0
   

MARS VS VENUS and INTELLIGENCE

 
 
Foxfyre
 
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 09:56 am
The quite politically incorrect findings in this study may get overlooked in the noise of the day's news and events, but I think it is something we could look at. What do you think? Do the results reflect your personal experience? Can we trust one study? How important is raw intelligence in the overall effectiveness and efficiency in our life experience?

Does anybody have any Mensa stats broken down by gender?

Men are more intelligent than women, claims new study
By BEN CLERKIN & FIONA MACRAE

Last updated at 13:38pm on 14th September 2006

It is research that is guaranteed to delight men - and infuriate the women in their lives. A controversial new study has claimed that men really are more intelligent than women.

The study - carried out by a man - concluded that men's IQs are almost four points higher than women's.

British-born researcher John Philippe Rushton, who previously created a furore by suggesting intelligence is influenced by race, says the finding could explain why so few women make it to the top in the workplace.

He claims the 'glass ceiling' phenomenon is probably due to inferior intelligence, rather than discrimination or lack of opportunity.

The University of Western Ontario psychologist reached his conclusion after scrutinising the results of university aptitude tests taken by 100,000 students aged 17 and 18 of both sexes.

A focus on a factors such as the ability to quickly grasp a complex concept, verbal reasoning skills and creativity - some of they key ingredients of intelligence - revealed the male teenagers had IQs that were an average of 3.63 points higher. The average person has an IQ of around 100.

The findings, which held true for all classes and levels of parental education, overturn a 100 year consensus that men and women average the same in general mental ability. They also conflict with evidence that girls do better in school exams than boys.

But Prof Rushton, who was born in Bournemouth and obtained his doctorate in social psychology from the London School of Economics, argues that the faster maturing of girls leads to them outshining boys in the classroom.

And since almost all previous data showing an absence of difference between the sexes was gathered on schoolchildren, the gender difference could easily have been missed.

'It looks like up until late adolescence, the females have the advantage over males because they mature faster, which masks the underlying difference, he said.

Although experts have accepted that men and women differ mentally, with males averaging higher on tests of 'spatial ability' and females higher on verbal tests, it was assumed the differences averaged out, leaving no difference in overall intelligence.

Prof Rushton believes the differences are directly linked to brain size, with other studies showing men having slightly bigger brains than women.

'We know that men have larger brains, even when you take into account larger body size,' said the researcher. 'That means there are more neurons. The question is what these neurons are doing in a man - and they probably have an advantage in processing information.'

It is thought the difference may date back to the Stone Age, with women seeking out men who are more intelligent than them in a bid to pass on the best genes to their children.

'Some people have suggested it evolved because women prefer men who are more intelligent than they are for husbands,' said the professor.

'Just as they prefer men who are taller than them, they also prefer a male who is a little ahead of them in IQ.'

Critics claim Prof Rushton's results could have been skewed by the inclusion of more test results from females than form males.

Prof Rushton, who four years ago triggered a scientific row by claiming intelligence and behaviour are influenced by race, with blacks being more likely to be involved in crime and Asians having a greater chance of high IQs, however, stands by his results.

'These are unpopular conclusions,' he said. 'People should not be made to feel afraid to study controversial issues.

'We have the right to find the truth. One should really look at the facts.'

His work appears to confirm British research which showed men have bigger brains and higher IQs than women, which may explain why chess grandmasters and geniuses are more likely to be male.

The analyses of more than 20,000 verbal reasoning tests taken by university students from around the world revealed that women's IQs are up to five points lower than men's .

Women needn't feel despondent, however, as the scientists believe women can achieve just as much as men - as long as they work harder.
SOURCE
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,928 • Replies: 57
No top replies

 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 09:57 am
Were my experience limited to you, i'd feel obliged to agree with the basic premise.

However, i have met many intelligent and perceptive women in my life, so i consider this to be a false thesis.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 10:10 am
The study may possibly prove that 17 and 18 year old boys have a slightly higher I.Q. that 17 and 18 year old girls.

Since 17 and 18 year old boys are constantly straining their cranium to discover how to foist themselves upon the 17 and 18 year old girls, they may have a slight edge on their ability to reason.

On the other hand, since they are usually not too successful, the girls seem to win out.

At least that is what I think. Smile
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 10:12 am
Intrepid wrote:
Since 17 and 18 year old boys are constantly straining their cranium to discover how to foist themselves upon the 17 and 18 year old girls, they may have a slight edge on their ability to reason.

On the other hand, since they are usually not too successful, the girls seem to win out.


Brilliant satire, that . . .
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 10:24 am
I thought this the most questionable statement in the article:
Quote:
Women needn't feel despondent, however, as the scientists believe women can achieve just as much as men - as long as they work harder.


In my personal experience, I have come to believe that many men are much more often right brained with skills in graphics and understanding of physics that seem to be beyond many women's normal range of cognitive abilities. It seems to be easier for more men to visualize and understand the International Date Line than it is for more women for instance. And yet there are women who have no problem with that at all.

On the other hand, I think more women are more likely to be left brained with verbal and practical connective/relationship skills than what more men demonstrate. Again this does not mean no men possess such skills.

But you always wonder how these differences affect results of intelligence tests. The on line tests, for instance, do contact a lot of visual graphics and not that much reading comprehension. I wonder if that materially affects the results of the tests as identifiable by gender?

And while I think world peace or the second coming are in no way affected by these things, I do find them fascinating to think about.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 10:27 am
Foxfyre wrote:
I thought this the most questionable statement in the article:
Quote:
Women needn't feel despondent, however, as the scientists believe women can achieve just as much as men - as long as they work harder.


It is my experience that women usually work harder than men anyhow.

It is also my experience that more and more women are achieving higher and higher levels of responsibility in business and government.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 12:13 pm
haha, that is so ridiculous.

1) 4 points difference on IQ? that is much too small to have such a pronounced effect. there certainly is not such a correlation between men of 130 vs men of 134!

2) the reasons why women have different average placement in the workplace are obvious. mainly it is a difference between social upbringing & goals. the innate desires of women are, on average (not always) different. they have different "genetic programming". in many cases women are not interested in the same kind of success as men are, and this has influenced society's expectations of them and created stereotypes about their intelligence, but it doesn't mean they are dumber (it doesnt disprove it either of course)

3) men and women do have physical differences, which means they must have differences in their brains to at least accommodate the control of the more obvious physical differences, which means that any perfectly accurate standardized method of testing should yeild one gender to be "ahead" of the other, but that would require a non-budging definition of intelligence .
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 12:58 pm
The media - especially the tabloids - have been a bit in a flury last week when that news published.

But when they found out finally that Rushton's work (mostly) had pertained to race differences before ...
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 01:02 pm
stuh505 wrote:
haha, that is so ridiculous.

1) 4 points difference on IQ? that is much too small to have such a pronounced effect. there certainly is not such a correlation between men of 130 vs men of 134!

2) the reasons why women have different average placement in the workplace are obvious. mainly it is a difference between social upbringing & goals. the innate desires of women are, on average (not always) different. they have different "genetic programming". in many cases women are not interested in the same kind of success as men are, and this has influenced society's expectations of them and created stereotypes about their intelligence, but it doesn't mean they are dumber (it doesnt disprove it either of course)

Gasp! You are actually acknowleding - in public - on A2K - that men and women are DIFFERENT? Smile

Just teasing.

The sample cited in the article was huge, but there is no indication whether all took the exact same test under the same condition, time limits, etc.

For instance, for various reasons, I have had my IQ tested by psychologists trained to do that and using accepted methods to do that. Evenso, these experts cautioned that the time of day, the level of stress or fatigue, etc. that I was feeling could affect the score on any given day.

Sometimes I have idly taken those I.Q. tests that pop up on the Internet and my I.Q. is always way higher on those than how the experts test me, but then on those I take my time, there is no pressure, and I can do the math calculations on paper before clicking the answer.

Nevertheless, I know men and women are generally better at different things and I wonder if that really does affect how they score on an IQ test?

3) men and women do have physical differences, which means they must have differences in their brains to at least accommodate the control of the more obvious physical differences, which means that any perfectly accurate standardized method of testing should yeild one gender to be "ahead" of the other, but that would require a non-budging definition of intelligence .
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 01:03 pm
Here's one of last weeks reports, which gives some further details to the study. (And a link to the pdf-version as well.)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 01:06 pm
Ack! I didn't get my edit done in time to unscramble my response to Stuh's post. Hopefully s/he can pick it out.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 01:16 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Can we trust one study?


I've no idea how trustworthy the other studies are (from the link I gave):



Quote:
Another set of observations concerned the sex difference found in brain size and the relation between brain size and cognitive ability. Studies published in 1992 at the University of Western Ontario by zoologist C. Davison Ankney, and also by psychologist Rushton, showed men average a 100-gram advantage over women in brain weight (and volume).

A 1997 study in Denmark documented that men have 15% more neurons than women (22.8 versus 19.3 billion).
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 01:23 pm
LINK
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 01:24 pm
Setanta wrote:
Were my experience limited to you, i'd feel obliged to agree with the basic premise.

However, i have met many intelligent and perceptive women in my life, so i consider this to be a false thesis.

Can we say "anecdotal?"
0 Replies
 
flushd
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 04:21 pm
Uhh. Okay then. I followed up Walter's link (thank you Walter).

Philippe Rushton's profile page is interesting, as is looking at his other publications.

Based on what I've seen here, I would venture to guess that a lot of the so-called 'findings' of this man are controversial.

I admit I got a little icky-chill thinking he is teaching in a Canadian University
(University of Western Ontario). Previously, he was working at the University of Toronto.

Lots of angry young people who could be brought down a bad road if they believed this dude. "Africans are stupider by nature! Women are stupider!"

*clearing throat* Yeah, make way for old white boy from England.

I can't even take him seriously. He mixes up race and science to start out with. What century is he living in? There are no such thing as races! It is a made-up out-dated social labelling.

Foolishness and arrogance, all of it! What a waste of money.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 05:19 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
Setanta wrote:
Were my experience limited to you, i'd feel obliged to agree with the basic premise.

However, i have met many intelligent and perceptive women in my life, so i consider this to be a false thesis.

Can we say "anecdotal?"


What's this we ****, Brandon, you got a mouse in your pocket?

Of course it's anecdotal--but more than that, and unlike most of the times you whine about it, it was a deliberate personal slur.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 05:29 pm
Men are just suckers. End of story. It's no contest. The female brain can be the size of a pip and it's just the same.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Sep, 2006 09:02 pm
Foxfyre,

Quote:

Nevertheless, I know men and women are generally better at different things and I wonder if that really does affect how they score on an IQ test?


It absolutely will.
0 Replies
 
spidergal
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Sep, 2006 04:28 am
From what I know about Mars and Venus intelligence, I can say that the brain of men and women is differently configured. Some areas of the brain are more developed in men while women have advantage over men in certain skills. For e.g, the brain of men is so configured so as to give them an edge over women in spatial skills. You may note that driving of vehicles requires spatial skills. If you have ever observed a woman driving a bike,you would know that her line of motion is straight, she doesn't endevours risky overtakes and is usually slow. I drive a bike and I know.* Men have exceptional control over driving. They will swing their bike around, zoom in like rockets etc etc.(You may also like to note that this difference is not so well-marked in car-driving but its there. Actually, a car sets both men and woman at the same level. Balance is no more a problem. But its still visible in how men will overtake other vehicles and how they will turn their cars around at the curves.) On the other hand, women are more mature emotionally and have better language skills. (Allan Pease et al) So, if you had been wondering why most engineers are men and teachers are women, you now know why.

As for the research, it really doesn't look like a valid one. You can't ascertain that men are smarter than women simply on the basis of a logical test conducted only on a particular age-group. "Men are smarter or more intelligent than women" is a big generalisation and you can't deduce with such a small-scale research whose only parameters were logical and other aspects of human intelligence were not even considered.

Here is why I think they got these results: (And it is ridiculous to me that the researchers involved have ignored these points. Have they done it deliberately? Are they racists?)

17-18 is an age when both men and women (or boys and girls) are well into the reproductive phase of their life. Puberty has its toll on girls. Its a time when secretion of hormones like progesteron and estrogen is the highest in their life. Allan Pease in his book Why men don't listen and women can't read maps (which is based on his research on Mars and Venus intelligence) has observed that secretion of these hormones has a negative impact on their mathematical (therefore logical) skills while boys, who are experiencing a spurt of testosterone, gain advantage as testosterone affects their mathematical performance positively. I recall from my school days how I and some of the girls outsmarted boys in all subjects during the primitive and junior schooling days. Around 15, I and most of the girls sort of lost that efficacy. From puberty on, boys took over in mathematics. Though girls were still better in languages etc.
And exams like SAT usually test logical and spatial intelligence. So, boys score better.
If they had conducted a research on 8-10 year olds, the results would have been different. We all know, as a generalisation, that girls are brighter than boys, during primitive school days.


*Whenever I have tried out those manly tactics, I have ended up breaking my limbs.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Sep, 2006 07:52 am
Great post Spidergal and also from some others.

If anybody ever wanted proof that boys and girls are different, one only has to watch young children playing with toy cars. Watching my son and daughter as well as their myriad cousins, friends, and classmates, one thing is unmistakably obvious:

All little boys make motor noises.
As a general rule, little girls don't.

There's no way you can explain that away by cultural influences. Smile
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » MARS VS VENUS and INTELLIGENCE
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 08:06:34