Руjа je napisao:
Па да... ако вики каже....
Читала сам озбиљан чланак о томе, али не могу га пронаћи сада. Ево нешто слично:
Citiraj:
The history of IQ testing is rife with discrimination. Charles Darwin asserted that intelligence evolved and distinguished man from apes. IQ tests were developed by Alfred Binet, a European psychologist, to measure intelligence at a time when blacks were thought to be animals. More than help man, these tests upheld superiority complexes among whites by resorting to abstract and biased methods of intelligence testing rather than utilizing human potential in a more practical and useful way in relation to cultural contexts. IQ tests often failed to utilize a wealth of human talent by examining only the componential aspect of intelligence and being culturally inflexible. The very nature of such limited IQ tests is to discriminate against those who do not fit its model and surely more practical and useful ways of evaluating people can be formulated.
It is being realized in more modern times that IQ tests are often not fully reliable means of intelligence testing. They pay little attention to the intelligence of adaptation and practically; skills needed in the workplace that are not stressed in schools. For this reason many people with only academic smarts fail to be successful or make valuable contributions in the working world. To quote Sternberg, "There are plenty of people going around with high IQ's who don't do a damned thing." More recent study by Flynn, shows that IQ tests do not even really measure intelligence but rather a correlate with a weak casual link to intelligence. IQ tests therefore are tests that are often culturally biased and fail to examine intelligence properly. While they fit the vain and racist purposes of Herrnstein and Murray well, they have no universal claim on intelligence.
http://destee.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-40690.htmlПитање за тебе... Зашто верници и атеисти треба да буду различити? Они иду у исту школу, живе у истом друштву... Која је разлика? Мозак?
Sto se tice testova, oni ne mjere generalnu uspjesnost vec inteligenciju, ne vidim sta je tu sporno. Sve se u nauci moze upotrebiti i zloupotrebiti, ako su ti neki Herrnstein i Murray zloupotrebili svoje testove, ne znaci da su testovi sami po sebi losi. Drugo, testovi mjere razlicite komponente inteligencije, tako da recimo osoba koja je nadarena za matematiku moze imati veoma nisku socijalnu inteligenciju i sl. Ne treba stvari generalizovati. Drugo, ima postenih naucnika koliko hoces koji ce uvijek uz test navesti sta tacno on govori ali i sta ne govori o testiranoj osobi, i koji ce ti uz to reci koliki je stepen objektivnosti samog testa. Nisu svi naucnici prepotentni kompleksasi.
Pitas da li se mozak vjernika i ateista razlikuje. Ne znam, ali znam da ce za naseg zivotnog vijeka biti odgovoreno na to pitanje, sto se tice neuroloskog aspekta, uredjaji kojim se ispituje mozak se stalno usavrsavaju. Vec sada je moguce na snimkama vidjeti koji se dio mozga aktivira kad volimo, kad vjerujemo, kad ne vjerujemo, kad racionalno ili iracionalno postupamo i sl. Tako da, strpi se malo i znaces odgovor
Ako pratis desavanja na tu temu naucices mnogo o mozgu i njegovim funkcijama. Imas tamo clanak na Vaderovoj temi, a to je tek pocetak:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=47932
Prijavite se
Registruj se
FAQ
Pretraga
nekih sustinskih razlika nema, osim stepena iracionalnosti a i on je jako relativna kategorija 
