#### Comment Preferences

• ##### You're joking, but for the record(6+ / 0-)

80 IQ is -really- low. It's not mentally retarded, but you may have a hard time distinguishing them from people who are relatively functioning retarded.

Is this just math that you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better?

[ Parent ]

• ##### about 10% of people have IQ 80 or lower(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:

as george carlin said (not the exact quote): think of how stupid the average person is -- and then remember that half the population is even stupider.

To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

[ Parent ]

• ##### If 100 is considered 'median' IQ(0+ / 0-)

then that means half of the people have IQs lower than that, while half of the people test higher than that. Are you saying that 90% of sub-median IQ people test at 80 or higher? If so, do 90% of extra-median IQ people test at 120 or above? Thereby placing 80% of all of us somewhere within that mere 40-point spread?

Just curious, haven't researched this.

• ##### uh ... not quite.(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
Joieau, lostinamerica

"about 10% of people have IQ 80 or lower".

thus, about 90% of ALL people test higher than 80.

and, about 80% of sub-median IQ people test at 80 or higher, since about 50% of people are sub-median.

however, your final statement is correct: about 80% of the population has by definition an IQ somewhere between 80 and 120. it is "by definition" because IQ is defined in terms of standard deviation of the distribution of scores.

To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

[ Parent ]

• ##### Thanks. Sorry my question was(0+ / 0-)

so garbled (on the high end 90% at between 100 and 120). I guess I can see that the upper and lower fringes are somewhat flat. I won't describe that as a "bell curve" even if it is.

My older sis and brother and I - all within 18 months of each other in age and in first, second and third grade at the same time - tested suspiciously identically back in the day. When they tested IQs routinely, and people thought it counted for something other than cultural bias. Dead even at 145. So despite varied experience into 6 decades of life with lots of people of relative 'intelligence' that did or didn't seem equal to or greater than mine, I always figured we were pretty 'normal'. God knows I've sacrificed some brain cells/connections since my younger days, though...

Reminds me of dog "intelligence" quotients, judged by how many times you have to repeat a silly command before the dog figures out what you want it to do. Some of the highest intelligence - in my experience of critters - has way more to do with what they understand of/about you and your requirements, vs. what traits they display by nature and breeding.

Have a GSD mutt (probably lab mix) and a beautiful pedigreed Border Collie, both rescues. The collie is definitely smart enough to figure out what his job is or invent it on the fly. These are the #1 intelligent dogs, per the criteria. But that German Shepherd/Lab is just almost human. We were on the back porch with her a few months ago, when she wanted to play but had lost her favorite ball. Husband told her to go get an apple so he could throw it for her. She was gone out front for awhile, I told my honey that if she came back with an apple I'd be convinced she was smarter than the collie.

When she came back she didn't have an apple, as there were none on the ground that day. So she'd gone all the way across the field to the Mama Pear, and brought us one of those to throw. Bada-bing, she won that little test hands down.

I am of the opinion that our 'official' ways of measuring the intelligence of animals and humans is heavily skewed toward our own prejudices.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.