First of all, take it down a notch, no need to fucking rage at me, I think we're just misunderstanding each other a bit.
Richie Tenenbaum wrote: The comparison isn't meant to be "fair." It was just one of two assumptions she made to reach her conclusion. You said both were wrong. This one is not.
You have to take it in the context of the original comparison. sinfiery was claiming that less religious people are more intelligent, and that based off of this, law students on average would be less religious. Law students being more intelligent than your average American is incidental if you take the fact that they have graduated college and the average American has not, even if it is true. What I was trying to say is that even if the average law student is more intelligent than the average American, law school itself is not the reason why. I'm sure there are many schools in the lower TTT that would accept your average American, if they only had a degree and a loan.
See what I'm trying to say? The average law student may well be more intelligent than the average American, but law school itself is not the test of that, so the argument that: religious people = less intelligent (which I'm not saying is true) + law schools only accept intelligent people = less religious people in law school is false.
You most certainly can. And you most certainly can improve your IQ by practicing the type of mental skills they typically test for.
Actually the research on that is still up in the air, but the current consensus is no, if the test is administered properly you cant increase your numbers by any significant degree, and that after you reach a certain age your kind of locked in place.
This analogy is a failure for the point you were trying to prove (and the point you seem to be trying to make is wrong). Improving your muscle mass improves your overall strength (and increases the upper limits of your strength). The length of your arms is not as important. Now compare this to the brain and intelligence: studies have shown that education/studying can cause physiological changes to your brain, and these changes seem likely to increase the upper limits of your intelligence. I'm not saying anyone can become Einstein through hardwork, but you can improve on what your brain is capable.
First of all the length of your arm does effect the maximum amount of strength you can gain in it. What I was trying to say that your IQ (the length of your arm) is a test of the maximum level of intelligence you can operate at. Your knowledge (muscles) effects how much intelligence you currently have.
And there's a big leap from saying that that study can
cause physical changes in your brain, and that they seem to
increase maximum intelligence, to holding it a as a solid fact.
I am not an expert on this subject and neither are you, I was under the impression that IQ does not change, that's what I had always learned and that's what my research has shown me, and that's what I predicated a bit part of my argument on. If you show me where you read that study can increase your IQ then i will happily admit I was wrong and we can move on. But based on everything I've read, at best your ideas of IQ are still under debate in the scientific community, at worst the consensus seems to be that IQ doesn't change by anything more than very small degrees, small enough to be attriubuted to the margin of error in individual tests.
Once again, what the fuck is wrong with you? That's why it's easy to say the average law school student is smarter than the average american. The latter group includes non-college graduates in it and the law school student group only includes college graduates. It's a pointless thing to argue about, and you have to be a fucking idiot to think that statement is wrong.
As I said in the beginning I agree with this, but the numbers are not attributed to law schools themselves as much as to having graduated undergrad school. Now calm down and stop flipping out/cursing over a miss communication.