HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720.jpg
1.72 MB
Extraction Summary
6
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Book page / report page (evidence production)
File Size:
1.72 MB
Summary
This document appears to be page 30 of a book or report titled 'Are the Androids Dreaming Yet?'. It discusses the science of intelligence (IQ), specifically referencing Lewis Terman's longitudinal study from the 1920s and the concept that high IQ does not guarantee life success or creativity. It cites examples of Nobel Prize winners who were excluded from high-IQ studies. The page bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720' stamp, indicating it is part of a document production for the House Oversight Committee, likely related to investigations involving scientific funding or connections.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Carol Vorderman | UK game show presenter |
Cited as an example of someone who would have a good 'Gq' score for quantitative numerical skills.
|
| Lewis Terman | Researcher |
Began the longest running study of intelligence and its relationship to life success in the 1920s.
|
| William Shockley | Nobel Prize Winner (Physics) |
Tested too low to be chosen for Terman's study but won a Nobel Prize in 1956.
|
| Luis Alvarez | Nobel Prize Winner (Physics) |
Tested too low to be chosen for Terman's study but won a Nobel Prize in 1968.
|
| Albert Einstein | Scientist |
Mentioned as an anecdote where a teacher stated he would never amount to anything.
|
| Sir John Gurdon | Scientist / Nobel Prize Winner |
School report called him 'too stupid' for science; later discovered monoclonal antibodies.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Stanford University |
Location from where the children in Terman's study were selected.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720'.
|
Timeline (3 events)
1920s
Start of Lewis Terman's long-running study of intelligence.
Stanford University area
Lewis Terman
1500 children
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Area from which Terman's study subjects were chosen.
|
Relationships (2)
Shockley tested too low to be chosen for Terman's study.
Alvarez tested too low to be chosen for Terman's study.
Key Quotes (3)
"Is there a single master intelligence from which the rest follow?"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720.jpg
Quote #1
"Success in creative endeavors seems to reflect strength of character and creative aptitude rather than raw brainpower."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720.jpg
Quote #2
"Famously two children, William Shockley and Luis Alvarez, tested too low to be chosen for the study but went on to win Nobel Prizes for Physics in 1956 and 1968, respectively."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,710 characters)
30 Are the Androids Dreaming Yet?
contestant a high ‘Glr’ score – ‘lr’ denoting for long-term retrieval. Carol
Vorderman, a UK game show presenter famous for mental arithmetic,
would have a good ‘Gq’ score, ‘q’ for quantitative numerical skills. With
all these types of intelligence to choose from it begs the question, “Is there
a single master intelligence from which the rest follow?”
Vorderman, a UK game show presenter famous for mental arithmetic,
would have a good ‘Gq’ score, ‘q’ for quantitative numerical skills. With
all these types of intelligence to choose from it begs the question, “Is there
a single master intelligence from which the rest follow?”
Political correctness plays a part here. It feels rather elitist to say
smart people are good at everything. It is far nicer to think we each have
our individual talents and some just have a few more than others. But
that’s not what the science tells us. ‘Group Intelligence’ – the overall G
score – does appear to be the underlying cause of the other types of
intelligence, and smart people do tend to be good all-rounders. However,
there is one major flaw in the analysis; the studies only measure the
subjects’ ability to pass academic tests, they don't look at our success in
real-life, nor our creativity.
smart people are good at everything. It is far nicer to think we each have
our individual talents and some just have a few more than others. But
that’s not what the science tells us. ‘Group Intelligence’ – the overall G
score – does appear to be the underlying cause of the other types of
intelligence, and smart people do tend to be good all-rounders. However,
there is one major flaw in the analysis; the studies only measure the
subjects’ ability to pass academic tests, they don't look at our success in
real-life, nor our creativity.
Lewis Terman began the longest running study of intelligence
and its relationship to life success back in the 1920s. It continues to this
day. A group of 1500 children with high IQs were selected and tracked
throughout their lives. Terman assumed their high IQs would result in
them being very successful. They certainly did well, but studies show
they did no better than if they had been chosen randomly from the same
area (all the children came from around Stanford University). Famously
two children, William Shockley and Luis Alvarez, tested too low to be
chosen for the study but went on to win Nobel Prizes for Physics in 1956
and 1968, respectively.
and its relationship to life success back in the 1920s. It continues to this
day. A group of 1500 children with high IQs were selected and tracked
throughout their lives. Terman assumed their high IQs would result in
them being very successful. They certainly did well, but studies show
they did no better than if they had been chosen randomly from the same
area (all the children came from around Stanford University). Famously
two children, William Shockley and Luis Alvarez, tested too low to be
chosen for the study but went on to win Nobel Prizes for Physics in 1956
and 1968, respectively.
There are many similar anecdotes: Apparently stupid people go on
to great things. Einstein’s teacher famously stated he would never amount
to anything and Sir John Gurdon’s school report said he was ‘too stupid’
for science. He went on to discover monoclonal antibodies for which he
was awarded a Nobel Prize! Scientists have now devised the alternative
theory of an intelligence tidemark. Once above this level – an IQ of
about 130 – you can pretty much do anything you want to. This might be
because one very important type of intelligence – creative intelligence – is
not highly correlated with the rest. Creative people tend to be sufficiently
intelligent for their field but once above that threshold the relationship
breaks down. Success in creative endeavors seems to reflect strength of
character and creative aptitude rather than raw brainpower.
to great things. Einstein’s teacher famously stated he would never amount
to anything and Sir John Gurdon’s school report said he was ‘too stupid’
for science. He went on to discover monoclonal antibodies for which he
was awarded a Nobel Prize! Scientists have now devised the alternative
theory of an intelligence tidemark. Once above this level – an IQ of
about 130 – you can pretty much do anything you want to. This might be
because one very important type of intelligence – creative intelligence – is
not highly correlated with the rest. Creative people tend to be sufficiently
intelligent for their field but once above that threshold the relationship
breaks down. Success in creative endeavors seems to reflect strength of
character and creative aptitude rather than raw brainpower.
Physical Basis of Intelligence
The high correlation between different sorts of academic intelligence
suggests we might find a physical process within the brain leading to
The high correlation between different sorts of academic intelligence
suggests we might find a physical process within the brain leading to
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015720
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document