a lower IQ, are kind of ignorant as well.

This, at least, is something women seem not to fall into; I think they bother to spend more time to communicate what they know with other people, while men are more narcissist and feel justified in leaving other people behind, if they can't keep up intellectually.
__________________
~don't forget to wake up~
Reluctantly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 12:54 AM   TheHabitatDoctor's time 29th-March-2012, 07:55 PM    #42
TheHabitatDoctor
penitent conformity
 
TheHabitatDoctor's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,567
windows_98_nt_2000ie
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

At the risk of derailing any larger, layered goals centered at the creation of this thread, ...... aw fuck I'll do it anyway:

Define intellect. /thread
__________________
Be the change.

<3 Cav.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place
TheHabitatDoctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 12:57 AM   BigApplePi's time 29th-March-2012, 07:57 PM    #43
BigApplePi
Banned
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Posts: 8,988
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
You seem to get mired in the same place as Minuend. This isn't about drive, breadwinners and achievement. Rather this is about mental ability apart from these things.
Well then. Let's take a broader approach. (Hi Minuend ... what's happenin'?)

There should be nature and nurture behind the results of any I.Q. test. When I was thinking motivation, I was thinking the learning that factors into any I.Q. test. At the high end of the scale if prior ability is used to learn, this can affect the I.Q. results. After all besides linguistic and reasoning factors, there are facts that will indirectly help one's score. Furthermore I've heard two things: (1) I.Q. scores are going up and (2) some parents deliberately prep their kids for such test. <-- only my single source so that needs verification.

That leaves nature. Does wiring at the high end affect males over females? Maybe it does, but even if equal wiring after all, encouragement of males at the high end could break the tie.
BigApplePi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 01:03 AM   BigApplePi's time 29th-March-2012, 08:03 PM    #44
BigApplePi
Banned
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Posts: 8,988
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehabitatdoctor View Post
At the risk of derailing any larger, layered goals centered at the creation of this thread, ...... aw fuck I'll do it anyway:

Define intellect. /thread
A derailment shows off where the rails are. Here's a def try:

Intellect = that facility (mostly found in humans) that enables one to do stuff, mostly mental (in the case of intellect ... you didn't ask intelligence).
BigApplePi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 01:16 AM   TheHabitatDoctor's time 29th-March-2012, 08:17 PM    #45
TheHabitatDoctor
penitent conformity
 
TheHabitatDoctor's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,567
windows_98_nt_2000ie
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigApplePi View Post
A derailment shows off where the rails are. Here's a def try:

Intellect = that facility (mostly found in humans) that enables one to do stuff, mostly mental (in the case of intellect ... you didn't ask intelligence).
I didn't ask how it's operationalized either ("Well... most people agree it measures something, therefore I have reason to say I'm smarter than thou! Aha!"), but the target isn't exactly a small one.
__________________
Be the change.

<3 Cav.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place
TheHabitatDoctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 02:21 AM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 08:21 PM    #46
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigApplePi View Post
Well then. Let's take a broader approach. (Hi Minuend ... what's happenin'?)

There should be nature and nurture behind the results of any I.Q. test. When I was thinking motivation, I was thinking the learning that factors into any I.Q. test. At the high end of the scale if prior ability is used to learn, this can affect the I.Q. results. After all besides linguistic and reasoning factors, there are facts that will indirectly help one's score. Furthermore I've heard two things: (1) I.Q. scores are going up and (2) some parents deliberately prep their kids for such test. <-- only my single source so that needs verification.

That leaves nature. Does wiring at the high end affect males over females? Maybe it does, but even if equal wiring after all, encouragement of males at the high end could break the tie.
Intellectual striving and level of education are certainly factors that inform expressive and receptive vocabulary, as subsidiaries of crystallized intelligence, as one tier down from the fabled g. So yeah, even at the level of one/three standard deviations raw intellectual horsepower without knowledge of one's culture, depending on the test, will make/break your composite score. I liked how Alan Kaufman framed the issue. He rhetorically asked whether someone with an IQ of 140 with low crystallized intelligence is more intelligent than someone with an IQ of 140 and high crystallized intelligence. His answer was a tepid yes because our culture is predicated on words. Kaufman posited the latter example is more functionally intelligent, and I agree. That bloke is better able to navigate our word-laden culture. If our culture was based on numbers, then others may hold the upper hand.

The Flynn Effect, which says scores are rising, is a debatable psychometric phenomenon. I would chalk up this phenomenon to practice effects and other extraneous factors. If you trace that effect back to the beginning and ask were folks really twenty points lower back then, the answer is, probably not really. Well, if parents do prep their kids for the ACT/SAT/WAIS then that test's ability to accurately gauge intelligence is hindered because the other bloke forewent the practice effects and unfair exposure. The ACT is a de facto intelligence test, but for actual intelligence tests there are specified times in which you can retest after. Some fluid intelligence subtests are extremely sensitive to ignorance to the task beforehand. The definition of fluid intelligence is basically how well you reason with novel stimuli. The stimuli cease to be novel at some point with practice, right?
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 02:43 AM   negativemotivation's time 29th-March-2012, 09:43 PM    #47
negativemotivation
Redshirt
 
negativemotivation's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 25
windows_vistafirefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

I think while measuring intelligence you need to eliminate simple retained knowledge. For example in elementary school I could always work math problems in my head. My teacher would write a problem on the board, a few seconds later I would blurt the answer. I quickly learned it was best to keep quiet but I also realized not many of my peers could do this. IMO this is a form of genetic intelligence.
negativemotivation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 03:16 AM   BigApplePi's time 29th-March-2012, 10:16 PM    #48
BigApplePi
Banned
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York City (The Big Apple) & State
Posts: 8,988
windows_xp_2003firefox
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by snafupants View Post
I liked how Alan Kaufman framed the issue. He rhetorically asked whether someone with an IQ of 140 with low crystallized intelligence is more intelligent than someone with an IQ of 140 and high crystallized intelligence. His answer was a tepid yes because our culture is predicated on words. Kaufman posited the latter example is more functionally intelligent, and I agree. That bloke is better able to navigate our word-laden culture. If our culture was based on numbers, then others may hold the upper hand.
Suppose I use words like, "intelligence via experience" versus "intelligence via novelty." I question such a difference and would want further definition. Think of a seven year old and a fourteen year old both with the same I.Q., say the mentioned 140. What would make the difference in intelligence? Is their intelligence the same or is the older more intelligent? Why? Why is the older person more able to deal with novelty?

Inserted sentences: use "mental age" instead. Same Q: what makes the teenager's intelligence higher than the 7Y old?

I would ask to define some sample novelties. Why can't novelties (techniques) be learned as well as "facts."
BigApplePi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 04:01 AM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 10:01 PM    #49
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by negativemotivation View Post
I think while measuring intelligence you need to eliminate simple retained knowledge. For example in elementary school I could always work math problems in my head. My teacher would write a problem on the board, a few seconds later I would blurt the answer. I quickly learned it was best to keep quiet but I also realized not many of my peers could do this. IMO this is a form of genetic intelligence.
So do I actually. Although I tend to perform slightly better on crystallized intelligence tasks, versus fluid intelligence tasks which are usually confounded with time, I would call for that move. There is, moreover, a tremendous overlap between crystallized intelligence/cultural knowledge and achievement tests. Why not rely on achievements tests for this information? In my opinion, intelligence should be akin to mental horsepower.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th-March-2012, 04:08 AM   snafupants's time 29th-March-2012, 10:08 PM    #50
snafupants
Resident Member
 
snafupants's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,026
macossafari
Default Re: Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigApplePi View Post
Suppose I use words like, "intelligence via experience" versus "intelligence via novelty." I question such a difference and would want further definition. Think of a seven year old and a fourteen year old both with the same I.Q., say the mentioned 140. What would make the difference in intelligence? Is their intelligence the same or is the older more intelligent? Why? Why is the older person more able to deal with novelty?

Inserted sentences: use "mental age" instead. Same Q: what makes the teenager's intelligence higher than the 7Y old?

I would ask to define some sample novelties. Why can't novelties (techniques) be learned as well as "facts."
Good questions. The older kid would have answered more questions corrected to achieve that scaled score. When you're converting raw scores to scaled scores, as a rule, the test taker needs to answer more answers correctly to attain the same scaled score as s/he progresses in age. This is attuned to cognitive changes,which are informed by neuroscience, that occur as we age. So for an older test taker, s/he would be expected to answer fewer questions correctly to obtain the same scaled score as a twenty five year old on fluid intelligence tasks because we know that fluid intelligence declines with age.

Mental ages are basically obsolete today. In the first three versions, at least, of the Stanford-Binet you would divide mental age by chronological age and then multiply the result by one hundred to get your composite IQ score. They did this for kids up to age sixteen. The term for this type of score is a ratio IQ. Today we use deviation IQ scores. The term deviation denotes the scores relationship to a shared mean and standard deviation, which are usually one hundred and fifteen, respectively.

In my opinion novelty can be learned. Tests are compromised all of the time. That's an ongoing issue with the de facto IQ tests in the United States, namely the SAT and ACT. Test prep companies effectively get paid to teach kids tricks and strategies for scoring well on the tests, meanwhile their intelligence stays stable, of course. The problem of practice effects certainly has implications for conventional intelligence tests, and folks are discouraged from disclosing sensitive information.

With something like GRE prep, though, I would argue both traditional studying and assimilating your thinking to the test plus exposure to new words could increase your GRE verbal score. Who's to say your crystallized intelligence didn't also receive a bump? The bigger problem today, however, is compromised answers rather than gleaned/learned strategies per se.

I enjoyed answering those questions, and if you need further clarification/explanations I would be happy to assist. You have sort of stumbled upon three flaws with these tests: they artificially predict future intelligence level based on childhood performance; they optimistically predict applicability to other/broader ecological tasks; and they make the assumption that if you know certain words than you know others of commensurate difficulty. The first and third assumptions aren't terrible but the second could be a killer. I suppose correlation studies vindicate the tests to some extent.
snafupants is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why do women have lower IQs than men?: The case for plebeian intellect in females [SPLIT] Mello Oubliette 75 6th-April-2012 08:27 PM
How many here see men and women as individuals? Minuend The Lounge Archive 94 29th-March-2012 05:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:47 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Template-Modifications by TMS



no new posts