“Brain damage makes my brain stop working properly. If I have brain damage, I wouldn’t be able to reason like this, therefore I cannot have brain damage. The CIA just told my doctor to say that I do.”
I have, every 2 years or so since 2002, taken a series of IQ tests and averaged the results together. (Side note: in 1997, an in-person IQ test rated me at 155. This isn’t calibrated to the other tests, of course, but it’s an interesting anecdote.)
In 2002, my IQ according to this process was 148. In 2004, it was 150. In 2006, it was 145. In 2009, it was 135. In 2011, it was 120. Today, it was 115.
I keep asking myself “now what”, but I’m not even sure I’m qualified to answer that question anymore. (This will sound hilariously cliche’d, but… I don’t FEEL any dumber. It’s just become more and more frustrating to think about deep problems. I feel like my domain expertise is just as good as it ever was—but how the hell could I TELL, if the very instrument which measures my expertise is the instrument which is failing?)
I have, every 2 years or so since 2002, taken a series of IQ tests and averaged the results together.
All the same test? Those are troubling results indeed, since the 2pt change from 2002-2004 looks like a practice effect, but a 35pt fall is surely not a practice effect.
It’s just become more and more frustrating to think about deep problems. I feel like my domain expertise is just as good as it ever was—but how the hell could I TELL, if the very instrument which measures my expertise is the instrument which is failing?
Presumably you’d measure your domain expertise by your domain results. That’s how most experts get by: lots of domain knowledge, not so much need for fluid intelligence.
The problem is that, in many situations, I was so poor at playing political games that I wound up accepting other people’s political measurements of my domain expertise, instead of accurate, objective measurements. I’ve eventually developed a sort of neurotic “learned helplessness” that makes it nigh-impossible to accept accurate, objective measurements of any of my capacities, if they would have a positive connotation.
Well, there you just said that you don’t have the patience for those type of problems, which (unless your area of expertise is identifying patterns of lines) doesn’t necessarily mean that you are not extremely well-suited to the work that you do. If you are worried about specific cognitive deficits, test for those—an IQ test is not going to help identify that.
“Brain damage makes my brain stop working properly. If I have brain damage, I wouldn’t be able to reason like this, therefore I cannot have brain damage. The CIA just told my doctor to say that I do.”
There’s a good check for this.
I have, every 2 years or so since 2002, taken a series of IQ tests and averaged the results together. (Side note: in 1997, an in-person IQ test rated me at 155. This isn’t calibrated to the other tests, of course, but it’s an interesting anecdote.)
In 2002, my IQ according to this process was 148. In 2004, it was 150. In 2006, it was 145. In 2009, it was 135. In 2011, it was 120. Today, it was 115.
I keep asking myself “now what”, but I’m not even sure I’m qualified to answer that question anymore. (This will sound hilariously cliche’d, but… I don’t FEEL any dumber. It’s just become more and more frustrating to think about deep problems. I feel like my domain expertise is just as good as it ever was—but how the hell could I TELL, if the very instrument which measures my expertise is the instrument which is failing?)
All the same test? Those are troubling results indeed, since the 2pt change from 2002-2004 looks like a practice effect, but a 35pt fall is surely not a practice effect.
Presumably you’d measure your domain expertise by your domain results. That’s how most experts get by: lots of domain knowledge, not so much need for fluid intelligence.
The problem is that, in many situations, I was so poor at playing political games that I wound up accepting other people’s political measurements of my domain expertise, instead of accurate, objective measurements. I’ve eventually developed a sort of neurotic “learned helplessness” that makes it nigh-impossible to accept accurate, objective measurements of any of my capacities, if they would have a positive connotation.
Well, there you just said that you don’t have the patience for those type of problems, which (unless your area of expertise is identifying patterns of lines) doesn’t necessarily mean that you are not extremely well-suited to the work that you do. If you are worried about specific cognitive deficits, test for those—an IQ test is not going to help identify that.