IQ tests for all Presidential candidates, please.

It is time for American politicians – indeed, I suggest all politicians seeking high office – to have mandatory IQ tests administered to them. This would save America – or indeed any other nation – from electing that particular breed of charming, persuasive, self-confident, but ultimately empty headed type that politics too often seems to attract. (I am sure you can think of a few who fit that description, without me naming them). Such mental lightweights do not have the cognitive resources to make the best decisions, or to think with a long term enough vision, to guide any nation to long term security, success, growth and stability.

So, I propose that an independent, international body be established to administer IQ tests to all current or prospective politicians, of all nationalities. I am sure that there would be some interesting revelations were such an examination to be performed. This IQ information should be made publicly available, and be searchable online. It should also be reported in the mass media. Were this to be done, I am sure there would be very interesting consequences. The electorate would have to hold, in its collective mind, a measurement of the basic mental capacities of each candidate. The electorate would also have to make a judgement as to whether a particular level of cognitive capacity was enough for the job. Though, of course, there could be a mandatory minimum level imposed. In such a world, a politician who was dumber than the base threshold – say an IQ of 130, perhaps – would be debarred from being a politician at all. However, it would be probably be more interesting – though perhaps less safe for the country – to leave that decision up to the collective mind of the electorate (though the IQ of that, is not particularly high).

A system of mandatory IQ tests for all prospective politicians, particularly for Presidential candidates, would allow for much greater understanding of the true intellectual power of the people in question. Until now, the intellectual reputations of politicians, particularly Presidential candidates, have been established through canny media campaigns, which resemble consumer goods branding exercises i.e. the statements and promises made often bear no relation to reality or truth. The campaign for Senator Barack Obama’s run for Presidency is a case in point. The media made him out to be a genius of the highest order. He was praised for an intellectual power that was deemed unprecedented. I saw absurdly high estimates of his IQ floating around...ones that would have made him among the smartest of people anywhere. Yet, a close look at the intellectual achievements of his life, reveals a perturbing thinness of evidence. If he is truly a great intellect, he hasn’t done much to show it. In fact, he has done less to show it than many men of fairly average intellect do. This does seem to suggest that his true intellect, is actually much closer to that fairly average impression. For instance, he became President of Harvard Law Review, essentially through affirmative action by all appearances. (For those of my readers who are not familiar with “affirmative action”, this is the practice of selecting people on the basis of race, not merit, or innate ability. Typically in such “affirmative action programmes”, the threshold for a minority race applicant is much, much lower than for a majority race applicant. This leads to obvious problems with the performance of such people, on the job.) Now, as President of Harvard Law Review, one would have thought that there would have emerged from the young Barack Obama, a fount of articles, to be published in its previously august pages...not so. The young Barack Obama published nothing in the Harvard Law Review, apart, perhaps, from his own name. It seems that was the extent of his writing abilities at the time. This fact is very strong evidence that the young Barack Obama was short on both ideas and writing ability. Both facts are not indicators of any high degree of intelligence. Yet, still, the media made him out to be some kind of genius for being “the first black President of the Harvard Law Review”. In actual fact, his conduct as President of the Harvard Law Review reveals a very modest intelligence at work.

The most effective way to stop the mass media being used to create false impressions of the intelligence of candidates is for their IQs to be made publicly known, having been verified by an independent body, external to the United States, with no ties to any one competing nation. Perhaps this could be an all nation effort under the UN.

Were President Obama’s IQ made known, I really think there would be a lot of surprise in many quarters. For the first time, people would have objective knowledge of the quality of his mind – and I am certain that his supporters will be very disappointed by what that objective measurement reveals. However, it would be unfair to imply that President Obama, alone, is probably not as bright as his “genius” marketing made him out to be. It is just that, in his case, the disparity between legend and truth is likely to be greater than for most other politicians. This is partly because his intelligence has been exaggerated more – and partly because he is probably not as bright as certain other recent politicians, despite all the positive press about his mental powers (as if he were some sort of Marvel Superhero).

Other politicians, too, would surprise the electorate by the essential mediocrity of their minds. This is a good surprise, for the people deserve to know the quality of the people they are electing. Some might think that it is enough to know where someone was educated, to gain an indication of their intelligence. This is fallacious thinking because it assumes that all candidates for admission are treated in the same way. They are not. Some politicians – indeed, many – come from very privileged backgrounds and gained admission to prestigious schools on the basis of family connections and the wish for said institutions to curry favour with their families – or repay old benefactions and the like. So, admission to a prestigious school, for people of such privileged background, may be no indicator of talent at all. However, it is an indicator of a kind of political influence, which is not the same thing.

Another point to bear in mind: a person’s educational history bears the same correlation to their innate intelligence, as does their appearance. This correlation is 0.381, if I remember correctly. Thus, candidates boasting about their education, is no more significant than saying: “I have got a pretty face!”.

No. The only way to settle all the uncertainty about the mental abilities of political candidates is for them ALL to have MANDATORY IQ tests performed, under controlled, observed, videoed conditions (to prevent cheating), by an independent body. Until then, politicians will do what they always do: lie about their intelligence and abilities to convince the electorate that they have some special, or at least adequate, ability to govern.

That being said, if anyone has any inside knowledge about the IQ of any politician please comment below, with your evidence and source. Thank you.

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

William James Sidis and Ratio IQ

William James Sidis was a child prodigy. Indeed, he was one of the greatest child prodigies ever recorded. Yet, what would happen to him today? Would the magnitude of his gifts be recognized were he tested by modern psychometricians?

The short answer is a definite no. You see estimates of William James Sidis ratio IQ place it at least 250 to 300. This might even be conservative in some ways, if you look closely at his life - but nevertheless, this is a significant IQ figure. But what would happen if he was tested by modern IQ tests? They would grossly underestimate him - and here is why. Modern tests tend to have a ceiling of a deviation IQ of 160. Ceiling effects will actually depress most gifted people's scores. Everyone has a different pattern of peaks in their subtests - and these peaks will be cut off at varying points by the test limit. Some subtests may show weaknesses - and these will lower the overall score. In fact, if William James Sidis took a modern IQ test he may not have even got a score of 160 - depending on his pattern of strengths and weaknesses, he may have had a depressed score of 150 or 140 or any other number below 160.

So, a psychologist testing Sidis today would most probably completely miss the magnitude of his gifts, in terms of a test result - because the test is incapable of measuring his gifts, as they truly are - but it is only capable of underestimating them, to an unknown degree. Of course, the same applies to any extremely gifted child today. The IQ tests are only capable of underestimating and not of measuring such children.

I do not know why, as a profession, the designers of such tests have decided to introduce this limit to the tests. Perhaps it is an economic decision: it simply wasn't thought worth having a test with a long tail with all the work that would require for only a relatively few test subjects to benefit from. Perhaps that is what it comes down to. Or perhaps scoring high in such a test is thought enough - perhaps the actual truth of the situation is not regarded as important.

Anyway, this situation with Sidis and all even remotely like him - the extremely gifted - points us to an unavoidable conclusion: ratio IQs remain valuable and should be reinstated as one of the tools of estimation of a child's intelligence.

(If you would like to read about Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, three and Tiarnan, fourteen months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

IQ testing without IQ testing

Are there ways to discover an IQ, without an IQ test?

Yes. Many. In fact ANY test, that involves thought, can be found to correlate with IQ.

So, what does this mean for those of you who, perhaps, find traditional IQ testing too expensive (as it is in Singapore...)? Well, if you have taken other tests in the course of your education, they can certainly be used to estimate IQ. For instance, the SATs. There are conversion tools available that allow you to convert a SAT result into an IQ. They do this by relating the SAT result to the IQ typical of someone who gets that result. In this manner, an IQ may be derived, without actually taking a conventional IQ test.

The same, of course, applies to any test that involves g, the general intelligence factor. That means that any test which invokes higher thought will have a correlation with IQ. That basically means any rigorous academic test whatsoever. The only problem is knowing what the correlation is - but in principle it could be done for any rigorous academic examination. There will always be a correlation and there will always be a typical IQ of a particular result. For some tests these relationships will have been calculated. I don't know of any apart from the SAT for which this has been done - but it is not difficult to do.

In a very real sense, I did a similar sort of calculation for my son's Chemistry O Level - I calculated the mental age that is required to pass an O level. I then used this to derive my son's minimum ratio IQ required to achieve this milestone by dividing the mental age required for an O level, by his actual age. You, too, could do similar calculations for any rigorous test your child has taken. It is a valid, logical, reasonable procedure that is scientifically sound.

This means that ANY "achievement test", with a true thinking component, will be able to act as an indirect, surrogate method for estimating IQ. The Physical Sciences - with their very strong g component - would prove to be a very effective surrogate for an IQ test, if the relationship between score and IQ and age, has been worked out.

So, perhaps you won't have to spend a fortune on an IQ test to, at the very least, determine whether you are gifted - or your child is - and into what band they fall: MG, HG, EG or PG...or even PG+, as may be the case.

Good luck.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and four months, and his gifted brothers, Fintan, three, and Tiarnan, fourteen months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of child prodigy, IQ, intelligence, gifted education, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)