Since time immemorial, humanity has had an unquenchable interest in discovering who is Good and who is Bad.
Whose health is Good versus whose health is Bad. Whose morals are Good versus whose are Bad. And most importantly for the subject at hand: whose intellect is Good versus whose intellect is Bad.
Intelligence Quotient (IQ) holds quite a bit of bearing over how we see other people. It’s drilled into kids from a relatively young age through media that this one number can single-handedly summarize everything that the human mind is capable of.
According to the University of Michigan, though, IQ is really a measurement of “your reasoning and problem-solving abilities.” Undeniably important things for humans to have, but not all there is to consider about a person.
If one falls flat in terms of problem-solving, I don’t think that necessarily means they don’t have a firm grasp on English, mathematics, or anything of the sort. It really only indicates that they may have difficulty applying that knowledge to a situation. That’s not a lack of intelligence, it’s a lack of a specific skill relating to intelligence.
Alfred Binet—one of the creators of the first IQ test—made a point to emphasize that he didn’t create it to measure just anyone. As his biography on Verywell Mind puts it, “Binet [believed] that such measures of intelligence were not always generalizable and could only apply to children with similar backgrounds and experiences.”
Upon finding all this out, I began to wonder how IQ became widely understood as the de facto standard for measuring all of a person’s mind. This led me to immigration lawyer and Anti-Eugenics Project member Ajitha Reddy, who revealed the answer is the same as the reason many studies have been appropriated for purposes they were never intended for: eugenics.
Binet’s statements against using his measurement as a general intelligence test didn’t stop eugenicist Henry H. Goddard from taking advantage of IQ for his own gain.
In an article for DePaul Law Review, Reddy writes: “Goddard used a perversion of Binet’s intelligence scale to rank those he considered feebleminded into varying degrees of mental incompetence… Goddard found morons wherever he looked: criminals, alcoholics, [sex workers], and anyone ’incapable of adapting themselves to their environment and living up to the conventions of society or acting sensibly.’ Most immigrants also fit this classification.”
Fundamentally, I think that trying to put a single number to any aspect of a person is a terrible idea. It undermines all the various parts of a person that that number tries to summarize.
I’ve observed that it also puts immense pressure on anyone on either end of the spectrum of IQ. If one has a high IQ, then they’re immediately deemed as a prodigy destined for greatness and will consequently yearn to live up to that preconception. If one has a lower-than-average IQ, then they will doubtless feel the need to “prove themself” and thereby push towards goals that aren’t healthy for anyone to feel pressured to reach. It’s a lose-lose situation.
IQ isn’t alone in being wholly inept at what it’s used for. The AMA Journal of Ethics has a good article on Body Mass Index’s history—a measurement equally drenched in eugenics.
Moreover, the SAT hardly scores what it was meant to. According to PBS, the SAT was initially branded as the “Scholastic Aptitude Test, the word ‘aptitude’ meaning that the test measured an innate ability, rather than knowledge acquired through schooling.” The article also goes into depth about how it doesn’t do that.
And, of course, the SAT also can be traced back to eugenics. The National Education Association wrote about Carl Brigam, who was known for claiming that “African-Americans were on the low end of the racial, ethnic, and/or cultural spectrum.” He later went on to be directly commissioned by the College Board to develop the SAT.
Although the primary focus of this article is IQ, I hope those brief examples can paint a fuller picture about aptitude tests as a whole. I hope they help you to see the line that can be traced directly from the desire to summarize human beings to one of the most twisted and deep-rooted pseudosciences in the modern world.
Humanity’s existence is a miracle, and boiling that miracle down to a single number does us a grave disservice. We should instead accept that human beings are complicated and multifaceted creatures, and let that guide how we consider their abilities.
Sources:
https://www.verywellmind.com/alfred-binet-biography-2795503
https://antieugenicsproject.org/presenters/ajitha-reddy/
https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1270&context=law-review
https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/racist-beginnings-standardized-testing
Tsukki • Nov 6, 2024 at 5:25 pm
When attending a school like this one, which is filled with highly intelligent people, it can be hard not to feel inferior, especially if you’re coming from a public school. However, none should be made to feel as though they’re lesser than others because of what number IQ they have, what percentage of the grades they have, or their SAT score. It’s important to keep in mind that everyone’s brain functions differently and doesn’t learn/process information as fast as another person. so it’s never appropriate to make someone feel as though they are of a lower value because they didn’t score as high as you did on the SATs.
Olivia • Nov 5, 2024 at 7:33 pm
Yes, we agree with the perspective in this article because I think it’s not good to determine someone’s value based on a number of their IQs, which doesn’t properly show how truly capable they are. The thing that was surprising or interesting to us because we thought the SATs were intended for after a few years of learning in high school, not a test that just looks at how much you already know without schooling. My thoughts on tests that measure aptitude are a little outdated and unfair. With people taking learning differences into account more and more, I think the need for such tests should be used less and less.
Keys • Nov 5, 2024 at 1:55 pm
Yes I do agree with perspective in this article because knowing who is good and bad is a thing you would want to pay attention to. One thing I was surprised about was According to the University of Michigan, though, IQ is really a measurement of “your reasoning and problem-solving abilities.” I was really shocked when I was reading about this . My thoughts about tests that supposedly. I think the test that supposedly measure aptitude is a hard test. I say this because the test measure everything you learned in school and certain things you probably would forget would means you would have to study a lot and on more than just one subject.
E'vah Myles • Nov 5, 2024 at 10:51 am
After reading this article I can’t help but agree with the author about its origins and effect on society. As someone who studied eugenics as well as its sociological impact, I do believe measurements of “bests” like IQ, WAIS, MBTI, or even a test like the MMPI can harm those it measures. Although the results of said tests may not be far from accurate, they lead to unnecessary isolation and categorization of human beings, otherwise referred to as eugenics. This can lead to people getting discriminated against, ostracized, or ultimately limited due to a score on an assessment. Multifaceted people may not shine in the way the universe intended them to. People with great common sense and knowledge of working a room might not thrive in “highly intellectual” spaces. Why should that limit or deter them from pursuing bigger things?
Ianka • Nov 5, 2024 at 8:03 am
I know that when some people get higher scores than others they start to make others feel less intelligent even if they don’t realize it. I think the score that you get could make you less confident in your work and affect your mental health.
Jermaine.L • Nov 5, 2024 at 7:58 am
I agree with the perspective of this article. I was surprised how much IQ actually matters today. It is a very interesting topic to write an article on. It makes it clear what IQ is, and what it does. I learned that we depend on most people in the world based on their IQ. I also learned about the guy that made the IQ test so you can see your IQ. My opinions on the tests that measure aptitude is that somebody doesn’t have to have a high IQ to be capable to do something. You could be intelligent without an high IQ, and the tests might be fake. A guy made a test on his own and how are we supposed to trust that. Overall this was a great article and it made me view IQ a whole different way.
Willa • Nov 5, 2024 at 7:46 am
I agree with the perspective in the article, “The Most Misunderstood Number in the World.” The opinion the author has surprises me because measuring students IQ in school is a very normalized procedure. I think that tests that measure “aptitude” are inaccurate because they aren’t advanced enough to summarize a person’s intelligence. I also think they are unnecessary because it puts a lot of pressure on a person.
Zane • Oct 30, 2024 at 10:42 pm
I agree a lot as I grew up in an environment that takes grades as a representative a whole person. I think what makes up a person’s level of intelligence is not only their IQ. Additionally, people starts to compare each other’s IQ even though it isn’t that important and can be unfair. What makes up a good and intelligent person also including many other factors.
Logan • Oct 30, 2024 at 10:51 am
I do agree with the perspective in this article, these tests lead people to believe that they are better than other people because they think this number represents their intelligence as a whole. The IQ testing just seems harmful, especially because parts of the media advertise it as how smart you are and if you don’t get a high or average number that you are dumb or you need to try harder. This is unfair because you could be great at one thing and not so great at something else and the test could give you a low score for that, this may make you feel that you need to further prove yourself and push for things that sometimes are not humanly possible. Also tests that measure aptitude are unfair, this is because these tests measure your innate abilities instead of the knowledge you acquire through school. We are told it is supposed to measure what you’ve learned at school but if it tests natural ability, doesn’t that give others an unfair advantage from the start?
Sienna • Oct 30, 2024 at 8:48 am
After reading this I agree with it because I think people do tend to put people in certain categories. I think its hard for some people to realize things about their IQ. I feel that your IQ number shouldn’t tell who you are as a person or how you act. Sometimes people may be harsh on others about just a number that doesn’t identify someone.
Rachel • Oct 30, 2024 at 8:35 am
I completely agree when it is mentioned the intelligence test in these scores only test what you are applying them to. The outcome of your intelligence tested in an IQ test is all about perspective, which I learned from the article. The quote by Alfred Binet should be used more when in this debate, I have heard this discussion but I never knew this fact, IQ tests were not made to generalize and to fit people into a specific place. Tests like the SAT were made to measure aptitude, not what students have learned through schooling. I think that is completely unfair because there is a difference between book smarts and overall intelligence.
Ruhi • Oct 30, 2024 at 7:25 am
I agree with the perspective of the article. IQ and SAT scores were only meant to see how good at problem-solving you are. It doesn’t measure your intelligence, just your adaptability and logical skills. Many people see these things as “they make or break you” and the unfortunate truth is that it does, but it should never have been like that. I was surprised to learn that the entire purpose of an IQ was not to test your intelligence, but your problem-solving skills! Tests that supposedly measure aptitude are just downright false. There is no measuring your aptitude because there is always something you’re going to miss and silly errors shouldn’t decide if you’re smart enough to do this or if you’re smart in general.
Roger • Oct 30, 2024 at 7:24 am
I completely agree with your analysis of the way we perceive IQ. People often categorize others. We often compare ourselves to others. As students, intelligence is an incredibly important part of our lives, thus when comparing ourselves to others, intelligence often comes up. There is no accurate way to measure intelligence, as our experiences and education, even at the same school can vary greatly. IQ is often painted as a way to measure intelligence, thus we use it in our comparisons. IQ was meant as a way to measure a specific part of overall intelligence, but we still use it in a broader sense. The actions of several scientists decades ago have caused us as a society to perceive IQ in this manner. People change over time, social norms change over time, but we still feel the need for comparisons.
Trey • Oct 30, 2024 at 7:21 am
I did not know anything about the origins of IQ or where it even came from, so reading this really taught me something new. After reading, I really agree with your conclusion that IQ should not be the de facto measurement about whether someone is “smart” or not. I also agree with your analysis that how IQ can put immense pressure on those who have a high one, and discourage someone that has a low one. I believe that IQ doesn’t cover enough of a broad basis, and will always be inaccurate when measuring intelligence. I think that humans are too complicated, and there will never be a test capable enough of truly measuring human intelligence.
Sam • Oct 17, 2024 at 8:13 pm
I didn’t know most of the information in this article, but after reading it I very much agree with the argument. I think that people do like to categorize others, and maybe it’s easier for people to do so than to admit that we can’t really know some things, like the value of a person. I remember taking IQ tests when I was younger, and I put a lot of pressure on myself to do well, which was really stressful. It seemed like the biggest deal ever, and something that would determine the rest of my life. When really, the actual number doesn’t change who a person is.
Nelson • Oct 17, 2024 at 7:12 pm
Links to an external site.. Do you agree with the perspective in this article? Were you surprised by anything you learned here? What are your thoughts about tests that supposedly measure “aptitude”?
I agree with the perspective in this article. Characterizing someone solely on a number is immoral and denies people the opportunity to prove themselves in all the ways they can. We cannot standardize intelligence, because human beings are all inherently different. I was surprised that eugenics was involved in its creation, but it makes a lot of sense. Classing people of non-white races as lower and inferior is a trend throughout American history. By making the tests unfair and “easier” for white people, it only ensures that this eugenics principle remains. Aptitude tests are inherently flawed as knowledge is based heavily on education and humanity is not considered. Instead, racist practices are perpetuated and perfectly intelligent humans are thrown by the wayside because of inadequate test scores
Rainy K. • Oct 17, 2024 at 1:48 pm
I find your headline and introduction so brilliant! The title is actually what made me click on this article – which means it did its job! Your writing is inspiring!
Ethan • Oct 17, 2024 at 1:43 pm
I agree with the perspective of the article that IQ is simply not representative of someones pure knowledge and that it is a negative idea. The idea that the writer brought up about IQ not only being misleading in identifying the intelligence or intellect of an individual but also bringing up the more broad view that human life is spectacular. The idea that Humans a phenomenon of life and that we are ironically putting Numbers on ourselves to define something much larger made me look at the idea of IQ even more negatively. I think that in the future we will be able to have test that accurately measure someones iq and also measure things such as problem solving and other skills that humans could possess, but as of now I don’t think there are any test that measure a humans intelligence because the system unfortunately like other systematic things in America is just really outdated.
Jenny • Oct 17, 2024 at 12:57 pm
I don’t really agree with this article to certain extents. Despite the shocking fact the IQ test was designed for testing the ability of using and solving, it is still the most reliable and accurate test to measure one’s intelligence so far. In this article it was mentioned that IQ doesn’t really determines ones intelligence and there academic well being, well, what I am going to argue is that this is a faulted comparison: It’s not fair to compare the supreme ones among low IQ people with just random ones in the high IQ people. Yes, there are low-IQ people who can learn lots of things/ be good at lots of things by working hard enough, yet if a high IQ person makes the same amount of effort, he/she is only going to be better. On the other hand I do agree with the article that IQ stresses people out. Psychologically there will be pressure on the people who have high or low IQs, but I think the stress also makes them improve didn’t it?
Mia S • Oct 17, 2024 at 11:06 am
I agree with the perspective of this article, that often we create these “good” vs “bad” black and white tests that rarely include accurate measurements with considerations like background, class, ability, etc. I think this is really well written and makes connections that I find deeply interesting, like correlations between misrepresentations on IQ tests and SAT tests. A number will never truly define who you are. One of my favorite books about the human perspective of intelligence is “Ways of Being” that also talks about how relative our idea of intelligence is. It includes the variances of intelligence in the natural world, and how what “smart” means to them is completely different from what “smart” means to us.
John • Oct 17, 2024 at 10:51 am
I agree with the article’s critique of IQ and similar assessments as inadequate measures of human intelligence. Reducing a person’s capabilities to a single number not only oversimplifies the complexity of human abilities. The historical misuse of IQ tests, particularly in categorizing marginalized groups, highlights the dangers of applying such metrics without considering cultural and contextual factors. Additionally, the pressure placed on individuals based on these scores can lead to anxiety and unrealistic expectations for students. I think that Eugenics is not a standard today at all, but I can see the past and its issues around these topics. The SAT is a great example of how these scores are moving out of the standard for colleges, and other uses in our world. This is a good direction to move toward as it creates less harmful experiences for students.
Drew Shenkman • Oct 16, 2024 at 6:39 pm
I agree with the points touched on in this article. I think that a value such as IQ, SAT score, and even GPA are all contextual and only reveal surface-level information about what a person is capable of. When it comes to the SAT, it only reflects the amount of time the test taker spent studying for it rather than how intelligent they are. The SAT is all about patterns and recognizing those patterns. By studying, you are essentially memorizing the question structure rather than applying your knowledge. I find that this article explains well the controversial history of the SAT and the origin of IQ. I agree it is unfair and degrading in some aspects to add a numerical value to a person when those numbers are calculated through flawed tests. To put a value on intelligence is truly an unachievable, and impractical, goal.
Solomon • Oct 16, 2024 at 6:18 pm
The perspective in this article is very interesting and I definitely agree with it. I think it is very true that IQ is not a good measure of someone’s intelligence. IQ has been grossly misused by society, individuals, and academic institutions. The misuse of IQ as being representative of one’s intelligence can hinder a student’s individual growth and development as a thinker in many ways. As pointed out in the article individuals can internalize negative messaging they are receiving about having low IQ and feel the need to prove themselves or conversely for individuals with high IQ feel the need to live up to the standards of a high IQ. Another way the misuse of IQ can hinder a student’s development is through how the special education system heavily uses IQ when writing IEPs/504s to support students.
Timmy Ma • Oct 16, 2024 at 7:28 am
Personally, I agree with the article. Any tests of IQ are inconclusive and only applicable to people of a certain background. Context is needed for any score and the score itself is a percentile, meaning it is relative to how other people did on the test. We had to constantly update the IQ to make it harder so that everyone doesn’t just score in the 200-300s. I never believed that IQ tests are able to accurately determine a person’s “smartness” because different people have different strengths and weaknesses, talents, and areas of improvement. For example, STEM subjects come easily to me because I can visualize the concepts but humanities subjects take more work. Does that mean I will not be able to do anything compared to someone who has it the other way around? No, because we all have different strengths, and working together will push humanity forward more than if we work against each other.
AJ • Oct 16, 2024 at 7:27 am
One line stood out to me in particular, “That’s not a lack of intelligence, it’s a lack of a specific skill relating to intelligence.” This brought me a sense of comfort due to the fact that I need extra help or “struggle” in math. I know math, I can do it, it’s just certain aspects of math I struggle to grasp with; like the quote said, “A specific skill relating to intelligence.” We are not numbers, we are people and I truly believe that if we start to look less at IQ numbers and GPA’s then there would be more confidence in the classroom to make mistakes and grow from them.
Serafina Kubersky • Oct 16, 2024 at 7:23 am
I believe that one test can’t fully encapsulate all that there is to know about someone’s aptitude. I found it interesting how the article brings up the history of these tests, and how they inherently place certain groups at a disadvantage. I feel as though IQ may not be the best determiner of whether or not someone succeeds in life. If that is the case, then I wonder: is there a test that does a better job at predicting someone’s abilities? Some past research has brought me to EI, or emotional intelligence, which observes how ‘in tune’ one is with their own emotions and the emotions of others. While this probably has some drawbacks, I wonder if it is a better alternative to the IQ test.
Dean sadowski • Oct 16, 2024 at 4:41 am
I didn’t know any of this and its interesting. I always had an idea in my head that some dude made it up but never understood the history behind IQ tests and the SAT. Knowing that you may have a low IQ compared to the average person based off of a test I feel like those people would feel bad and look down on themselves in a way where they feel lesser because they aren’t as smart. everyone has there own stories and their own trials and errors and I agree with the statement in the article that connects with the idea that your IQ is determined by your environment, your up bringing and where you are from.