"Marielle Fois" <im99_foa at nada.kth.se> skrev i melding
news:Pine.SOL.4.30.0106291701480.2911-100000 at my.nada.kth.se...
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Brian wrote:
>> > So, what do you think of the book "The Bell Curve" ??
> > It poses these facts, and no matter how one wishes to twist and turn, it
> > seems that we males are more developed, specially spatially.
>> I don't know of the book, but if there is something you can do with
> statistics is to twist and turn them to get the results you want.
Well, you can't twist and turn the numbers, because they would be rendered
useless, right ?
> Be careful, comments like "it seems that we males are more developed,
> specially spacially" usually trigger feminists extreme reactions (I
> am not a feminist ;) The contrary could also be said "women seem
> to be more developed than men, specially verbally".
It was made to be inflamatory, and as I can see, you've read that I think
that we have different kind of the usage of the intelligence.
Hence, the score should be calculated differently, on a two-dimensional
frame of reference.
Good for you that you're not a feminist.
But as a female you'd show that you're interested in standing up for females
> I have read a couple of articles that suggest this difference between
> men and women. In reality, the difference was not between women and
> men itself, but between individuals exposed to higher and lower
> levels of testosterone. In their studies, women that had been exposed
> to higher levels of testosterone during their lifes seemed to develop
> better spacial skills. Thus, they proposed that men develop better
> spacial skills because they are evidently exposed to higher levels of
> testosterone than women are.
I've read something similar.
But it is not just testosterone, but also estrogene.
I think that the level of these hormones are essential for the developement
of male and female babies.
One theory is that the sex is decided pretty much at the beginning and that
the mothers body respond by raising/lowering the level of the hormones.
Sometimes the mechanism is interrupted and the child will develope a
'male' brain in a 'female' body - hence the idea of living in the wrong
> I think there is nothing wrong with this idea, diversity is good. The
> wrong thing is to only encourage studies about what skills may be
> better in men and not encourage studies about what skills may be
> better in women. That makes a kind of discrimination. The same idea
> happens with iq tests, if you base your iq test on skills that are
> better in men, then of course you will have statistics that say that
> men are more intelligent than women. As Richard Norman wrote, "what
> does iq really mean?"
Well, I can't disagree with you.
So in reality wouldn't it be better to undiscriminate by segregating classes
Females could better develope their skills vs the males.
Maybe not completely, but on a percentage-base around 45-48%.
> About the multiple dimention approach, I don't really know what to
Think of the usage of the brain with TWO scores, one verbal and another
Arthur.Jensen is an expert on psychometrics, and should know far better
than me how IQ (or the g-factor as he calls it) should be measured.