Of Boris, clever buffoons and stupid intellectuals ...
Boris Johnson is part of a long English tradition of clever men who either try hard to avoid showing off their intelligence or actively pretend to be buffoons.
Anyone who listened to or read the whole of his speech the other day should have realised that it was far more inclusive and less extreme than you might think if you just caught the quote about IQ.
Which is just as well because the quote about IQ was in fact completely and utterly meaningless.
The people who created IQ tried to set it up as a normal distribution with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
On that basis BY DEFINITION about a sixth of the population have IQs below 85 and slightly over 2% have IQs above 130.
In his speech to the centre of Policy Studies Boris Johnson said that "Whatever you may think of the value of IQ tests it is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85 while about 2% …"
and he then departed from the text of his speech to ask whether anyone in his City audience had a low IQ. To muted laughter he asked: "Over 16% anyone? Put up your hands." He then resumed his speech to continue about the 2% who have an IQ above 130.
Unfortunately, and just going on the published text of the speech, it was logically equivalent to
Whatever you may think of the value of IQ tests it is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that approximately 16% of our species have an IQ score in the bottom sixth while about 2% have an IQ in the top fiftieth."
Sorry Boris, much of the rest of your speech was brilliant but that point is equivalent to the boss who complained that 40% of the sick days taken by his employees were on Mondays or Fridays. It isn't relevant to anything at all except possibly an academic discussion on testing the spread of characteristics in human populations.
And actually, although intelligence is important, effort and what you do with your intelligence are, if anything, even more important.
In the comedy film "A Fish called Wanda" there is a character called Otto who is what at first sounds like an oxymoron, a stupid intellectual. This character is not very bright but he is fascinated by using his brain, reads very challenging books, has clearly remembered much of what he read in them, and even understood a small portion of it.
Otto is a figure of fun to the viewer and some of the other characters in the film because, and only because, he does not realise that he isn't nearly as bright as the person he aspires to be.
But this humour misses an important point. A person who has been gifted with mediocre or poor intellectual talents but is fascinated by intelligence and by using and improving it, and thereby makes the very best of the intelligence he has, will almost certainly achieve a far higher level of intelligence than someone who does not make that effort. He might even achieve more than someone whose native gifts were far greater but who does not use them. Otto may be a joke, but he is far smarter than he would be were he not fascinated by using what intellect he has.
I'm not holding Otto up as a role model - he is a figure of fun from a comedy film and has certain other serious problems on the role model front (like being a hit-man, for instance.)
But we should and must recognise that there are many people who can achieve a lot by working hard and by using what intellect they have to the very top of their potential. That potential is in everyone, whatever their IQ score.
Anyone who listened to or read the whole of his speech the other day should have realised that it was far more inclusive and less extreme than you might think if you just caught the quote about IQ.
Which is just as well because the quote about IQ was in fact completely and utterly meaningless.
The people who created IQ tried to set it up as a normal distribution with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
On that basis BY DEFINITION about a sixth of the population have IQs below 85 and slightly over 2% have IQs above 130.
In his speech to the centre of Policy Studies Boris Johnson said that "Whatever you may think of the value of IQ tests it is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85 while about 2% …"
and he then departed from the text of his speech to ask whether anyone in his City audience had a low IQ. To muted laughter he asked: "Over 16% anyone? Put up your hands." He then resumed his speech to continue about the 2% who have an IQ above 130.
Unfortunately, and just going on the published text of the speech, it was logically equivalent to
Whatever you may think of the value of IQ tests it is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that approximately 16% of our species have an IQ score in the bottom sixth while about 2% have an IQ in the top fiftieth."
Sorry Boris, much of the rest of your speech was brilliant but that point is equivalent to the boss who complained that 40% of the sick days taken by his employees were on Mondays or Fridays. It isn't relevant to anything at all except possibly an academic discussion on testing the spread of characteristics in human populations.
And actually, although intelligence is important, effort and what you do with your intelligence are, if anything, even more important.
In the comedy film "A Fish called Wanda" there is a character called Otto who is what at first sounds like an oxymoron, a stupid intellectual. This character is not very bright but he is fascinated by using his brain, reads very challenging books, has clearly remembered much of what he read in them, and even understood a small portion of it.
Otto is a figure of fun to the viewer and some of the other characters in the film because, and only because, he does not realise that he isn't nearly as bright as the person he aspires to be.
But this humour misses an important point. A person who has been gifted with mediocre or poor intellectual talents but is fascinated by intelligence and by using and improving it, and thereby makes the very best of the intelligence he has, will almost certainly achieve a far higher level of intelligence than someone who does not make that effort. He might even achieve more than someone whose native gifts were far greater but who does not use them. Otto may be a joke, but he is far smarter than he would be were he not fascinated by using what intellect he has.
I'm not holding Otto up as a role model - he is a figure of fun from a comedy film and has certain other serious problems on the role model front (like being a hit-man, for instance.)
But we should and must recognise that there are many people who can achieve a lot by working hard and by using what intellect they have to the very top of their potential. That potential is in everyone, whatever their IQ score.
Comments
I would say he knew exactly what he was saying, its what he does best, but, there is no way he is a fool.
even "screaming lord such" was a self confessed monster raving lunatic, but he was no fool either.
so much better to play the fool and be the wise man, rather than do a Caroline Flint, and criticise a proposal, by stating one of its most obvious benefits. that's more "playing the wise man and being the fool"
n.b. when i type "wise man" then its simple short hand and can refer to either gender, I am sure any female reader can forgive me this.