Politics of Intelligence - SECRETS OF A MUSEUM JUNKIE

My son at the Hong Kong Science Museum using his energy to make things work.

Politics of Intelligence

Last week’s newsletter focused on the plight of 32 million illiterate Americans. I explained how those neglected during childhood often suffer brain impairments that cause societal problems later. For the first time in many years these forgotten citizens have caught the attention of politicians. The subject of jobs and pay equity has come to the forefront of their platforms. It is important to note that illiteracy is not to be confused with intelligence. Though one may impact the other, there is not an absolute correlation. Many factors come into play when considering intelligence, including where your were born, the socio economic position of your family, how education is valued, determination to succeed, and the quality of training you receive as you go through the school system. Testing has played both a good and a divisive role by categorizing people.
IQ tests were started in 1904 when when the French government commissioned Alfred Biney to design a system to help identify intellectually normal children from those who were more challenged. Mensa’s IQ scale is as follows:

Intelligence People in each category

below 55 .1 %
55-70% 2 %
70-85 14 %
85-100 34 %
100-115 34 %
115-129 14 %
130- 145 2 %
145 + .1 %

Of interest: Einstein’s IQ was 160; Madonna – 140; Steve Martin – 142; Sharon Stone – 154; Arnold Schwarzenegger & Matt Damon – 135; Bill Gates -160; Adolph Hitler -141; Bobby Fischer 187; Bill Clinton 137; Paul Allen 170

Other tests were developed to evaluate factors that are not apparent on the standard IQ test. Howard Gardner, proposes his theory of multiple intelligence that tests for other intelligent factors such as:

Kinaesthetic – Body Smart
Linguistic – Word Smart
Logical – Number Smart
Interpersonal – People Smart
Intrapersonal – Myself Smart
Musical – Music Smart
Visual/Spatial – Picture Smart
Naturalistic – Nature Smart

No one wants to label others and say they are not capable of succeeding. However, just as it helps be aware of circumstances surrounding how you were raised, there is benefit in knowing your intelligence strengths when choosing a career.

There are those who take exception to these tests, warning that because culture and literacy affect outcomes they should not be depended on by educators or employers in determining whether to admit a student to university or to make a job offer. Some teachers have concerns that children labeled less intelligent at a young age will be stigmatized throughout life. On the positive side are those who use results to individualize instruction.

My interest, however, is centered on jobs, rather than intelligence. I want to know if there is a correlation between intelligence and future employment opportunities. Since millions of citizens take these test there is a lot of data to support results. It is reasonable to assume that the general population falls into a normal distribution curve. There will always be people at the low and high ends. Tag programs and challenging jobs are available to those at the upper levels of the spectrum. They are the fortunate group.

It is the normal range of the IQ scale that spawns so many angry people at political rallies because their employment opportunities have become limited. To this you might counter by saying, for those who are motivated to get trained, there are still plenty of opportunities. Streetwise is a good example of a young man who spent four years as an apprentice, journeying out to become an industrial painter with a job that will provide a good salary for the rest of his life. I wonder how many of jobs in the trades are available for willing workers?

And what happens to those millions of citizens who have an IQ under 85? In the United States 16.03 percent fall in this range. According to the 2016 Census estimation the nation’s population this March was 324,118,789. This means that 52,831,362 people are categorized as being intellectually challenged. These men and women certainly can work, but they may need special accommodation that includes increased supervision.

Another 110,200,388 people have IQs in the low average category (85-100). By definition, half the people of the country have an IQ of 100 or lower. What will keep these people inspired and willing to put in the effort to learn to read and develop skills leading to employment?

Post WWII a person who was of average intelligence could find honorable, well-paying work . Today the jobs they previously filled are scarce. They have either been sent overseas, supplanted by automation, replaced by technology or become obsolete. In my neighborhood even the trash collectors have gone from two people manning a truck to one. As the employment chain requires more highly skilled personnel even those with over 110 IQ such as paralegals, tax preparers, mid-level managers and desk top publishers are being replaced by software.

Economists say that a highly trained, technologically sophisticated workforce is in our future. According to Jobs for the Future, 68% of U.S. jobs will require postsecondary credentials in the knowledge based world of 2020. This brings us back to the question of what will people with average intelligence and inadequate training do to support themselves.

I’ve heard suggestions that range from, “all people should automatically get paid for doing nothing,” to “the government must provide make-work programs to keep citizens busy and out of trouble.” And then there are those who ask, “why should I support those lazy bums?” We need a conversation. When will it start?

Are you tired of people living on the streets, of gang violence, of an illiterate populace, of lack of jobs, and of gross income disparity? Or do you see a future of armed, walled-in cities, such as now exist in China to protect the fortunate from the rest of society? I visited one outside of Guangzhou. Known as villas they house 1/2 to 1 million people in luxury. The gated areas are complete with shopping centers, restaurants, schools and hospital. Women and children never leave their compounds. Men go off to run their factories.

A 2011 Gallop survey proclaims nine countries claim to have full employment. In each case their government is involved in controlling working conditions. Some limit work hours while other have initiated public work programs. My ex-husband returned from an engineering consultancy job in India where the owners asked him to help design a more efficient factory. In private conversations the workers complained. They needed jobs, not efficiency and automation.

There is a bible saying that warns, “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop.” The passage implies that those who don’t have anything to do with their time are more likely to get into trouble. Sounds reasonable to me and I fear that many of the problems we face in the United States are directly related to inactivity without sense of purpose. Isn’t it also reasonable for a person of average intelligence to be valued and provided an education and training with a guarantee that there is something useful to do at the end?

I look for solutions that will give all people meaningful employment so they can be part of contributing to the greater good. I do believe that it can be done if we make benefiting society and not accumulating wealth our priority.

Your thoughts?

Please respond to this article below.

References

http://www.i3mindware.com/mensa-requirements– Mensa IQ testing.

http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks3/ict/multiple_int/what.cfm – test for multiple intelligence

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/ – Population of the U.S. in 2016

http://www.jff.org/initiatives – Jobs for the future.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2012/04/25/nine-countries-where-unemployment-does-not-exist/2/ – Countries with the highest employment rates.

http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/most-shocking/10-famous-people-with-surprisingly-high-iqs/ – IQs of the rich and famous.
To view my art go to eichingerfineart.com. Questions can be directed to me at marilynne@eichingerfineart.com.

___________________________________________________________________________