A Measure of Bush's Intelligence [Archive]

View Full Version : A Measure of Bush's Intelligence

Wolfman

31st July 2007, 06:36 PM

How does one go about measuring Bush's intelligence? It may well be an impossible task...just as impossible as the question of "How Much Does a Meme Weigh (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=86964)?".

For those of you who may have missed it, this particular thread, started by a rather non-sensical post by T'ai Chi, has gone on to produce some amazing works of both prose and poetry. In fact, this single thread has, all by itself, produced more potential finalists for The Language Award (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=76070) than all other forums combined.

As a result, there is a run-off vote (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=88711) to determine the best of the submissions from the meme thread, before having the final TLA award this month. Please go and check them out, I'm sure you'll enjoy it...and we only have two more days in which to vote on which of the meme posts will go on to the final TLA competition.

Oliver

31st July 2007, 06:42 PM

shemp

31st July 2007, 07:25 PM

Step 1: Obtain the use of an electron microscope.

Wolfman

31st July 2007, 07:31 PM

Step 1: Obtain the use of an electron microscope.
I think you're being overly optimistic there

bigred

31st July 2007, 08:20 PM

How does one go about measuring Bush's intelligence? It may well be an impossible task...

...as opposed to the intelligence of Bush bashing that my 5-yr old niece would find childish and tedious? :rolleyes:

Have fun kids.

PS I am far from Bush's biggest fan.

Wolfman

31st July 2007, 08:25 PM

...as opposed to the intelligence of Bush bashing that my 5-yr old niece would find childish and tedious? :rolleyes:

Have fun kids.

PS I am far from Bush's biggest fan.
I appreciate your point; however, it should be obvious that this post is not really intended as a discussion of Bush's intelligence, but rather using Bush as an excuse for a shameless plug to get people to vote for their favorite "How Much Does a Meme Weigh?" post.

Oliver

1st August 2007, 07:05 PM

I appreciate your point; however, it should be obvious that this post is not really intended as a discussion of Bush's intelligence, but rather using Bush as an excuse for a shameless plug to get people to vote for their favorite "How Much Does a Meme Weigh?" post.

What on god's green earth is a "Meme"? :confused:

EGarrett

1st August 2007, 07:13 PM

What on god's green earth is a "Meme"? :confused:Google has made questions obsolete, my friend.

EGarrett

1st August 2007, 07:14 PM

BTW, Bush scored 1250 on his SAT's, back when they were basically IQ tests. That should answer the topic.

Jeff Corey

1st August 2007, 07:14 PM

What on god's green earth is a "Meme"? :confused:

As I understand it, it's an analogy of a gene, passed down through generations by social means. Like religion or frottage.
A silly idea proposed by Dawkins, who is enamored of anthropomorphising things like "selfish genes".

Oliver

1st August 2007, 07:19 PM

As I understand it, it's analogy of a gene, passed down through generations by social means. Like religion or frottage.
A silly idea proposed by Dawkins, who is enamored of anthropomorphising things like "selfish genes".

Thank you, Jeff Corey. :)

shemp

1st August 2007, 07:23 PM

BTW, Bush scored 1250 on his SAT's, back when they were basically IQ tests. That should answer the topic.

So I beat him by 110 points. I don't consider myself a genius. And I didn't spend 25 years snorting coke and drinking heavily. He's an idiot.

Jeff Corey

1st August 2007, 07:26 PM

BTW, Bush scored 1250 on his SAT's, back when they were basically IQ tests. That should answer the topic.
I CFLarsen you on that. Evidence?

Jeff Corey

1st August 2007, 07:31 PM

Thank you, Jeff Corey. :)
Any time. I've always been puzzled by people who threw the term around like woos with quantim mechanix.

EGarrett

2nd August 2007, 08:31 AM

So I beat him by 110 points. I don't consider myself a genius. And I didn't spend 25 years snorting coke and drinking heavily. He's an idiot.I didn't say he was a genius, did I? But that score is significantly above average.

Also, doing drugs and drinking are not necessarily signs of stupidity. Edgar Allan Poe and Paul Morphy both did drugs and/or drank heavily. And that's just off the top of my head...

Darth Rotor

2nd August 2007, 08:37 AM

I didn't say he was a genius, did I? But that score is significantly above average.

Also, doing drugs and drinking are not necessarily signs of stupidity. Edgar Allan Poe and Paul Morphy both did drugs and/or drank heavily. And that's just off the top of my head...
Right. W might have written a poem somewhat like "The Pretzel."

Once an autumn afternoon
Watching football in my room
Sipping soda, feet on stool
Needing bread to soak up drool

Quick, I grapped the bag of plastic
Knowing not my glottis spastic
Would soon render breathing drastic
While I squirmed upon the floor

Just a pretzel
Nothing more.

DR

Beerina

2nd August 2007, 08:48 AM

That's more than high enuf for Mensa, e'en if not technically genius level.

EGarrett

2nd August 2007, 08:54 AM

I CFLarsen you on that. Evidence?I double-checked and I did in fact make a mistake. When Bush took the SAT it was pre-1974, so the conversion was different...so he had the same equivalent IQ (125), but the equivalent score on the test was lower (1206).

So to clarify, Bush's IQ equivalent on the test was still 125, but it was back when the test was harder, and he scored a 1206 which was about the same as scoring 1250 on the 1974-1994 version.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/20/timep.affirm.action.tm/

Solus

2nd August 2007, 09:01 AM

I double-checked and I did in fact make a mistake. When Bush took the SAT it was pre-1974, so the conversion was different...so he had the same equivalent IQ (125), but the equivalent score on the test was lower (1206).

So to clarify, Bush's IQ equivalent on the test was still 125, but it was back when the test was harder, and he scored a 1206 which was about the same as scoring 1250 on the 1974-1994 version.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/20/timep.affirm.action.tm/

Are you defending Bush's intelligence (a joke of itself) or merely being pedantic?

EGarrett

2nd August 2007, 09:10 AM

Are you defending Bush's intelligence (a joke of itself) or merely being pedantic?The topic is "A Measure of Bush's Intelligence." Isn't that exactly what I'm attempting to do?

Darth Rotor

2nd August 2007, 09:16 AM

The topic is "A Measure of Bush's Intelligence." Isn't that exactly what I'm attempting to do?

A dip stick, or a sounding lead, might be a better tool than the standardized tests he took before he spent some years using mind altering substances as a habit.

Or not. Sometimes, the only tools to hand are imperfectly suited for the task, so you do your best. SAT scores aren't a bad place to start.

DR

davefoc

2nd August 2007, 09:28 AM

I suppose this thread was meant to be an opportunity to take a few more shots at Bush but, at least for me, it goes to towards what are interesting and serious questions.

What is the nature of Bush's personality that has created an administration like his?

One of the things that I have noticed is that Bush's speech doesn't reveal any indication of deep thought. There is a huge contrast between listening to Cheney and Bush. You might not agree with Cheney but there is no question that he has personally considered the issues and is presenting his take on them. I sense the opposite in Bush.

Secondly, Bush often reveals a strange kind of insecurity in his speeches. He seems to find a need to reinforce the idea that he's the guy in charge even while he seems to defer most policy decisions to others.

The most unique aspect of the Bush administration is the enormous influence that close advisers have had on policy. Ideologically, Cheney and Rove have dominated the Bush administration. Only recently has the influence of Cheney diminished and then only in that some of his most extreme notions seem to have been constrained.

My own cut at this is that Bush is unusually susceptible to manipulation by people willing to pander to his ego. Cheney and Rove know how to do this to perfection and have been rewarded with a power sharing arrangement that has given them each an opportunity to have influence over policy to a degree that would suggest that the Bush administration is a shared presidency.

Rob Lister

2nd August 2007, 09:29 AM

Sometimes, the only tools to hand are imperfectly suited for the task, so you do your best. SAT scores aren't a bad place to start.

DR

Nor are accomplishments.

Tricky

2nd August 2007, 10:07 AM

BTW, Bush scored 1250 on his SAT's, back when they were basically IQ tests. That should answer the topic.
Bush got 1250 on his SATs? I heard that the answer to the question, "What did GW Bush get on his SATs" was "Drool".

And thanks for the shameless plug, Wolfie. Everybody needs to vote (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=88711)soon so that we can advance the most worthy posts to TLA finals.

Wolfman

2nd August 2007, 10:11 AM

No problem...I'm good at shameless.

RandFan

2nd August 2007, 10:36 AM

As I understand it, it's an analogy of a gene, passed down through generations by social means. Like religion or frottage.
A silly idea proposed by Dawkins, who is enamored of anthropomorphising things like "selfish genes".

Dawkins explains over and over in his book why he does this and thoroughly disabuses the reader of taking it literally. Dawkins won praise for his excellent writing that made it possible for lay people to understand him. Anthropomorphizing was simply a tool he used to accomplish this task. Had he not explained it the way he did you would have a point. In the end it is the ability to communicate an idea that matters. At this he succeeds because of his use of anthropomorphizing.

I also don't get the criticism of Dawkins meme. His arguments are rock solid and and again he conveys an idea that is well understood and advances our understanding. Words and ideas do in fact evolve. Why? Thousand year old ideas still control people's lives. Why? The idea of the meme helps us understand why.

Perhaps the notion of meme is wrong and there is a valid criticism. I would think that one would attack the argument and not the means of explaining the argument.

EGarrett

2nd August 2007, 10:38 AM

Nor are accomplishments.Accomplishments are best for measuring the combined effects of intelligence, ambition, knowledge, charisma, contacts, experience and luck. For plain intelligence, a test score is more accurate.

jnelso99

2nd August 2007, 11:08 AM

I've always found this as a good measure of Bush's "intelligence"...

http://www.ifilm.com/video/2646755?loomia_si=1

I still cringe whenever I see or hear this exchange...

Adrian Lopez

17th August 2007, 07:23 AM

As I understand it, it's an analogy of a gene, passed down through generations by social means. Like religion or frottage.
A silly idea proposed by Dawkins, who is enamored of anthropomorphising things like "selfish genes".Analogies should be pushed no further than whatever similarities they are meant to highlight. Once you recognize that, the idea is no longer silly.