Hong Kong and China

Lucem Ferre · 08-22-2019, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

You're still assuming that you can motivate low scoring (stupid) people more with money than you can high scoring people.

I never said that. Ever. That's where you're straw manning me. And low IQ can actually be trained to have an average IQ.

Quote:

Otherwise, if you're not assuming that, the motivation argument means NOTHING. At this point, if you're too stupid to understand this then I'm too unmotivated to continue to explain it again and again.

No, it doesn't mean nothing because motivation isn't an 'is' or 'isn't' thing, it's a sliding scale. The fact that you can't understand the fact that some people are on average more motivated to do well on IQ tests than others and how that can be a huge factor in the inaccuracies of IQ tests and have to result to straw manning my position and now poisoning the well with an ad hominem that I'm just 'too stupid to understand' doesn't make you right.

Lucem Ferre · 08-22-2019, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I'm not sure why you would think I don't know that?

Because they are intrinsically more motivated, are they less susceptible to external forms of motivation like bribing?

I've already addressed this, quit doing everything you can to stagnate the conversation and move it forward.

~~jwb~~ · 08-22-2019, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

I never said that. Ever. That's where you're straw manning me. And low IQ can actually be trained to have an average IQ.

listen... I'm being serious... If I'm going to continue to respond to you I want you to think about this seriously, cause this is getting tiresome.

You didn't say explicitly that low IQ people are more suceptable to bribe type motivation than high IQ people. This assumption is just inherent in your argument.

If they are equally suceptable to bribes, then everyone's performance would improve if bribes were given across the board.

Since IQ is based on the average score, everyone's performance would go up but the scores would stay the same.

~~jwb~~ · 08-22-2019, 07:18 PM

Fair enough.

Wouldn't pretty much anyone taking the SATs "try their best"?

Lucem Ferre · 08-22-2019, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

listen... I'm being serious... If I'm going to continue to respond to you I want you to think about this seriously, cause this is getting tiresome.

You didn't say explicitly that low IQ people are more suceptable to bribe type motivation than high IQ people. This assumption is just inherent in your
argument.

No, it actually isn't. That's just the conclusion you pulled.

Quote:

If they are equally suceptable to bribes, then everyone's performance would improve if bribes were given across the board.

No, because not everybody is susceptible to the same reward which is the basis of my argument. That doesn't mean low IQ people are more susceptible to bribes than high IQ people. It means that it will have varying effects on how much it motivates people to score higher regardless of the previous IQ scores.

Quote:

Since IQ is based on the average score, everyone's performance would go up but the scores would stay the same.

I'm confused on what you mean by this and why you come to that conclusion.

Lucem Ferre · 08-22-2019, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

Fair enough.

Wouldn't pretty much anyone taking the SATs "try their best"?

No.

~~jwb~~ · 08-22-2019, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

No, it actually isn't. That's just the conclusion you pulled.

No, because not everybody is susceptible to the same reward which is the basis of my argument. That doesn't mean low IQ people are more susceptible to bribes than high IQ people. It means that it will have varying effects on how much it motivates people to score higher regardless of the previous IQ scores.

I'm confused on what you mean by this and why you come to that conclusion.

Sigh.

You contradicted the first part of your post with the second part. I'm quickly losing patience with you.

As for the third part, if you don't understand that you just don't understand what IQ tests measure. The scores are based on the average score of the population. As such, 100 is always the average.

Lucem Ferre · 08-22-2019, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

I haven't even taken the SAT yet

I imagine with that, if you're not going to try why would you even take it tbh

depends on if it's normal for students to be forced to take it in some places and I'm just not aware?

This should be an obvious no. Most people would try. To take it in the first place is some form of effort. Their best? I don't even know if most would try their best. Can't assume everybody has the same goals and motivation. People think differently for a lot of different reasons.

~~jwb~~ · 08-22-2019, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

theoretically if everyone who wasn't previously motivated were bribed into scoring high their score wouldn't change much because it would average out

but that's also not really relevant to the question of whether intrinsic motivation creates an artificially higher discrepancy in scores

The more I think about this the less it actually means to me..

If you have the capacity to learn calculus but never do... That's not as good as actually learning calculus.

OccultHawk · 08-22-2019, 07:35 PM

Did I say 112

I meant 120

08-22-2019, 07:35 PM	#120 (permalink)
OccultHawk one-balled nipple jockey Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Dirty Souf Biatch Posts: 22,033	Did I say 112 I meant 120 __________________ 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Member of the Year & Journal of the Year Champion Behold the Writing of THE LEGEND: https://www.musicbanter.com/members-...p-lighter.html

08-22-2019, 07:18 PM	#114 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	Fair enough. Wouldn't pretty much anyone taking the SATs "try their best"?