|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 8:32 am
it is your will not your IQ that makes you smart
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:41 pm
WELL.
I don't think you should pressure your kid to be smarter than they are. You could probably pursue them to try harder, but not become smarter.
Because what's "smarter", exactly?
To know every question your teacher asks?
Or to decide your own fate when your older?
I am saying this as myself, an 11 year old. I'm fed up with people saying "How do you get so smart?" I don't even have an answer to that, but I'd say "When I actually try."
Because in my grade 6 class, our class was ranked by the students. My friend Kevin was first, then I was second place. I felt kind of angry that everyone placed bets kind of on who would get better marks at the end of the year, but glad everyone called me smart.
Having people make you smarter makes you feel stupid.
Its better to know your smart by showing yourself first.
..?
Did I just write that? eek
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:24 pm
i think that if that proceedure is ever possible, it wouldn't matter much. think of how much it would cost to alter the IQ. besides, i am 14 years old and have an IQ of 139 and i fit in with my friends and other people in my school. you must also think ahead in the future. if the children DO become super smart, then they would end up finding ways to run for political offices, or becoming college propfessors, ect. and what if the procedure is done when the child is very young abd then said child grows up and doesn't enjoy being that smart. as i said earlier, it would cost much money, and so the child wants to be on an average level of smarts an dthat has not yet been discovered. think of the children's lives as well. there is alot more to be said on the subject that peopel have not already mentioned, but, oh well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:06 pm
So much wrong in this thread....not sure where to begin.
Anyways, IQ tests are renormalized every so often so that the mean score is 100. Hence, you can never have 200 as being 'normal.'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:27 pm
It's probably a means of conveniece for people to describe the phenomena, rather than continuously refering back to either the future's 100, which could be around our 200, or our 100.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 4:26 am
dboyzero It's probably a means of conveniece for people to describe the phenomena, rather than continuously refering back to either the future's 100, which could be around our 200, or our 100. I considered that, but weighing in the strengths of the arguments in this thread, decided that was not the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:18 pm
OK, I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet in this thread because I didn't feel like reading everything, but I think that evolution will naturally raise IQs of some.
Look at it this way, we fall in love with people who are like us. Thus those with higher IQs naturally breed with one another, and those with lower IQs naturally breed with one another.
This has been going on for all of time. That is why intelligent beings such as ourselves have been able to evolve from brainless pond scum.
We will eventually have another branching of our species. There will be a higher IQ group, and a lower IQ group.
Really we have that now, only we can still breed with each other, so we are considered one species. Once we reach the point where we can no longer breed together we will be considered as different species.
I don't think we should genetically engineer our species. We may make tragic mistakes that we can not take back once they are made.
Think of the genetic engineering we have already witnessed. We have changed corn to be resistant to pests, and disease. This resistance was found to kill butterflies, because it was supposed to protect against a certain moth. The moth is similar enough to butterflies that they are also killed. Corn is a grass, so it passed this on to other genetically similar grasses, ones that incidentally are considered weeds. These weeds, that are difficult to control, as they are so resistant, also kill butterflies.
We need to stop all genetic engineering. The dangers outweigh any benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:36 pm
I hope some day humanity will understand that we can only change the world for worse, not better. Despite our intention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
