Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

I'd respect someone with a degree in Gender Studies/Philosophy/Art History/whatever more than someone with a degree from their university's business college in Business Admin or Communications or whatever. They'll have learned more useful knowledge from it, too.

Uh....that's a joke, right?

No. The former are degrees for people who have a naive perspective on the world or who don't value being able to support themselves financially; the latter are degrees for trust-fund kiddies who want to spend four years partying and expect to have a white-collar job handed to them by virtue of having High School Diploma v2.0.

I took several business courses while I was an undergraduate, and the one consistent theme I noticed was that the students who paid the least attention, skipped the most sessions, and got the worst grades were not the H&FA students like me, not the students from other colleges of sciences, but rather the business majors themselves.

Notably, you can enter pretty much any law school in the country (up to and including places like Harvard Law School) with any Bachelor's. I've had pre-law professors say that it literally does not matter what your undergraduate degree is in.
--

At the end of the day, it's not what you majored in that matters, it's how good you are at navigating the world. I know someone who's had a career with good benefits and ~$75k annually after getting a B.A. in English lit and dropping out of grad school. I went from a Liberal Arts B.A. to closing on the end of a 3-semester Master's with <$16k loan debt and a secure path into a good job. Honestly, it's tragic that liberal arts education is being so thoroughly neglected; people say that it isn't necessary to teach critical thinking or ethics, and that you don't need broad knowledge to succeed in the world, but the state of the world pretty clearly indicates otherwise.

It's as Heinlein said:

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

[Tiruin]

Don't feel that bad; 70 IQ points is more or less the cutoff for a fully functional human being.

* Tiruin applies a shotgun to that wording. :V

That's very mean (and very non-inclusive to many, many people) to say 'fully functional human being' as correlational to 'measured' IQ. :I IQ is non-definite and used as an indicator or guideline instead of a proving point.

_{Though I'm more guessing you're not aware of that bit like people with SLDs or any parallel to that, and other regards. ._.}

At first I parsed that as average human being, which confused me because that would be IQ 100 by definition.

But IQ is a vacuous term anyways. Even if you don't think it's completely useless, it's still split into different parts which don't make sense when put together as an overall IQ score.

Also, IQ pattern tests are probably made by so eone with schizophrenia.

Edit: I tried one of those online tests because reasons. I think it's heavily skewed in favor of people who are good at mathematics because I got 140.

ONLINE TESTS != RELIABLE. :I
Also misleading (and more actually incomplete) info there :V
Since when has online testing of IQ or otherwise become a basis for really basing anything on?! (Grr social media messing up with psychometrics in reliability and validity. >_> Pseudo-psychology online testing FTW! :v)

[Sonlirain]

Just did a random IQ test because why the hell not.
And yeah... math.
I got 131 out of who knows how much.
Most questions were kinda trivial but then you get a question like:
Which number is out of place.
1 - 8 - 25 - 46 - 69 - 99 (note i picked the numbers at random so there is no solution here)
And i just sit with my mouth agape saying "whut?"

The rest was kinda easy with some cheap shots for the unaware like:
Bob needs 13 bottles of whisky to drink himself dead after failing an IQ test but he can only carry 3 bottles at a time.
How many grueling trips to she shop Bob must undertake before he can finally drink himself dead at his home?
2, 3, 4, 4 1/3, 5

So.... yeah.

[Putnam]

131 isn't "out of anything", it means "smater than 97% of the population".

BUT!!!!!!

Your results are bullshit and faked. I took one of those. Answered every question to my best ability, then pointedly chose the answer farthest from the one I got. I got 101 from answering every question wrongly on purpose.

[Tiruin]

* Tiruin adds pertinence of the thread by looking at all the discussion of how valid online IQ/psychological testing is. x_X

Your results are bullshit and faked.

Misleading thinking. 'Faked' is not the right idea to hold to it because it also depends on honest self-reporting (sans the test being conducted personally and without trained overview, but eh).

[Putnam]

Yeah, I guess there's correlation with actual test score, maybe, but it's not a legitimate test score at all. It's designed to gullible people to share on facebook to show how smart they are to their gullible friends for all that ad $$$

you know no matter how much I say I'm not cynical, i really quickly become cynical whenever it comes to money...

[Sonlirain]

Ok so i decided to retake it and tried to get everything wrong.

Note no 1.
The questions were all exactly the same on second try so it was a bit suspicious.
Note no 2.
The test shown an IQ of 74
Note no 3.
I answered one question right by accident.

So i guess it is borderline legit because you can actually fail it but the fact there is only 1 set of questions is... eeeh.
But at least the lowest score possible seems to be 70... because 70 is probably the minimum requirement to use a mouse and click random windows.

All things considered i wouldn't put the results on my CV.

[Putnam]

70's not that bad. I'm pretty sure someone with an IQ of 70 could navigate a computer. I don't have much experience with them, but I imagine they could play Dwarf Fortress, though given more patience than usual (which, being a pausable game, is fully available).

[Sonlirain]

Well i doubt that test was legit anyway but comparing it to scores on wikipedia 70 is always below average or outright bad.

Above 140   "Near" genius or genius
120–140   Very superior intelligence
110–120   Superior intelligence
90–110   Normal, or average, intelligence
80–90   Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness
70–80   Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as dullness, often as feeble-mindedness
Below 70   Definite feeble-mindedness

That's just one of many tables on wikipedia... i kinda wonder how i'd fare with a real IQ test now because i'm certainly not a genius.

[Flying Dice]

IIRC the 70s is borderline mental retardation, where someone might need assistance for semi-complex routine tasks but can live and work mostly normally. As far down as the low 50s is still in the normal genetic range, and people that far down are capable of living and working provided they have competent supervision and a simple routine. Total inability to function in society/lack of self-awareness is usually due to brain damage or harmful (and typically terminal) mutation. Not to mention the inconsistency; I've seen more recent measures claiming shit like 120 as "average" or 130-140 being the threshold for critical thought and inferring new ideas from extant information.

Keep in mind, too, that IQ tests are only really useful measures in the low and mid ranges. Never mind how tests are prone to inflation.

Relevant.

tl;dr IQ is a vague and limited measure, IQ tests are almost universally an expression of capitalism.

[TheBiggerFish]

Why did anyone think that a bed a student cannot fit in is a good place to make a student sleep for two nights?!

[Putnam]

Relevant.

i don't even play the game and i'm shit at every game in the genre and i recognized that that "just open" moment was just going way too deep and getting punished for it, goddamn

"it's my team's fault for me dying when i ran between every enemy, they should've engaged"

no, ya dumbo

seriously, i actually started commenting "oh, he's dead, he's dead, there he goes, he died, not surprising"... and then he blamed his team??? yeesh

[Flying Dice]

Relevant.

i don't even play the game and i'm shit at every game in the genre and i recognized that that "just open" moment was just going way too deep and getting punished for it, goddamn

"it's my team's fault for me dying when i ran between every enemy, they should've engaged"

no, ya dumbo

seriously, i actually started commenting "oh, he's dead, he's dead, there he goes, he died, not surprising"... and then he blamed his team??? yeesh

EroticDiscoHeat puts out a lot of these excellent highlights of terrible streamers, but this might be the best one he's ever done. Every single moment is just darkly hilarious, from blaming his team for his bad play to blaming his regional top-tier pro team jungler for the loss to the trolling-rage hitlist text document at the end. Eckks Dee.

[Putnam]

I DIDN'T NOTICE THE C9 TAG LO

well, i actually probably tuned it out due to the fact that i don't play at a high enough level in any game at all to see people with pro tags and every game i play has free name switching, but the point stands, didn't even notice the jungler was literally pro lol

[IcyTea31]

Spoiler: IQ tests rant (click to show/hide)

The results are only comparable to those got from the same test, and require a large sample size to be accurate. This is because IQ is not so much a score, as one's placement in a curve comprising of everyone who has taken the test. To make things confusing, the curve varies. Sonlirain's table seems to be made with a variance of 10, the standard for graphing statistical probability distribution in any field. However, many older tests use a variance of 15 (i.e. the categories would be 85-115, 115-130, and so on), and some tests use 20. Furthermore, through the generations, average intelligence has risen, so a two-decades-old test might not give reliable results.

I really don't like IQ tests.

I read science magazine today. Apparently, some Israeli psychologists went to try and calm down feelings about the war in Palestine with passersby and see what kind of arguments work. According to them, an effective technique was to feign agreement and take the idea so far further along the extremism spectrum that the other person has to disagree.

Now where have I heard this trick before...?