Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 15:53:22 04/19/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 1998 at 17:13:54, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>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. > >IQ test were unable to identify people with brain damages. >These brain-damaged people reacted very normal, normal IQ, or >intelligent, although they had very big physical damage in the brain >making the guy unable to play a game card or any other card game where >you have to decide when you have enough cards. Thosrten: In the first place I was not putting my ideas about this, BUt that of a guy they gave his research about this topic. Besides, that guy centered the search from the beginning NOT in average, normal pople, but in the hiigh extremes of the curve. >This can be read by Damiaso. Also Arno Gruen has found out that crazy >people have normal IQ values. >The question is : WHAT do you really measure. In fact you do not measure >how intelligent somebody is, in fact you do measure HOW DIFFERENT >somebody uses his 2 brain-halves and sub-divisions of his brain. >It is known that girls do normally more use their right brain halve (if >she is right-handed) meanwhile boys do more often use their LEFT brain >halve. >The logic center is in the left brain halve, also the center in charge >for ego and will and the survival-will. >The right brain halve uses another logic. It works complementary and >mainly associative and is in charge for the images, analogies, feelings >and intuition. > >The right brain halve is not using WORDS. It is using IMAGES. >The left brain halve COUNTS and MEASURES. The right brain halve can feel >if something is wrong without counting or finding out. >Musicians and painters do normally more often use right-brain part. > >We have much data from split-brain and other clinical-situations. > >Whatever you measure, it is not intelligence at all. It is a different >USAGE of the brain. You cannot say the higher value = more intelligent >and lower value = less intelligent. It means: higher value = >left-brain-IQ. lower value = less left-brain-activity. All this about two halves of the brain is very speculativbe, even more speculative that the IQ measure. I cannot believe is vvbery logic to refute a somewhat speculative aapproach making use of another even more speculative. >ONLY my 2 cents. > >I like this topic much. I completely understand why girls don't like >computerchess or chess in special. >I understand them completely. > Well, I would love to know your hipothesis. I repeat: I have non on my account on this topic. I am not defending a sexist,racist, etc position. I do not like the specific BEHAVIOURs of males in these field too. >> >>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. > >I have no interest in rassistic or sexistic discussion. My point of view >is that female are more intelligent than males. But the WAY of their >intelligence is much different than ours. Therefore we call girls >normally stupid. I don't think this fair. Could be.
This page took 0 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.