Without a doubt, IQ tests were invented basically with a good intention behind them; however good the intention of IQ tests might seem at measuring intelligence, they would not really measure intelligence.
So what do IQ tests really measure? Crap. They measure IQ, no more, no less. If an IQ test would only reveal nothing but a quotient to determine one’s intelligence, it would be crappy for this very reason.
On the other hand, if it would accurately measure intelligence without resort to IQ, it would make more sense. Unfortunately, there is no IQ test that would not resort to IQ as evidence of its quantification.
That said, if IQ tests really rely on IQ to prove one’s intelligence, is IQ itself a reliable metric to determine what our level of intelligence really is?
Probably not. Why? Intelligence is a complex covert behaviour that is so much influenced by factors both internal and external to it.
These factors could be unstable; so, as unstable they are, IQ changes with them. Another question is this: if an IQ really changes with factors internal and external to it (gene, gene mutation, stimulating environment, neuroplasticity etc.), how much of our actual intelligence have changed over time? Still hard to tell without resort to that figure called Intelligence Quotient. Isn’t it?
Now, should IQ be equated with intelligence?
Hell, no. IQ is in no way equal to one’s actual intelligence because intelligence is an umbrella term that encapsulates a lot of untold wisdom that IQ tests could not fathom.
Should you take an IQ test? The choice really depends on the intents you have about it. If you are looking to take an IQ test to reveal your real intelligence, keenness or wisdom, rethink.
IQ tests are useless. Aren’t they?
To be frank, IQ tests are not outrightly useless. See uses of IQ tests. So why all these criticisms leveled against IQ test? For the most important part, intelligence is more than just IQ. Period!
What causes an IQ test to be wrong goes beyond the intents inherent in the test itself because of these other reasons:
1. Intelligence is more than just IQ
How many times have you heard this phrase being rehashed over and over? This isn’t a false notion, it’s the fact.
Consider that the traditional intelligence tests were invented to see how fast and accurate you would answer questions related to mainstream logic. Go write the Mensa or Wechsler test and see this for yourself.
Humans extend beyond mainstream logic the same way intelligence and practical wisdom extend beyond mainstream logic.
Relying on the mainstream logic test in a social or cultural context other than mainstream is not a good idea. Why? This has inherent cultural flaws in it, which is called cultural bias in psychological testing.
Hypothetically speaking, would you say that an illiterate farmer who commercializes his products on a massive scale to make hundreds of thousands of dollars ($$$ $$$) isn’t intelligent because his IQ was only 73?
Remember there is another type of intelligence called business intelligence. Now what? IQ doesn’t necessarily translate to intelligence and practical wisdom.
2. IQ doesn’t translate to creativity
Consider Mr. A who studied fine arts and memorized all the history of fine arts, but incompetent at pottery – a practical course that involves being creative in molding clay or any of such elements into something real like a statue, building etc.
Could an IQ score of 157 obtained through the yardstick of logic and information alone guarantee this creativity?
3. IQ doesn’t translate to emotional intelligence
First off, emotional intelligence is one’s ability to understand his/her emotion, others’ emotion, control one’s emotion, using emotion in a productive manner and ability to delay gratification in order to achieve meaningful goals.
How could high IQ guarantee what is defined here? Unless the IQ test incorporates Emotional Quotient (EQ) into it, nothing can be really fruitful about it, with regard to EQ.