这东东和考分一样,对普通人有效,对天才无效

来源: 嘚瑟一下 2017-07-16 13:33:36 [] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读: 次 (4737 bytes)

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sudden-genius/201101/is-high-intelligence-necessary-be-genius

Nevertheless, scattered information offers some suggestive hints. Consider the IQs of three past American Nobel laureates in physics. In 1965, the year he won his Nobel, Richard Feynman gave a talk at his former high school in New York and told the students that when he took an IQ test at school, around 1930, he scored 125. A ‘merely respectable' figure (notes his biographer), somewhat below the level of about 130 generally considered to indicate ‘giftedness'. William Shockley was tested twice at school in the 1920s and failed to reach the IQ of 135 required to join Lewis Terman's pioneering survey of gifted children, started in 1921 at Stanford University. Luis Alvarez, too, was rejected by Terman--which meant that Terman's programme lost a further opportunity to ‘discover' a future Nobel laureate. In fact, none of Terman's gifted children went on to win a Pulitzer prize or a Nobel prize.

The much older Einstein was of course never tested as a youngster. But when he visited the US in 1921, he was informally subjected to a question set by the inventor Thomas Edison (see picture), an advocate of intelligence testing for his prospective employees. Some journalists asked Einstein: ‘What is the speed of sound?' He confessed he did not know, and replied patiently that there was no need to carry this information in his head, as he could look it up in a book. Next day, the inevitable headline was: ‘EINSTEIN SEES BOSTON; FAILS EDISON TEST'.

The chief difficulty in correlating intelligence with exceptional creativity and genius is that while psychologists may be able to measure intelligence, ever since Francis Galton's day they have been unable to agree on even an approximate definition. ‘Innumerable tests are available for measuring intelligence, yet no one is quite certain of what intelligence is, or even of just what it is that the available tests are measuring', admitted Robert Sternberg, in 1987. According to James Flynn, writing in 2007, ‘We have to realise that intelligence can act like a highly correlated set of abilities on one level and like a set of functionally independent abilities on other levels.'

In the mid-1980s, Flynn discovered an astonishing and subversive fact about mean IQ figures. In the post-war decades, mean IQ trended steadily upwards, not just in one or two countries but in all developed countries where sufficient IQ data were available. Over the second half of the century, some two generations, mean IQ grew by almost 20 points in the United States and Europe. Other, less reliable, data suggested that the growth went back to 1900, and that the mean IQ in 1900, scored against current norms, would have been somewhere between 50 and 70.

If we take the ‘Flynn effect' into account, it appears that Feynman's school-tested IQ (circa 1930) might have been more like 150-55, rather than 125, were Feynman to have been tested today. So, maybe the current Nobel laureate I mentioned earlier--five years junior to Feynman--had a rather higher IQ than he was informed. The debate about the relationship between high intelligence and exceptional creativity continues to churn.

加跟帖:

当前帖子已经过期归档,不能加跟帖!