I maybe could have come up with a better topic for a post than an out-of-office president’s standardized test scores, but I just discovered this in article at Wikipedia on George W. Bush:

Though no official “IQ” test score for Bush has been found, the score he received on his SAT during his final year of prep school at the exclusive Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts is known.  He scored 1206, which has been correlated to an I.Q. of 120.  The score that Bush received on his qualifying test for the military suggests that his IQ was in the mid 120′s, placing him in the 95th percentile of the population …  An article published in the journal Political Psychology, estimated Bush’s IQ at 125. The same study estimated the IQ of Bush’s predecessor Bill Clinton at 149.  …  A lecturer in American politics at Warwick University said: “…[H]e is by no means a dimwit.”

OK, taking this apart.  First, Bill Clinton should have been assumed to have a disadvantage due to his lower socioeconomic bracket in his youth.  All else between them is roughly commensurate: they were both WASPs of about the same age living in roughly the same part of the country, so bias should presumably be roughly commensurate.  Whatever the I.Q. test is measuring — and it is measuring something, it simply fails to reduce absolute “intelligence” to a scalar — it puts Clinton way out in front.  For most I.Q. tests, σ=16.  Cross referencing this with the claims in the cited article show that this is the σ value being used (play with this to find out why.)

Points:

• Bush is at 1.6σ, Clinton is at 3+σ.  This is statistically huge.
• Clinton’s 3σ is 99.9th percentile.  That’s “smarter” than 999 in a thousand people.  Is this starting to sound more like a president to you?  More to the point, perhaps, is it starting to sound more like — Clinton’s estimated IQ by one single paper in a psychology journal?  [And mcgees.org zooms off in a different direction!  Anyone still reading this far?  Anyone comment before reading this far?]
• Zooming still — why the fuck do we care so much about the answer to this question?  It shows up all over the Internet.  Obama hasn’t released any scores, so far as I can tell, and people have estimated his IQ at between — 116 and 160.  Gee, that’s useful!  Tell you what: give me your estimate, and I’ll tell you for whom you voted.
• Bill Clinton did better on his SATs than George W. Bush did.  Great.  I believe I beat both of them.  Does that mean that I should have been president instead of Bill Clinton?  Not remotely.  Not only because I was 14 years old at the time, either.  So much more than (trivial) math problems and (fairly trivial) analogy questions are required for someone to head the Executive branch.  Gah.  Isn’t this completely obvious?  One needs to work well in crisis, to manage people, to handle public attention well, to get by on little sleep, to be responsive when required, to keep a great deal of information in one’s head, to … well, it’s starting not to sound like George W. again, is it not?  But that’s just snark.  The whole idea of reducing something as complex as “intelligence” to a single number — and then pretending that corresponds with the ability to lead a fucking country — is lunacy.  I therefore request you to:
• Read Stephen Jay Gould’s  The Mismeasure of Man.  I have been strongly anti-I.Q. since reading it in college.  I left Mensa upon reading it (in that year of great self-examination, I left the church as well).

Here’s something that is valid, though:

• Bush’s SAT scores put him in the 95th percentile.  Good.  That’s one in twenty.  A thinking person probably should not put all that much in the number.  But you know who does do such things?  Schools.
• Schools.  Since when does “one in twenty” get you into the Ivy League?  I mean, unless you have a famous legacy father and grandfather?  What might one expect of someone literally grandfathered into Yale?
• I’d expect “gentleman’s Cs”.  Which is what Bush got.  This is because the thing most accurately measured by the SAT is, perhaps, how well one takes tests.
• I’ve taken my 1590 SAT scores and my 148-150 IQ as carte blanche to write about how dumb I think reliance on these tests is.  Whatever else may motivate me, the grapes are sweet.

(The intended title of the post was “The IQ Obsession”, but that rather gives the game away, yes?)

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:54:04 +0000
Under politics
Comments feed | Trackback
Log in