|
Hollismason posted:Cops do not score above average IQ. They're generally the intelligence as the Population. Meaning there's some really smart ones, really dumb ones, and 99 percent are just average. I worked in the south where more were dumb than smart though. According to that article, they score slightly above average intelligence on average. SedanChair posted:Can you give me an example of an intelligent racist? I guess I'll start with anyone who lives in a white flight suburb and isn't a total moron, and go from there. I mean this is now getting into a debate about what "really" counts as racism. Plenty of intelligent (white) people crack racist jokes, if that's what your definition is.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 07:31 |
|
|
Those people are unintelligent.computer parts posted:I guess I'll start with anyone who lives in a white flight suburb and isn't a total moron, and go from there. I don't classify people as "intelligent" just because they have a complicated job or something, do you? The belief that races can be inferior is fundamentally damaging to a person's intelligence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Does this post that I quoted when I made that statement say anything about departments rejecting candidates? The link I posted says something about departments rejecting candidates. You can quibble about just HOW SMART a 120 IQ is (not smart enough to call someone intelligent unless we're just handing that adjective out), but departments commonly reject candidates who are too intelligent. This is not something hollismason made up, it's something that the departments themselves seem totally fine with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I don't classify people as "intelligent" just because they have a complicated job or something, do you? The belief that races can be inferior is fundamentally damaging to a person's intelligence. Apparently half the world is intelligent in computer parts' mind. After all, they're above average!
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I don't classify people as "intelligent" just because they have a complicated job or something, do you? The belief that races can be inferior is fundamentally damaging to a person's intelligence. So now we're getting into "what is the definition of intelligence" as well. Everyone else seems to be using IQ, which we both know is a flawed measure, but it is the standard being used. 30.5 Days posted:The link I posted says something about departments rejecting candidates. But not the post I quoted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
What even is intelligence?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Apparently half the world is intelligent in computer parts' mind. After all, they're above average! According to the article you posted, IQ is a direct measure of intelligence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So now we're getting into "what is the definition of intelligence" as well. The post you quoted said intelligent rookies don't exist. This is, necessarily, the case, because departments have a policy of not hiring intelligent rookies. I don't know how much clearer I can make this before your determination to not understand becomes far too apparent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:The post you quoted said intelligent rookies don't exist. How high does your IQ have to be to be considered intelligent?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
computer parts posted:According to the article you posted, IQ is a direct measure of intelligence. It doesn't matter whether IQ is an effective measure of intelligence because the point is that police departments are using it as a way to identify and reject candidates with high IQs, which is the point of this conversation. computer parts posted:How high does your IQ have to be to be considered intelligent? You should probably be in at least the top quartile? We don't call people strong just because they are stronger than the average person, that would cover, like, almost every man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:The link I posted says something about departments rejecting candidates. You can quibble about just HOW SMART a 120 IQ is (not smart enough to call someone intelligent unless we're just handing that adjective out), but departments commonly reject candidates who are too intelligent. This is not something hollismason made up, it's something that the departments themselves seem totally fine with. This is something tiny suburban or rural departments do. It's because they know someone that is overqualified for the position will use it to get the training and spend long enough to jump ahead of the off the street line at an urban department. Next they try to get into a detective position, spend the 5 or 10 years there (I forget) that's minimum for FBI special agent hiring, spend 20 years there and retire with a good pension at 50ish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
pacmania90 posted:What even is intelligence? In actual language use? Whiteness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:It doesn't matter whether IQ is an effective measure of intelligence because the point is that police departments are using it as a way to identify and reject candidates with high IQs, which is the point of this conversation. Actually it matters quite a bit. Your entire argument rests on the assumption that more IQ = higher intelligence, so therefore police departments are rejecting intelligent people. If this is not in fact the case, then there's no proof that police departments are specifically avoiding intelligent people. Instead, they might be using it for some other predictive factor (e.g., the likelihood of bailing for a different job).
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Rich people: "Charities should be serving the poor, not government." *proceeds to not donate to any charities*
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Why do people not expect this behavior from police officers? Cops don't have some special test to make sure their not immoral. in fact you can get turned down because of intelligence. hmm why not just fake a lower score on whatever test they give you presuming people catch on to this hiring practice
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
HL Mencken was probably pretty smart and he was p racist
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Yes, paragons of intelligence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1_7g3PcvD0
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Actually it matters quite a bit. Your entire argument rests on the assumption that more IQ = higher intelligence, so therefore police departments are rejecting intelligent people. Sorry is your argument that the department isn't offering the IQ test as a measure of intelligence?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Sorry is your argument that the department isn't offering the IQ test as a measure of intelligence? Correct, as noted in your article: quote:Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took the exam in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training. The article calls it an intelligence test, but that doesn't mean it actually is one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Correct, as noted in your article: So how did they come to determine that IQ tests correlate with a high chance of leaving the job?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:So how did they come to determine that IQ tests correlate with a high chance of leaving the job? Presumably past experience. I don't know the test in question, but it's perfectly likely that they compared the scores on the test versus job length in the department and found that most of the people leaving too early scored above 27 or whatever the article said.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Presumably past experience. I don't know the test in question, but it's perfectly likely that they compared the scores on the test versus job length and found that most of the people leaving early scored above 27 or whatever the article said. How would they have past experience with an IQ test that they only started offering to determine if someone was likely to leave the job?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Clearly if a critical public service job keeps having all their smart employees leave, the solution is to ban smart employees rather than trying to figure out why anyone smart wants to gtfo
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Actually it matters quite a bit. Your entire argument rests on the assumption that more IQ = higher intelligence, so therefore police departments are rejecting intelligent people. IQ does have correlations across most logical reasoning tests, and therefore, is a reasonable proxy for something we can call intelligence (the ability to learn, reason, and solve problems) Even as an imperfect measurement, the net result of rejecting people with high IQ will be to reject people with high intelligence, regardless of your definition of intelligence. Moreover, if an unmeasurable/unquantifiable "true intelligence" in fact has no correlation with how likely a person is to leave a job, then they should at least be using a better metric that does not have the side-effect of eliminating smart people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Can you give me an example of an intelligent racist? Gφring had an IQ of 138 and loved to play with model trains 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:How would they have past experience with an IQ test that they only started offering to determine if someone was likely to leave the job? I don't know that they only started offering it then, the article doesn't say. What's also possible is that there's national data about job length for that type of job versus the type of score received on the test. The article in general is kind of weird though, apparently this all happened in 1996? I guess the appeals took a while but that article doesn't have a date on it either, which is really weird.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Is this where you cite James Watson as if a handful of nominally intelligent racists proves the bulk aren't morons? Racism exists as a structural component of society rather than as a force of aggregate individuals. Thus the traits of individuals aren't particularly relevant, and reducing racism down to that has the effect of ignoring its pervasive nature, thus extending it. Trying to make being racist nto something only dumb people do, like how it has been reduced to something only bad people do, is how we end up with the current situation of there being a ton of racism, but curiously no one involved "has a single racist bone in their body" In the more direct of there being highly intelligent, highly accomplished, highly racist people about, I'm not really sure why anyone would deny that, "Ties are a bigger threat than hoods", remember? The bankers who gave subprime loans to "mudpeople", the legislative assistants who draw up laws with disparate impact against black people, the criminologists who come up with the policing training that treats minorities as a greater societal threat, the intelligence analysists who devote more time to communities of color than right wing militias, the organization heads at top colleges that freeze out minority students from joining them... It is tempting to have those channers in Minnesota be your image of the average racist, but the ones making it happen are the white collar upper middle/upper class people
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I don't know that they only started offering it then, the article doesn't say. What's also possible is that there's national data about job length for that type of job versus the type of score received on the test. I can't tell if you're like autistic or just being intellectually dishonest. Okay, then, why is there a lower bound on the acceptable IQ test scores?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:I can't tell if you're like autistic or just being intellectually dishonest. Okay, then, why is there a lower bound on the acceptable IQ test scores? Probably a mandated minimum from a higher authority (state, federal, etc). I don't know, I don't know the test in question or the (codified) hiring policies of New London, Connecticut. Trabisnikof posted:Clearly if a critical public service job keeps having all their smart employees leave, the solution is to ban smart employees rather than trying to figure out why anyone smart wants to gtfo The issue seems to be that it's a middle of nowhere small town. The nearest cities are Hartford and Providence and they're both an hour's drive away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Clearly if a critical public service job keeps having all their smart employees leave, the solution is to ban smart employees rather than trying to figure out why anyone smart wants to gtfo Well they certainly can't do something like offer better pay/benefits to keep smart and capable people there. Better just get lower quality guys and make sure the FOP spokesman is shameless enough to lie repeatedly and victim blame when a cop does something horrific.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Well they certainly can't do something like offer better pay/benefits to keep smart and capable people there. Better just get lower quality guys and make sure the FOP spokesman is shameless enough to lie repeatedly and victim blame when a cop does something horrific. We're talking about a city of 20,000; policing it is probably boring as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Can you give me an example of an intelligent racist? I strongly suspect there was at least one intelligent white guy before like 1920 in the US.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:We're talking about a city of 20,000; policing it is probably boring as gently caress. And again, they're still hiring people/police of above average intelligence: quote:Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took the exam in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training. We only have two data points, but if a score of 20 is roughly 100, then we have somewhere between IQ 100-115 or thereabouts. An IQ of 115 is still about 85th percentile, going by this. e: Really, the lesson is that this dude is pretty smart and could probably get better work than a security guard. (by that same site, IQ of 125 is about 95th percentile) computer parts fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:We're talking about a city of 20,000; policing it is probably boring as gently caress. Yeah I recognize there are challenges to filling jobs in rural/small town settings, but instead of say, focusing on recruiting locals, providing better incentives to stay, etc they chose to refuse to hire candidates that score too well. Imagine if a rural hospital, in the name of getting more doctors to stay longer, banned the hiring of doctors who did too well in med school. It would be an insane policy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Can you give me an example of an intelligent racist? evilweasel posted:I strongly suspect there was at least one intelligent white guy before like 1920 in the US. And/or one person in a large majority of the planet today
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Probably a mandated minimum from a higher authority (state, federal, etc). I don't know, I don't know the test in question or the (codified) hiring policies of New London, Connecticut. So, this town is offering an IQ test, as an intelligence test, in order to test the intelligence of applicants, and then reject applicants outside the acceptable range. This policy might come from the state level, but probably doesn't, and certainly doesn't come from the federal level. Regardless of who initiated the IQ test ,the purpose of the IQ test is to test intelligence and then reject candidates with scores below a certain value, with the clear and obvious goal of rejecting candidates with intelligence below a certain level. This town also takes the step of rejecting candidates with scores above a certain value. The reasoning being that candidates with an IQ above a certain value (about 115-120) might leave more easily than others. However, we cannot say that they're rejecting candidates with high intelligence because maybe they don't believe in this IQ mumbo jumbo anyway, except that obviously someone who scores too high will get bored, not because of their intelligence but because of their high IQness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yeah I recognize there are challenges to filling jobs in rural/small town settings, but instead of say, focusing on recruiting locals, providing better incentives to stay, etc they chose to refuse to hire candidates that score too well. Well, then you get into the question of what exactly the needed intelligence is for that particular position. Like yeah, smarter cops are never a bad thing inherently, but if there's already enough applicants within the range you specify, it's not a terrible decision. Especially because, like I said, they're still not hiring morons. 30.5 Days posted:So, this town is offering an IQ test, as an intelligence test, in order to test the intelligence of applicants, and then reject applicants outside the acceptable range. This policy might come from the state level, but probably doesn't, and certainly doesn't come from the federal level. Regardless of who initiated the IQ test ,the purpose of the IQ test is to test intelligence and then reject candidates with scores below a certain value, with the clear and obvious goal of rejecting candidates with intelligence below a certain level. This town also takes the step of rejecting candidates with scores above a certain value. The reasoning being that candidates with an IQ above a certain value (about 115-120) might leave more easily than others. However, we cannot say that they're rejecting candidates with high intelligence because maybe they don't believe in this IQ mumbo jumbo anyway, except that obviously someone who scores too high will get bored, not because of their intelligence but because of their high IQness. You're still getting hung up on "intelligence test". The town is offering an IQ test (which doesn't measure intelligence that well), and using the scores to compare with a known correlation (people higher than this range typically leave earlier) for hiring purposes. It sounds like if the state provided free training to all accepted applicants, the policy would go away. Oh by the way (for everyone) this is apparently the test in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_test These scores are from a different year, but here is the median score based on profession: quote:Systems analyst 32 So basically this guy was crazy smart. (also interesting sidenote: the NFL apparently uses this test quite frequently in the Scouting Combine)
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Like yo, I understand this whole "their town is old fucks who don't want to pay .1% more property taxes to have non-lovely local services, and it's way cheaper to just hire barney fife" poo poo, but this bizarre insistence that they're not intentionally filtering intelligent candidates when that's inarguably what's going on is loving ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So basically this guy was crazy smart. Being intellectually dishonest is like lying, you have to keep your story straight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 07:31 |
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Being intellectually dishonest is like lying, you have to keep your story straight. Fair enough. Even If we take it for granted that this IQ test is a reasonable measure of intelligence, then this dude was crazy smart.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 18:29
|
|