I created a very special crossword puzzle. In order to take it you must register by giving a first and last name but you don’t have to use your real name or even the pseudo-name we know you by, but whatever name you choose, please write it down somewhere safe so you’ll remember it for next time I post one of these tests which will likely be very soon.
By using the same name every time you take a test, not only can you build a diagnostically informative cognitive profile, but you allow me to calculate how well my tests intercorrelate.
So what makes this crossword puzzle so special? I created it by selecting 17 words completely randomly from the English language. The crossword clue for each word was simply each word’s definition from the most authoritative dictionary.
Because the words were completely chosen at random and thus are a representative sample of all English words, a perfect score means you can retrieve close to 100% of the English language from seeing just the definitions and a 0 score means you can retrieve close to zero percent.
Further, because this test has a true zero point, someone who scores 4 out of 17 has arguably twice the receptive vocabulary as someone who scored 2 who has twice the receptive vocabulary as someone who scored 1. This is rare chance to study the true distribution of cognition on an absolute scale.
Pumpkin Person 
[redacted by pp, 2023-08-09] you don’t see an error in assessing people based on 20 random words from the dictoionary?? Seriously? Your verbal IQ must be low to think this was a valid method.
Anything you could say I’ve thought of it twice. You’re understanding of the research is 100 years behind. Indeed on the first Wechsler scale, vocabulary was considered such a poor test of intelligence that it was used as an alternate test, however Wechsler quickly discovered that vocabulary correlated better with overall IQ than virtually any other test in his battery.
Indeed if psychologists could only use one subtest, they would probably turn to vocabulary. People don’t acquire large vocabularies by autistically memorizing dictionaries as you seem to think, but by endlessly inferring different subtle shades of meaning from encountering s word in different contexts. The better you are at reasoning, the fewer encounters with a word you need to infer its meaning, making vocabulary an excellent proxy for g
I grew up in a working class town and the only book in my house was the bible. Youre saying a vocabulary test would have been the best solution to finding out my verbal IQ at say age 20?
This test penalises people from working class backgrounds, foreign backgrounds and even people with no interest in books. It basically is designed for Bruno who reads the entire dictionary and remembers the official explanations for words.
I hate the agree with RR in any way, but this is basically a test to see what social class youre from.
As a child vocabulary tells us your social class but by age 40 or so, social class of origin has no independent effect on vocab. Even HBD deniers like James Flynn agree with this. As we get older our genes select environments. So you came from a working class slum, but that hasn’t stopped you from seeking out environments like this blog where you’re exposed to hyper-educated people like me thus increasing your vocab.
Thats basically magical thinking. Your vocab is basically a function of the people you hang around with. 90% of the people I grew up with and lived with until I was about 23 would basically not know what the word ambigious means.
Chris Langan lived in a working class town and job all his life and never went college. His vocab at age 20 is not reflective of his IQ.
If I was raised by ashkenazi jews in New York my vocab would be double, maybe triple what it is now. Theres just no way you can deny that.
our vocab is basically a function of the people you hang around with.
In part, but people with high IQ genes tend to hang out with other high IQ people.
90% of the people I grew up with and lived with until I was about 23 would basically not know what the word ambigious means.
And most of those people would also score poorly on a culture reduced tests.
Chris Langan lived in a working class town and job all his life and never went college. His vocab at age 20 is not reflective of his IQ.
Yes it was
If I was raised by ashkenazi jews in New York my vocab would be double, maybe triple what it is now.
As a child perhaps but by age 40 the adoption effect would have virtually vanished.
This is not a matter of opinion, we have studies showing the home you grow up in has a big impact in childhood, a small impact in young adulthood, and no impact by middle age. Hard to believe but true.
the simplest way 2 say this is that vocabulary is acquired but the propensity 2 acquire it and use it functionally is a cognitive aspect that is inherited.
Peeps, Correlation doesn’t necessarily imply causation.
Also say I learned the definitions of 50 words in an hour. Am I more intelligent an hour later?
yes thats what crystallized intelligence measures though does it not?
Well then the studies are wrong and were done incorrectly. Vocab is a cultural aspect as much as a cognitive one. I might believe by age 60 someone could catch up with someone raised by jews in new york but realistically it depends on way too much happening in the persons life.
The basis of quantitative intelligence is memorization. A person’s vocabulary size reflects her ability to memorize words.
not necessarily. a persons vocabulary gives insight in2 how they associate the word with a particular concept especially when the word is more g-loaded or just more intellectually profound.
you cant just memorize words like numbers or whatever you have 2 understand what theyre referring 2 so you have 2 have a grasp of the world around you aka the artifacts of your surroundings.
thus intelligence is just self awareness.
Memorization is association between symbol and object.
Qual intelligence is more related to self awareness than quant.
youre right but the association between a symbol and object is memorization but the rank order we assign the importance of the memory is where intelligence comes from.
intelligence is heuristics and heuristics used effectively so when you think about it you can memorize infinite things but can have it all wrong because you misplaced the importance of one thing over another that is what intelligence is starting 2 become and in actuality should be represented as!
But actually “only quant” intelligence doesnt exist. All intelligence domains are performance-comparable and thus quantifiable at some point, even thought this quantification is mostly fictional. IQ is more technology or pragmatic in nature than sheer science, because it’s a mean to an end and not a natural knowledge.
I think heuristics is part of intelligence, one of its available/evolved cognitive resources, right?
Bear in mind i’m defining intelligence only as memory but this basis, because it is underlying in every intelectual task, even the most simplest one. That’s why our very first identity is our memory.
Bear in mind i”m NOT defining intelligence only as memory.
imagination which is a parallel 2 intelligence does not need memory at least theoretically speaking.
Indirectly, it needs some to oftentimes, specially through very basic knowledge we store like knowing what a cloud is, superficially, or knowing not necessarily by conceptualization but by comparison and differentiation like “i dont know technically what is a cloud but i know what it is by what it is not.
loaded, that indicates knowledge. Intelligence is an ‘ability’.
i know that what context are you even using here
Loaded, say I learned the definitions of 50 words in an hour which I didn’t know before. It doesn’t mean I grew more intelligent it means I have become more knowledgeable. My ‘ability ” to use those words didn’t improve it has stayed the same.
the brain is a muscle your ability 2 use other words does improve by understanding the context of words firstly and then more importantly 2 what intelligence would be 4 other users of this blog it begins 2 create a more flexible learning ability.
have you ever played video games? its corollary 2 a video game improving spatial abilities basically.
cant outsmart that.
Wait, is it 20 or 17? I put 15 instead of 17 because I forgot some numbers were across and down. Either way, I only got three wrong.
what im saying 2 Santo is that prioritizing an association above another is what verbal intelligence becomes. otherwise it truly is memorization.
but the catch here is that memorization is actually the ability 2 crystallize the word in2 different compartments which have different connotations etc.
words have so many connotations that if theyre used improperly they wont make as much sense. its problem solving at its finest where you have 2 complete a phrase with a word that makes the most sense in that situation.
analogies are what verbal IQ becomes about because you have 2 think 2 yourself that something that means one thing can also have a counterpart 2 it that gives it more meaning than b4.
like dichotomies where you have words that are completely opposite a word is not individually understood but only in contrast with the other words in the language.
Mugabe wrote a good comment on what verbal intelligence is some years ago. You should consult that Puppy.
I define verbal intelligence as the ability to use words (or if you’re deaf signs) to your advantage.
So lots of low verbally IQ people are actually verbally smarter??
I dont think so.
Emotional street intelligence is not the same as verbal intelligence even thought all intelligence domains interact each other.
Or also we need to diversify our concepts of verbal intelligence not just the writing ability.
Someone who is good in communication is verbally smart too right?
A person can have a high verbal IQ and not know any language puppy. I think its possible although it might be impaired somewhat because its kind of like a muscle that needs to be tensed in certain ways.
VIQ is what mugabe says and that is the ability to deal with concepts. Lower verbal reasoning is memorising the dictionary which is what you are testing. Higher verbal reasoning is basically promulgating and critiquing theories and concepts and being able to use analogies and simplifications. I just don’t think you know what verbal IQ is.
A lot of people with autism dont have higher verbal IQ abilities. Ask Bruno an open ended question about a concept or theory and you will get garbage.
Pill you are an idiot. concepts are words. the simpler a word is 2 turn into a concept the more loaded that word is intellectually speaking.
Polyglotism and verbal intelligence are correlated but the first is like a savant skill. Most people with high verbal IQ are not polyglots, right?
IQ usually access abilities isolated from real world contexts. It is like analysing the functioning of pieces but not the whole intelligence integrated to real world, i informally call rationality or reasoning skills.
Reasoning is qualitatively superior to learning skills, what IQ superficially access. Reasoning skills is our capacity to evaluate information while learning skills is our capacity to memorize and stuck information in the mind. This helps to explain the correlation between higher IQ and social liberalism indoctrination vulnerability as well any type of ideological indoctrination/fanaticism.
verbal intelligence definitely relies on having receptiveness 2 the concepts ideas and generative bases of thought you may have indeed.
however i think that reasoning is a synergy between verbal and nonverbal if youre just verbally proficient like Pill is but spatially retarded youll have a hard time reasoning because it wont make sense 2 you in a pictural perspective.
it must also be said that learning new languages requires cognitive flexibility like the Stroop task not something like verbal intelligence.
like you said verbal intelligence is the ability to dig deeper into a concept while focusing in on something particular within that framework.
an example would be if i told you the sky was blue the verbal intelligence would be 2 interpret what blue is and then what the sky is and synergize verbal IQ is basically a mathematical representation of words language models and reasonings.
Reasoning is about everything so i can suck on spatial tasks but exccel on non-spatial charged stuff. But like i said reasoning, by my interpretation, is the capacity to evaluate information. So i dont think how your example can interact with my reasoning concept.
“verbal IQ is basically a mathematical representation of words language models and reasonings”
This makes absolutely no sense. A mathematical representation is a numerical representation. While verbal intelligence also has arythmetic, saying it is essentially a “mathematical of words language models and reasonings” is a sounding bold and likely wrong claim.
there are building blocks for how words exist and what they mean and then how they are integrated and compromised. this is how you uniquely come up with sentences meaning that one piece of the conceptual puzzle is added by applying a certain word in a certain context.
its more like a puzzle than math but both make sense. when you see a puzzle you complete it by piecing together its parts same with language!
Evaluating is basically taking something and asking “What does it mean to me?” So it is subjective.
The way pp is using it:
“I define verbal intelligence as the ability to use words (or if you’re deaf signs) to your advantage.”
It just means you can use language in any way that benefits you but does this mean you understand anything?
input (words) priority (will this benefit me) output (results)
It is how most machines work like chat_gpt
But language is really about empathy.
Understanding is the empathy component.
Am I accurate in knowing what the other person is trying to get at?
So the point is: can I come closer to knowing how a person is using words together to form an intended result in others?
If I were to use a different language than English I would need to understand how words together modify the meaning. I would need to know what words to together show what I am intending to convey and what others are intending.
A low empathy person will think words have one meaning and if one output is given one input, they will talk at you, not to you. They will be angry because they think the other person is stupid or ill-intended because they do not know others think differently. But language is recursive to the dependencies of use. It is how it pushes and pulls inside each person that drives intention.
So if you understand certain things and want another person to know what you mean you need to understand how they think, and how they use words, and that creates a model of them inside yourself of how they push and pull internally, then you can predict what must be said to get them to realize what you intend for them to know which is something they did not know before. Use of Language is Motivated.
People that self-indoctrinate are people that use a different set of internal intentions than others. Words are used in different ways in one domain than in another domain. That is why when cross communicating people must understand these internal push and pull mechanisms in that domain. The human brain of people with high verbal intelligence can understand others’ use of language by the way they put words together over time and in response to certain stimuli. because sounds are what are called letters and words are made of letters.
We model others when we know their internal push-pull mechanism and so can predict what inputs will produce what outputs in them but then we will also know that when we change them they will learn from us how we operate also by their experience with us. That is they will change inside themselves the internal model they have of themselves in response to us. We will make them either confirm a preexisting bias or they will be confronted with new data that will complexify existing dependencies (recursive complexification).
Math is a language in its own right. What is behind almost everything and people mistakenly call mathematics, is logics: any coherency which build any element, phenomenon or abstraction of reality. Reality itself is totally built from trillions of specific logical patterns. Without logics, anything could be possible.
logic serves as a way 2 summarize heuristics into larger or smaller heuristics or components would be a better term anyways.
logic serves as a way 2 communicate ideas so language can be used as a tool 2 serve logic.
logic itself is a consequence of cause and effect or a relationship between things that happen when one things leads 2 another. so yes mathematics is a language.
logic can also be worked backwards so its like breaking something down into its infinitesimal point.
the pragmaticism of physics and its actually workings is a good analogy 4 how logic works.
i disagree that with logic anything could be possible. in fact NOTHING would be possible.
illogical thought patterns are an example of this because when you come up with an erroneous conclusion it leads 2 a pathway 2wards nothing or at least nothing in terms of a progression.
“Evaluating is basically taking something and asking “What does it mean to me?” So it is subjective”
So objective evaluation is impossible??
Reasoning skills levels
!. I evaluate Earth flat hypothesis right
2. I dont know if Earth flat hypothesis is right or wrong
3. I evaluate Earth flat hypothesis as factually wrong but i dont know why, It’s like a feeling or a sub understanding i cant integrate its pieces to make sense for me and others.
4. I evaluate Earth flat hypothesis as factually wrong because .. (exposing related facts)
More subjective is your reasoning, more irrational.
You got it very right. Without logics, nothing could be possible.
Because if the structural randomness was the absolute rule so it would be the world’s logics.
@santo
“So objective evaluation is impossible??”
(e)value(ation) means that we take something and put a positive/negative value on it. That means we take something we know and say: is this good or bad? If it is good we accept it if it is bad we reject it. So objective evaluation is like saying “The Earth is flat is good so I believe it” is objectively false but saying “The Earth is a spheroid is good so I believe it” is true objectively but only believe it because it is good. So if you believe things because they are valuable for you to believe then you do not value truth. You only value what is expedient to your bias that may or may not be true.
So “objective evaluation” = finding what is actually good not finding what is objectively true.
Truth and Values are not the same things.
But they are not opposite things either.
The way you define “evaluation” you must believe that what is good is true. But what if what is true is not good? Then you will evaluate things differently if you need that bad truth to go away.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
God wants us to believe the truth.
Satan wants us to believe lies.
The Bible says evolution is not true.
The Bible is good and the word of God.
So evolution is a lie meaning it is evil.
Scientists are deceived into believing in lies.
Scientists who spread lies will not go to heaven.
Not necessarily. Evaluation can be (mostly) subjective but also objective. Seems you are claiming evaluation only can be subjective. If i evaluate things based on my feelings so it’s not objective but subjective.
Objective = to object
Subjective = from subject
So good piece of your comment seems not right. I dont know what you mean in the end but i bet your supernatural inclination moving you to believe evaluation is only subjective.
About reasoning, someone who falsify some truth or fact to accomodate his feelings or subjective impressions is corrupting is own reason or legitimate understanding. It’s like believe that Earth flat hypothesis is right because you want or feel good on it or that mind exist and only on humans, or that environment has an absolute impact on our developments and behaviors.
@santo
To the object, you can evaluate if it fits with a rational comparison. That is you can compare things because “value” is synonymous with the word “ratio”. 1/3 one-third or so. or the hammer will hit the nail because they “fit” together.
but to the subject and evaluation is what you said: my premises are true therefore I am correct because I want the premises to be true (mah argument).
reason = a connection between two things
but it is a connection that has two values
physical: The car hit the wall and so stopped
intentional:
The cat yelled be(cause) it was scared.
The Buttler killed the Sheff (be)cause he wanted to.
what is intelligence?
understanding causes.
evaluate can be a method for finding causes but then we ask what are the hierarchy of causes.
the round peg fits in the round hole
we understand this
if we did not we could not evaluate the purpose of holes and pegs, thus children need to learn mental tools and rules before making evaluations unless an evaluation is learning because in that case evaluation = comparison.
round peg = round hole, because (ratio comparison)
high verbal intelligence means you compared many many ratios within languages to come to proper conclusions.
evaluate = perceive compare conclude
If A then C
If B then C
So if C then A or B
Peg A fits in hole C
Peg B = peg A
Peg B fits in hole C
ratio A and ratio B are invariant in time and space
thus conclude they are equal and if they are equal then we can use them in the same way as to results:
A and B both fit hole C
A and B are invariant to the same task i.e. get the same result.
a language is just a set of many invariant ratios between verbs nouns and modifiers: the way they are used.
“If A then C
If B then C
So if C then A or B”
This can be written as
(A ∧ B) → C
C → (A ∨ B)
This isn’t valid.
What would be the valid form?
If peg A = peg B then do both fit in hole C if peg A or B fit hole C?
“@santo
To the object, you can evaluate if it fits with a rational comparison. That is you can compare things because “value” is synonymous with the word “ratio”. 1/3 one-third or so. or the hammer will hit the nail because they “fit” together.
but to the subject and evaluation is what you said: my premises are true therefore I am correct because I want the premises to be true (mah argument).”
But the value, objectively, is the understanding of the object, itself, knowledge as the end. To the subject, yes, the value is dependent on personal or individual purpose.
“reason = a connection between two things
but it is a connection that has two values”
Not necessarily two things and the connection between. Connecting things is structural to thought so for reasonable thinking, but not its concept.
“what is intelligence?
understanding causes.”
Not just that.
“evaluate can be a method for finding causes but then we ask what are the hierarchy of causes.”
Originally it is just to evaluate or to give value, as you said, but objectively the value must be predominantly independent on subject’s impressions.
“the round peg fits in the round hole
we understand this
if we did not we could not evaluate the purpose of holes and pegs, thus children need to learn mental tools and rules before making evaluations unless an evaluation is learning because in that case evaluation = comparison.
round peg = round hole, because (ratio comparison)”
Ok. But seems you are counterarguing something i didnt claim. Of course, humans dont born fully equipped to evaluate things, but still not totally absent on it.
“high verbal intelligence means you compared many many ratios within languages to come to proper conclusions.”
Can too.
I got 12/15. I don’t know what that’s supposed to translate to. However, one of those questions was retarded.
[redacted by pp, 2023-08-10] But whatever, I guess the crossword gods know best.
Yes I was baffled by that definition also, but that’s how the dictionary defined it. In some cases dictionaries have old or outdated definitions but part of vocabulary is knowing even obsolete meanings and this adds to the test’s ceiling.
Pumpkin do you see me as an equal? i wonder if you actually think i contribute anything worthwhile 2 your blog since ive blogged here 4 almost five years and have added a lot of content that in the eyes of readers can be very pronounced as intellectual and insightful meanderings of what is going on in my mind!
my vocabulary is very high higher than almost all the blog commenters because my fluid intelligence lets me understand the perspective of what words mean and how 2 use them in a way that evokes the most quality.
anyways i just wanna know where we stand. do you want me 2 continue commenting?
because with comments like “[LOADED] is worthless” i find little appreciation within the frame of mind you possess.
and i know that as long as the Internet exists those who read my comments will look @ me as a savior for their worldviews so maybe i dont need your approval but i would like it nonetheless.
I am surprised by the log chart of the bell curve.
No one should have an IQ above 190.
And 120 million people have an IQ of 100.
my open mindedness is so high it does fall at an extreme end of the bell curve.
i am so open minded that i can see a vast vast variety of perspectives.
i am not very curious though so i choose not 2 involve myself in the evil exploits others may have.
15/17
One I wouldn’t get anyway but the last one I figured out using assistance after I gave up, not at all an intuitive guess. Using a crossword puzzle is a funny idea.
am i allowed 2 comment furthermore PP or is a ban still in place?
i wanted 2 say crosswords make it easier and harder because you have assistance in what words are going 2 be easier 2 find while also limiting your potential in focusing on the word itself.
it has more upside than downside
I assumed all of that was an intentional choice on Pumpkin’s part. The more constrained the possible solution is the easier it is to find the word, I don’t relate with the focus part.
Figured out you meant there’s a loss of focus on figuring out the word from the definition alone due to the extra clues. Sorry.
hmm haha i think focusing can be hard because if you think the word is something else due 2 the clues they give you it can throw you off js
loaded, unrelated to the discussion here…what does your most important holybooks say about why the almighty created the universe and/or living beings?
and to my dear christian friends here, what does the bible say about the same thing?
Just asking out of curiosity because i always wondered about this question.
well i was raised a muslim but i denounce all religions strongly. the Islamic holy book which i am well educated in despite my Muslim “brothers” ignorance states something to the effect of Allah having created the Universe and its proprietors fulfilling the requirement of Creation and its abode.
all religions are spinoffs of the same philosophies im sure a Christian will tell you the same thing about how things went down.
Islam is a very strict religion and its impracticality in the modern day is so perverse that it should be disregarded as being practicable.
however it could be true that what these religions preach is actually a real facet of our reality i wouldnt doubt some Force out there claims 2 be benevolent and all-knowing when not really showing the true nature of our reality either.
that is 2 say that the truth may be something bad and twisted we dont know ive seen some really weird things happen and continuously see affirmations of the illogical and irrational perspectives of this world so who knows….truth can always be bent.
These abrahamic religions all derive from danes. Islam, christianity and judaism.
yeah Jews obviously invented religion as being the Chosen Peoples. some religions are like that especially modern day ones.
as we become more narcissistic as individuals in a society that is anthropocentric already we will see religions become very much focused on becoming the Chosen.
One of the most dumbest and violent organized religions were invented by jews. Now wokeism, it was not originally invented by them but has been weaponized by them to genocide whites and take their civilization to themselves.
whites?
Wokeism was also invented by danes. Danes control peoples morality.
They exploit it ruthlessly but enlightment, from which wokeism is derived, was not a jewish invention.
Wokeism has nothing to do with the enlightenment.
Of course it does but it is its absolute corruption. Wokeism is a combination of christianism, hegelian idealism and social justice and reason-over-superstition from enlightment.
Without Jewish influence, woke liberalism would be a minority opinion that no one paid attention to (like Communism), but it would still exist. Jews have worked overtime to make it the ONLY acceptable ideology in polite society today.
loaded, what is the requirement of creation?
Austin, then how do you explain woke liberalism being popular in many countries that have no jewish influence?
Disregard my first submission. Wrote 14 instead of 16.
So the correct score is 16 out of 17?
Yes.
theres so much anti-intellectualism nowadays. no 1 cares how smart or intelligent an individual is any more its all about statistics.
if you have a certain IQ your life will go a certain way apparently but lets say you have cognitive flexibility and can use your intelligence in certain ways….the lack of awareness on other peoples parts 2 the motives and associations of other people is criminal.
did you take any other verbal tests?
i dont think this test or any tests measure my intelligence well but id wager mine is 130.
i was referring 2 my verbal
Cenk Ugher endorsed Marianna Williamson. Thats good.
Are canadians as poor as americans? Whats the welfare state like in Canada Puppy?
In Ireland basically you can be unemployed and live a good life with free housing, healthcare, public transport and education.
We have never had a left wing government in Ireland but our welfare state is as strong as the nordic countries.
I got 13 right. I think it took me more than half an hour.
you do know im smarter than you right PP? im just saying. you can ban me all you want but i will live in your head 4ever.
My guess is that the median will be around 14-15 and that a perfect 17 will equate to a VIQ around 150.
i never got why people think im unintelligent. im far more intelligent than most people and my other cognitive qualities (i dont agree with PP that cognition is intelligence) are so far above others its ridiculous!
at its end i think that its just prejudice. its why racism is such a double-edged sword because i see the good in believing in HBD but then theres just blatant racism that the Lurkers of the world actually practice.
they think im dumb 4 being Pakistani that idiot Pill will say its because im actually dumb furthering my belief that this is just stupid misrepresentations and racisms beyond the belief of any rational mind!
my intellect is so high that its not even funny.
Probably because you say dumb things.
no its because dumbasses like you think theyre smart when they lack even a drop of self awareness.
I got all but 3 which seems somewhat intelligent, yet when filling out the form I somehow thought there were 25 words in total so for number correct I put 23, actually proving I am somewhat retarded…..
people try 2 outsmart me all the time. like they think im dumb or something. theyre conjobs. they dont understand that the only thing between me getting 2 the right answer and making them suffer are my morals.
i am way more socially perceptive and brilliant in every way than any one ever could understand.
i can see motives far and wide. i know my social IQ is 140 in theoretical understanding of the society and individuals.
i see clearly what others cannot.
16/17 enjoyable
if i were a maths genius i would be a trillionaire
Even if it was in my mother language i wouldnt be good on it, very bad on puzzwords.
i dont have poor social judgment because of my processing speed i can learn and unlearn positive and negative experiences
zipf’s law states that the value of the nth entry is inversely proportional to n
frequency = 1 / rank
probability = 1 / ((rank + 1) / vocabulary)
average vocabulary = 20,000
table of word ranks
the: 1
of: 2
and: 3
a: 4
to: 5
be: 6
in: 7
have: 8
I: 9
The probabilities of the words in the table being in a vocabulary of 20,000 words, according to Zipf’s law, are as follows:
The: 0.9537
Of: 0.90754
And: 0.8613
A: 0.8150
To: 0.7688
Be: 0.7226
In: 0.6764
Have: 0.6301
I: 0.5839
ive posted rap songs on Animes blog and i want 2 be able 2 post more here.
id like 2 just post 1 i think reminds of an elton john song ive heard 2.
theyre both called rocketman. this one is about Takeoff and Melo and i discussed the dude on this blog b4.
he got shot and killed which is just fatalism in effect.
theyve got like four of these duplicates out there rn.
i genuinely think this is the end of the world so in your final seconds listen 2 this song 2 learn about what life is about.
PP im wishing you the best in every way i hope your scientific endeavors end up turning out well 4 u.
i hope Mug is alright even though he suffers from a lot of depression and self hate as well.
we can all be better humans. just the functionable facets of our society are deteriorating.
everyone is dropping out. its dangerous.
why can’t one of the words be [redacted by pp, 2023-08-13] instead of [redacted by pp, 2023-08-13]
it works too
Because that wasn’t one of the 17 random words I selected from the English language. I let complete randomness determine the words and the dictionary determine the definition. If that definition can apply to more than one word, you just deduce which one is right from which fits best into the crossword puzzle
PP what are your thoughts on interdimensional beings?
PP I can’t play the puzzle because too many have already taken it
OMG is there a limit on how many people can do it? Well good thing you already took it.
I did? It was the same puzzle?
Yes
Anyway it should be working now but like I said you already took it.
Het pumpkin!
Have you ever heard of a 67 cm head?
Take a look at this:
More like 66 cm but still freakishly huge, assuming it’s natural and not caused by steroids.
i dont think PP cares about head size as much as you think he does. he is far 2 pragmatic 2 be stuck in that zone of thought.
most of you are autistic though so it probably matters very little 2 you what others feel=autists have no empathy
So you criticised me for bashing autists and yet this guy loaded is allowed to bash autists continually.
its only right.
She does. Her obsession with oprah is because of head size not because oprah is black like that dumbest mug thinks.
Really??
Yes dear santo.
Melo stop judging me. i am way smarter than you but dont have the technical or spatial intelligences you possess.
you have autism first of all. rest my case.
its like everyone says dumb things but why judge them so heavily 4 it.
on the point though i dont say that many “dumb” things just things that are shockingly true and disturbing 2 some.
Melo doesn’t have autism at all. Hes just a stupid person.
Where is Mugabe? Why hasn’t he commented?
I saw him on RR’s blog a few weeks ago asking if my blog was still active. The long break may have convinced him I stopped blogging.
You want all his crap again on this site?
Look puppy we all make mistakes. This test doesn’t really test verbal intelligence. You can admit it and we can move on.
The Weschler battery of tests was way more extensive than this. Guess what score I got?
I bet if I did this crossword I would get less and you would idiotically think your test was more accurate haha.
Vocabulary is an excellent test for native born Americans. Now if I was giving the Wechsler in Japan, I would exclude the vocab section before translating the test into Japanese because it’s not suitable for cross-cultural research. A U.S. based vocab test might even be biased in Ireland. Jensen was intrigued that a very intelligent british scientist he tested failed the vocab item “caboose”
Because knowing the word caboose has nothing to do with your VIQ and more to do with what type of life you live.
People with high verbal IQ not necessarily memorize rare words intentionally, it just because their specific storage for words is bigger but yes, many them like to signalize social and supposed intelectual status using these words. But, for real world verbal intelligence, knowing or learning rare words and using them in social interactions tend to be more counterproductive specially if you do it with less “demanding” cognitive social circles. Also, knowing rare words is mostly useless to the verbal intelligence utilities, BUT because we live in a world dominated by narcisists it is considered the ultimate expression of erudition.
no using more specific words means there is more specification in thought. simple as that.
Its like that social intelligence test you gave me with the questions…that basically tested if you were mentally retarded. [redacted by pp, 2023-08-13]
Because I made that test when I was 12. It was not about making the most sophisticated test, it was about recapturing my childhood.
good job pp
When I was 12 is when I started theorizing about Artificial Intelligence.
you all fail 2 understand how stupid the average person is
Pingback: Challenging the Myth of Objective Testing with an Absolute Scale in the Face of Non-Cognitive Influences « NotPoliticallyCorrect
Hey Pumpkin. Is there a time limit for this test?
I probably should have imposed one but it’s a little late now. I did intend for the test to be taken in one sitting.
Would that affect the norms then (inflated scores)?
If different people took the test different ways that could affect the norms but preliminary data (r = 0.86 with other verbal tests) suggests the norms are good though sample size was small
What subtest of the WAIS verbal reasoning section would you say correlates best/is similar to the crossword IQ test?
vocab
And I assume that TAVIS corresponds to the information subtest? This means that you need to make a test that is somewhat similar to the similarities subtest (no pun intended). Do you plan on that?
Hard to know which WAIS subtest would best correlate with TAVIS. Information is a strong candidate but I could also see Vocab or Similarities. All three load strongly on the verbal knowledge factor so the distinction between them might be illusory.
As for a Similarities test, I’ve created a test measuring abstract reasoning which I will unleash after hopefully getting feedback from Ganzir.
I ask because of the discrepancy that I have in scores between this test and the TAVIS. Would I just average out both the scores to obtain an accurate reflection of my verbal abilities?
because the tests are imperfectly correlated your true verbal would likely be more extreme than the average of the two tests though not as extreme as the more extreme one.