655
I didn't get a job I applied for a few years ago for a broadly similar reason. Also they thought (correctly) that I didn't know a lot about web development.
So I was rejected for being simultaneously overqualified and underqualified.
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
655 points (96.3% liked)
Today I Learned
17770 readers
1050 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Maybe he should consider a career in writing high fantasy novels instead.
He could try a joint series with Brandon Sanderson!
Smart people think too much to go along with the propaganda and indoctrination
"Great minds think for themselves"
Great minds and intelligence are different. Many intelligent people like to do the thing they like to do and not think about other things. The NSA is filled with these people. Other smart people think their way into justifying awful things like von Neumann and Edmond Teller who were both strong proponents of hydrogen bombs.
Not applying to become a cop in the first place is the ultimate intelligence test
What's your alternative to having cops?
Transformative justice
This is widely cited and I agree it happened and it's messed up, but I think it would be more interesting to see some kind of broader analysis of how common this practice is, which I haven't been able to find solid information on. I've seen this a number of times and there are always comments offering speculation on how the system works, and maybe a few anecdotes, but I've talked to people who are skeptical that this is a larger phenomenon and I can't exactly offer anything to prove it to them.
Not sure we should be doing IQ test for Police officers, EQ would be much more important, you'd rather have a slightly less intelligent police officer who tries to relate to you rather than an intelligent quasi sociopath happy to unload their magazine into you at first sign of trouble, wouldn't you?
Pretty sure IQ testing has a racist origin anyway, so let's just leave it behind
The problem with EQ is that it's relatively new and there isn't many out there measuring it in a meaningful way. We know what it is. But like a thermometer measures the temperature someone had to figure what those tolerances are for each temperature. No one has done that with EQ in any meaningful way the last time I checked.
you'd rather have a slightly less intelligent police officer who tries to relate to you rather than an intelligent quasi sociopath
Sure, I would, but no way the sociopaths at the top would want that
That's a fair argument, but what I'm saying is more wondering to what extent this is really how things work and how that can be confirmed, than making a statement about how things should be. Every time I see this discussion everything is extrapolated from this single court case about a single police department.
Has the average intelligence increased? As in, someone who scored a 100 in 2024 would definitely be smarter than someone who scored a 100 in 1969.
Just cast LeadBeGone!! on a country, and watch the IQ rise.
In general, yes. Average IQ increases by a point or two every few years, so the people who design the tests need to consistently create harder and harder tests to maintain a good baseline.
It’s a large part of why many people say IQ is a bad metric for intelligence; It really just tests your ability to solve problems within the context of your upbringing and life experience. A carpenter or machinist who constantly uses geometry in their day-to-day life will breeze through any geometry-based questions, for instance. And as jobs have become more complex and efficient, people have gotten better at basic problem solving.
Average IQ cannot increase or decrease. The test is calibrated so that 100 is always the average. It's for this reason and many others that comparing historical testing data is difficult.
In the revised version of his book "The mismeasure of man" (about biodeterminism and measurement) Gould was asked why he didn't draw the obvious comparison between IQ and phrenology. His answer was that such a comparison would be unfair... to phrenology. The methods of phrenology were bunk, but it's theory (that different regions of the brain were responsible for different functions) was sound. IQ fails both in methodology and theory.
I understand that, but that means that the test has to be adjusted, which means that the middle point keeps moving. Similar to currency: $100 is $100, in 1920 or 2024 they are the same, but they also aren’t the same. Our current IQ would yield a higher score the further we go into the past, and a lower score as we travel to the future.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
The short answer is "Yes". Scores rise about 3-pts every decade and the "Q" is adjusted accordingly. That said, modern education and modern intelligence testing aren't independent of one another. It is very possible to train for an IQ test and improve your score (a thing that was originally argued as impossible when these tests were formulated). And - both consciously and unconsciously - we've geared our education system around improvements on standardized exams.
There's also a host of environmental improvements - better nutrition, fewer diseases, less heavy metal poisoning - which all contribute to higher cognition. These latter factors are suggested in no small part thanks to a leveling off of the Flynn Effect in later years, both thanks to marginal declines in all of the above and thanks to the diminishing returns once individuals reach peak performance.
But intelligence testing is also a very sketchy and misunderstood field, with lots of scams surrounding its practical application and enormous stigmas associated with any population that scores "below average".
Much like polygraph testing and dowsing (yes, American police still use dosing rods), its a methodology that police seem to cling to long after it has worn out its usefulness in practical terms.
Aptitude tests aren't measures of education.
No, but human intelligence increases over time. Just wondering if it’s been long enough since the invention of the test.
2000 called, it wants it's 24 year old article back.
I remember reading this on Fark.com
Same deal here right before they spilled beer on the server.
I hadn't noticed how old this was, I wonder if they still have the same policy.
Hold on. Can't we all just go back to that time instead?
Only if the time loop repeats on September 10, 2001. I wouldn’t want to relive the past 23 years.
Yeah I thought it was a mistake when I saw the article date.
view more: next ›