aiming atalent or can be proved
Comments
-
I refuse to believe that any idiot can become a decent lawyer/rocket scientist/bio chemist.
Probably far from reality though.
i go to an engineering school, and let me tell you some of my friends aren't much past the "any idiot" level.
there's a big difference between engineering innovators and licensed engineers versus joe schmo with a degree.
the biggest thing is you have to have ways to deal with failure and you can't really give up. intelligence only plays a factor in that you will have an easier time, but there are people who fail calc3 3 or 4 times and end up graduating. academics is a very small part of engineering -
Is this not what we call natural talent at the Base ? and some will do better with X talent and will perform better in that field rather than to use X talent to master something that require natural Y talent ?Not everyone is cut out for higher degrees of education, while pretty much anyone with functioning motor skills can get decent at a game. -
man , I know that I am an idiot , without Idiots like me the world will not be what it is and without intelligent man like you ,idiots like me will never learn and have natural talents . it`s is sure 300% " as you teach me by your theory of learning and practice" that I will have NATURAL talents . Now let me pi-ss in my pant laughing a bit .
By the way a doctor use his hand and brain to cut at the right place . and a gamer use also his hand and brain to move the mouse to do what he has to do in a game. may be you are too inteligent to understand what an idiot like me is trying to say . I feel sorry that I don`t have your Natural mental power .:o
it's the fact that your analogy is completely flawed.
there is no such thing as natural talents when it comes to intelligence/education. the only way thing i can think of is people with autism and actual geniuses, but that's a completely different thing. -
Hmm?
I'm pretty confident that intelligence factors in too. Not everything can be learned.
Oh, and because I'm desperate for intelligent discussions. Z8 lacks it something fierce.
Oh, and because I'm desperate for intelligent discussions. Z8 lacks it something fierce.
OMG tooooo nice that one:D -
Hmm?
I'm pretty confident that intelligence factors in too. Not everything can be learned.
Oh, and because I'm desperate for intelligent discussions. Z8 lacks it something fierce.
When it comes to professions, everything can be learned.
Now whether that is learned through studies or first hand experience is irrelevant to me. It can still be learned -
It arrives that sometimes that the idiots use their brain and let the intelligent persons between themselves and just keep away from them like to say " better to go and play CF and have fun . at least I will have the possibility to practice and have one day some natural talents that I did not get when i was born "it's the fact that your analogy is completely flawed.
there is no such thing as natural talents when it comes to intelligence/education. the only way thing i can think of is people with autism and actual geniuses, but that's a completely different thing.
oups I would have forget that one " noobs are born noobs and will die a bit more noob with some practice " Amen:D -
at the start i was a Bad sniper and bad quick scoper i started playing with awm in Prison all matches without even knife once and i got better im not the best quick scoper or the best AWMer but i can defend myself more than before.
same with knife i was a knife noob i played so much ghost mode and guess what I GET KICKED ALL MATCHES I GHOST MODE!!!!!!!!....
wait that isnt better...
whatever i play Arena and i can kill Axers and Shovelers maybe shovelers with lagg kill me but im better than before!!!!!!!...
so keep Practice ,practice make the master -
You can study and get the facts down.When it comes to professions, everything can be learned.
Now whether that is learned through studies or first hand experience is irrelevant to me. It can still be learned
Thinking on your feet and adapting to actual problems requires some form of talent and above idiot intelligence.
Without both parts, I wouldn't call him a professional. That he grinded a few books to pass the test matters less. -
It arrives that sometimes that the idiots use their brain and let the intelligent persons between themselves and just keep away from them like to say " better to go and play CF and have fun . at least I will have the possibility to practice and have one day some natural talents that I did not get when i was born "
oups I would have forget that one " noobs are born noobs and will die a bit more noob with some practice " Amen:D
is english your first language, cause i can barely understand what you are trying to say
this whole natural talents thing you keep talking about doesn't exist -
You can study and get the facts down.
Thinking on your feet and adapting to actual problems requires some form of talent and above idiot intelligence.
Without both parts, I wouldn't call him a professional. That he grinded a few books to pass the test matters less.
i definitely agree on that, there's a huge difference between a professional engineer and someone with an engineering degree -
You can study and get the facts down.
Thinking on your feet and adapting to actual problems requires some form of talent and above idiot intelligence.
Without both parts, I wouldn't call him a professional. That he grinded a few books to pass the test matters less.
good point. I know a guy that has a photographic memory,all A's in his leaving/junior certs and has no practical mind. Ask him to put something together and he's f**king confused,and is one of the best mathematicians in the country. If he was doing engineering, he would obviously ''ace'' his engineering tests but when he'd be out doing the job he'd be hopeless.
Not everything can be learned,but a lot of stuff can. -
no English is not my natural talent I learned it at school this is why I can`t handle it as you do . but Creole is my natural language and you will never be able to handle it as I do even if you pass your life learning it .is english your first language, cause i can barely understand what you are trying to say
this whole natural talents thing you keep talking about doesn't exist
Do you still not get the point ? -
no English is not my natural talent I learned it at school this is why I can`t handle it as you do . but Creole is my natural language and you will never be able to handle it as I do even if you pass your life learning it .
Do you still not get the point ?
i'm done replying to your posts, since you can't seem to understand simple words/sentences
and a language is not a natural talent, where are you getting this stuff from...
ps creole is just a derivative of another language, nothing impressive about knowing it -
Omg you really have a long long way to do before you arrive to understand that I am playing with words and sentences and be very sarcastic with you .I am sure that you probably think that when I said that I am an idiot and you an intelligent person , you have believed in what I stated .i'm done replying to your posts, since you can't seem to understand simple words/sentences
and a language is not a natural talent, where are you getting this stuff from...
ps creole is just a derivative of another language, nothing impressive about knowing it
so then let me explain something to you , as I would to explain something to a 10 years old boy( well I am not saying that you are 10
)
let us take singers for example ." you know, those guys who sing songs "well those guys are born with that ability or talent or what ever word you may use to qualify it. You can`t just pick one guy like that on the road and teach him how to sing make of him a super star like Micheal Jackson.If this was possible , believe my friend , I would not be here writing to you like an Idiot .I would have made myself a super super star , singing around the world.:o Unfortunately I don`t have that ability or talent , and even if I would learn how to sing and practice my voice , I will probably receive some rotten tomatoes and eggs on the face , as soon I would start to sing .
Now if you have not been able to understand , then I would advise you to go in game and have some fun there and avoid the forum if you can , because here you have only the ability to flame people and treat others as idiots and try to lower people with whom you can`t discuss with by saying to him " your English is very bad " that kind of noobish defense you should keep it for other noobs like you and try to avoid mistakes when you write you mother language here . " it`s really a shame for you not to be able to write it properly" -
Omg you really have a long long way to do before you arrive to understand that I am playing with words and sentences and be very sarcastic with you .I am sure that you probably think that when I said that I am an idiot and you an intelligent person , you have believed in what I stated .
so then let me explain something to you , as I would to explain something to a 10 years old boy( well I am not saying that you are 10 )
let us take singers for example ." you know, those guys who sing songs "well those guys are born with that ability or talent or what ever word you may use to qualify it. You can`t just pick one guy like that on the road and teach him how to sing make of him a super star like Micheal Jackson.If this was possible , believe my friend , I would not be here writing to you like an Idiot .I would have made myself a super super star , singing around the world.:o Unfortunately I don`t have that ability or talent , and even if I would learn how to sing and practice my voice , I will probably receive some rotten tomatoes and eggs on the face , as soon I would start to sing .
Now if you have not been able to understand , then I would advise you to go in game and have some fun there and avoid the forum if you can , because here you have only the ability to flame people and treat others as idiots and try to lower people with whom you can`t discuss with by saying to him " your English is very bad " that kind of noobish defense you should keep it for other noobs like you and try to avoid mistakes when you write you mother language here . " it`s really a shame for you not to be able to write it properly"
you're looking at the end result and going oh that's natural talent right there
you only get so far with talent, since you seem to think "natural talent" is the panacea to all of your problems you live in a misguided fragile world -
natural talent right there
Reaction time (RT) is the elapsed time between the presentation of a sensory stimulus and the subsequent behavioral response by the participant. RT is often used in experimental psychology to measure the duration of mental operations, an area of research known as mental chronometry. In psychometric psychology, RT is considered to be an index of speed of processing. That is, RT indicates how fast the thinker can execute the mental operations needed by the task at hand. In turn, speed of processing is considered an index of processing efficiency. The behavioral response is typically a button press but can also be an eye movement, a vocal response, or some other observable behavior.
Scores on many but not all RT tasks tend to correlate with scores on paper and pencil IQ tests. This is especially true for so-called elementary cognitive tasks (ECTs). These require participants to perform trivially simple cognitive tasks, like deciding which of two briefly-presented lines is longer (the inspection time task), or which of three lighted buttons is farthest away from the other two (the odd man out task).
Most people can perform ECTs with near 100% accuracy, but individual differences in RT on these tasks are large and correlate well with IQ scores. Jensen (2001) argues that ECTs could replace traditional IQ tests as measures of intelligence, because the former are measured on a ratio scale whereas IQ tests only rank people on an ordinal scale. Jensen has invented a Jensen box to present ECT task stimuli to participants in a precise, standardized fashion.
Not all RT tasks, however, are good measures of intelligence. In general, RT on tasks that take between 200 milliseconds and 2 seconds to perform tend to correlate well with IQ. Tasks that most people can do faster than 200 milliseconds generally measure the efficiency of sensory processes (seeing, hearing) rather than intelligence. Tasks that take longer than about 2 seconds typically allow for strategic differences among people which cloud any relationship between RT and IQ (for these tasks, accuracy-- versus speed-- is likely more related to IQ).
Reaction time best predicts IQ test scores when participants perform many trials (i.e., 100s) of the same ECT. Aggregating average reaction times across different ECTs also produces significantly larger RT/IQ correlations. In many studies, the within person variability of RT is also a strong predictor of IQ. Participants showing relatively large RT differences from trial to trial tend to score lower on IQ tests than do participants who do not deviate much in their reaction time from trial to trial. Finally, the slowest trials for any person tend to better predict that person's IQ relative to either his or her average or fastest response.
Although the literature on RT is vast, far less research has looked at race differences on RT as a potential explanation for the race/IQ gap. The general pattern, however, is that race differences exist on ECT performance, and that these differences are in line with those found on traditional IQ tests. For example, a recent study in the journal Intelligence looked at race differences on the Wonderlic Personnel Test (a traditional paper and pencil IQ test) and performance on two ECTs (an inspection time and choice reaction time task). A black/white difference was found on the Wonderlic, and both ECTs. Statistical mediation was found in that controlling for race differences on the ECTs resulted in the race difference on the Wonderlic no longer being significant. (EDIT: yeah right)
RT = Reaction Tiem -
Reaction time (RT) is the elapsed time between the presentation of a sensory stimulus and the subsequent behavioral response by the participant. RT is often used in experimental psychology to measure the duration of mental operations, an area of research known as mental chronometry. In psychometric psychology, RT is considered to be an index of speed of processing. That is, RT indicates how fast the thinker can execute the mental operations needed by the task at hand. In turn, speed of processing is considered an index of processing efficiency. The behavioral response is typically a button press but can also be an eye movement, a vocal response, or some other observable behavior.
Scores on many but not all RT tasks tend to correlate with scores on paper and pencil IQ tests. This is especially true for so-called elementary cognitive tasks (ECTs). These require participants to perform trivially simple cognitive tasks, like deciding which of two briefly-presented lines is longer (the inspection time task), or which of three lighted buttons is farthest away from the other two (the odd man out task).
Most people can perform ECTs with near 100% accuracy, but individual differences in RT on these tasks are large and correlate well with IQ scores. Jensen (2001) argues that ECTs could replace traditional IQ tests as measures of intelligence, because the former are measured on a ratio scale whereas IQ tests only rank people on an ordinal scale. Jensen has invented a Jensen box to present ECT task stimuli to participants in a precise, standardized fashion.
Not all RT tasks, however, are good measures of intelligence. In general, RT on tasks that take between 200 milliseconds and 2 seconds to perform tend to correlate well with IQ. Tasks that most people can do faster than 200 milliseconds generally measure the efficiency of sensory processes (seeing, hearing) rather than intelligence. Tasks that take longer than about 2 seconds typically allow for strategic differences among people which cloud any relationship between RT and IQ (for these tasks, accuracy-- versus speed-- is likely more related to IQ).
Reaction time best predicts IQ test scores when participants perform many trials (i.e., 100s) of the same ECT. Aggregating average reaction times across different ECTs also produces significantly larger RT/IQ correlations. In many studies, the within person variability of RT is also a strong predictor of IQ. Participants showing relatively large RT differences from trial to trial tend to score lower on IQ tests than do participants who do not deviate much in their reaction time from trial to trial. Finally, the slowest trials for any person tend to better predict that person's IQ relative to either his or her average or fastest response.
Although the literature on RT is vast, far less research has looked at race differences on RT as a potential explanation for the race/IQ gap. The general pattern, however, is that race differences exist on ECT performance, and that these differences are in line with those found on traditional IQ tests. For example, a recent study in the journal Intelligence looked at race differences on the Wonderlic Personnel Test (a traditional paper and pencil IQ test) and performance on two ECTs (an inspection time and choice reaction time task). A black/white difference was found on the Wonderlic, and both ECTs. Statistical mediation was found in that controlling for race differences on the ECTs resulted in the race difference on the Wonderlic no longer being significant. (EDIT: yeah right)
RT = Reaction Tiem
this has nothing to do with anything that has been talked about in this thread? -
-
Reaction time (RT) is the elapsed time between the presentation of a sensory stimulus and the subsequent behavioral response by the participant. RT is often used in experimental psychology to measure the duration of mental operations, an area of research known as mental chronometry. In psychometric psychology, RT is considered to be an index of speed of processing. That is, RT indicates how fast the thinker can execute the mental operations needed by the task at hand. In turn, speed of processing is considered an index of processing efficiency. The behavioral response is typically a button press but can also be an eye movement, a vocal response, or some other observable behavior.
Scores on many but not all RT tasks tend to correlate with scores on paper and pencil IQ tests. This is especially true for so-called elementary cognitive tasks (ECTs). These require participants to perform trivially simple cognitive tasks, like deciding which of two briefly-presented lines is longer (the inspection time task), or which of three lighted buttons is farthest away from the other two (the odd man out task).
Most people can perform ECTs with near 100% accuracy, but individual differences in RT on these tasks are large and correlate well with IQ scores. Jensen (2001) argues that ECTs could replace traditional IQ tests as measures of intelligence, because the former are measured on a ratio scale whereas IQ tests only rank people on an ordinal scale. Jensen has invented a Jensen box to present ECT task stimuli to participants in a precise, standardized fashion.
Not all RT tasks, however, are good measures of intelligence. In general, RT on tasks that take between 200 milliseconds and 2 seconds to perform tend to correlate well with IQ. Tasks that most people can do faster than 200 milliseconds generally measure the efficiency of sensory processes (seeing, hearing) rather than intelligence. Tasks that take longer than about 2 seconds typically allow for strategic differences among people which cloud any relationship between RT and IQ (for these tasks, accuracy-- versus speed-- is likely more related to IQ).
Reaction time best predicts IQ test scores when participants perform many trials (i.e., 100s) of the same ECT. Aggregating average reaction times across different ECTs also produces significantly larger RT/IQ correlations. In many studies, the within person variability of RT is also a strong predictor of IQ. Participants showing relatively large RT differences from trial to trial tend to score lower on IQ tests than do participants who do not deviate much in their reaction time from trial to trial. Finally, the slowest trials for any person tend to better predict that person's IQ relative to either his or her average or fastest response.
Although the literature on RT is vast, far less research has looked at race differences on RT as a potential explanation for the race/IQ gap. The general pattern, however, is that race differences exist on ECT performance, and that these differences are in line with those found on traditional IQ tests. For example, a recent study in the journal Intelligence looked at race differences on the Wonderlic Personnel Test (a traditional paper and pencil IQ test) and performance on two ECTs (an inspection time and choice reaction time task). A black/white difference was found on the Wonderlic, and both ECTs. Statistical mediation was found in that controlling for race differences on the ECTs resulted in the race difference on the Wonderlic no longer being significant. (EDIT: yeah right)
RT = Reaction Tiem
copy and paste ftw. -
Re-read the thread and... make up your mind.
Are you stating your opinion or making a question?
Inquiring minds want to know
The IQ test is a flawed test.
Situations in FPSers are well below 200 ms, your post contradicts itself.
And I find that your suggestion that one race is superior than another very offensive
![[dot]](https://forum.z8games.com/uploads/customavatars/27/navatar_2942827.gif){kind=avatar}
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- Off-Topic - Go To Game OT Forums
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 16 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 5.2K CrossFire
- 951 CrossFire Announcements
- 942 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 1.4K Community
- 122 Modes
- 600 Suggestions
- 85 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 274 CF Competitive Forum
- 19 CFCL
- 26 Looking for a Team?
- 701 CrossFire Support
- 52 Suggestion
- 116 Bugs
- 28 CrossFire Guides
- 166 Technical Issues
- 47 CrossFire Off Topic