Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 13:06:07 04/19/98
Hi all: well, I knew this kind of things produce an automatic broadside from the good guys, all those that just close his mind to any kind of debate where non correct political issues are in discussion. I had been told of how strong is that kind of attitude in anglosaxon countries, but anyway... So, let me insist in the following points: a) To bruce: I cannot do the quotations you want because I don't even remember the title of the book I read at fast pace in a store. It was not, in any case, "that" kind of books; it was a serious one published by one of those universtiy publishing houses that produces academical kind of stuff. OK, if you think I am inventing a book to support what I think... I don't care, I don't try to probe nothing, and not presenting a paper in my alma mater, etc. b) Is not truth -although is now a very popular point of view, very progressive and democratical- that IQ does not measures nothing relevant. It does, Thoersten. Of course comparisons are made inside the same cultural pool. I am talking of men and women of the same country, level of education, etc. The guys that made that books were no stupid; they did not compare a phicisist from USA with women from a tribe in Mombaza. c) Picasso, as well most if not all great performers in arts, are not, as some people believe, creative but not neccesarily smart, high IQ people. They are. Now I can quote, Bruce: the last and most extensive and intensive research of these matter was conducted by Dr R. Ochse in a book entitled "Before the Gates of Excellence", Cambridge University Press, where he quotes a research made in 1926 where is proved that "historical genuses were assesed as being above normal -IQ, ranging from 120 to 200, with a mean of 158,9..". After examining that and another facts, the author say that althought many other things are neccesary for preeminence in creative perfomances, a high level of intelligence is neccesary. d) If high IQ people are or not happy, are or not succesful or even if that kind of academic intelligence is so important or not, if it is "just" a measure of verbal or mathematical abilities -"just"...-, that's another matter. I am not going to discuss the philosophy of this issue. I just remembered some facts and used it for giving an element of explanation about the issue why women does not oplay chess or does not appear in places like this. e) If somebody uses this kind of research to justify racist positions, that's also another fact. We cannot stop short in any kind of debate just because there is people willing to use something for backing his political positions. Should we stop chemical research because people like Husseim can hire a guy to produce mass destruction weapons? ANYWAY END BESIDE, I AM NOT INTERESTED IN THIS ISSUE, FOLK.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.