Can Reading Lift Our IQ? (Vanquish the Myth)

[Lucid Being]

😎

[Jack of all trades]

Having the wall of text makes this difficult to read. Reading on electronic devices is easier with a blank line between paragraphs. Physical print still follows the old blank lines indicate passage of time or change of subject.

The seemingly random capitalization also bothered me. I prefer that only proper names and words at the beginning of sentences get capitalized. I'm pretty old fashioned that way.

I didn't care for an entire paragraph being in parens, either. A paragraph long aside seems unprofessional to me. But if you are going to keep it, at least put the period within the parens.

As for any other errors, I found the mentioned difficulties too distracting to notice anything else.

As for the content, I'm familiar with emotional intelligence, but not the other two. Maybe you could provide links for more info for all three so readers can learn more.

I recently read about having access to books in the home improves grades at school. But even IQ tests may not be testing intelligence (the ability to learn), but rather knowledge (facts menorized). So I found the subject interesting, but I wasn't convinced, for what it's worth.

[Lucid Being]

��

[bdcharles]

An intereting topic. Jack seems to have covered off the grammar and written side of it, so from a non-fiction, scientific point of view, you might want to look at including links to the studies and evidence you cite. The risk is otherwise that this interesting topic is presented in a pseudoscientific manner.

Additionally you use quite marks around several words. This reads as if you don't believe or trust their accepted meaning. Eg:

Let’s take a look at the three main IQ areas. Firstly we have “Crystallized Intelligence” – widely seen by psychologists and neurologists as the assemblage of the knowledge that ‘fills’ our brain. (This Intelligence is the one that uses learnt experience and knowledge). This Crystallized Intelligence is exponentially increased by the act of applied reading.

What is the "assemblage of the knowledge that 'fills' our brain"? How is it measured? It must be measurable, pedants will note, because you state that Crystallized Knowledge increases exponentially with reading, so they will be calling for a graph

As it is, I feel the subject is a good one that warrants solid investigation. Even an essay hypothesising about it, with no empirical data, would be good. This, to me, is a little too heavy on the woo, which tends to discredit a subject. But then again, if that, for whatever the reason, is what you are going for, then it may fit that bill.

[Lucid Being]

��

[bdcharles]

Bdcharles,
you sound full of: Jack of ALL trades ) do either of you have any original ideas?? I think not. The both of you exist to bring down anything that is new and doesn't agree with your boring! BORING!! (An Intereting Topic)? You are sounding like Jack!!! And why would I want to put links? Are you this scared? You sound like you are very seriously having a go at me because of my work? This is shit! Why? Is it a new comer thing?? WTF? Whyyy the Hatred???

Ah, yes, I thought you might respond in this way. I don't bear any sort of antipathy toward you or your work. Rather I am suffused with love for both, and desire only their pauseless improving. Whenever I think of your output (which is often) I am buoyed up on clouds of what I can only describe as a sense of the warm, the pink, and the fluffy.

The issue is that I feel that very same way about scientific accuracy, precision about the written word, and so forth. Possibly even more so. Now, fortunately I'm in a position where I can see off any ensuing cognitive dissonance by flipping paint at the wall and calling it art while shouting at a barful of strangers and calling it singing. But you invested time and energy in your reply, and so you deserve a proper explanation. Hope this clarifies.

If, however, it's my original ideas you are after, you shall have to buy my book. Books.

Wishing you a speedy recovery and, of course, plenty of reading materials,

{{here there is a smudge occluding what looks like a lengthy name followed by an interminable string of honorifics}}

[Jack of all trades]

There was no hatred. This is a critique section, where members point out errors and things they think need improvement. I thought you, Lucid Being, wanted to improve the writing. I see you also posted this in the blog section. There folks are more likely to comment on the content, not the writing.

I don't often critique nonfiction. After this I may not do it again.

I did like the writing style. It was conversational instead of stuffy. In hindsight, I should have mentioned what I liked as well as what I thought needed improvement, and I apologize for failing to do so. I hope you return and see this.

[Theglasshouse]

It's well known that people cite papers, and in doing so avoid the pseudo-scientific angles. This is as obvious as there is a sun outside my house. I think his reply sounds like a prank, might want to look serious when you give your replies Lucid Being. The scientific method started with Aristotle and is used in peer cited papers. Everything should be cited, or based on someone else's paper. I guess you can create original work, there are exceptions. But this is a very studied field or science. I didn't read the original but I am guessing it's related to education.

When I took a psychology course, for instance, they said the most you can test higher on an IQ test is by ten points. But IQ tests are meaningless anyway. They don't always predict school success but of course, a high IQ will help. It's a variety of factors. It may be the strongest link. But reading doesn't increase your intelligence. JMO but it makes you more knowledgeable. The rare cases are diseases or accidents where IQ might be impacted. Not to mention, IQ was originally created for its school applications. Whatever the case nature versus nurture there is an ongoing debate. The nurture side is the one you are talking about. I hope this doesn't offend you, but I don't think you gave any reasons for being angry at them.

Maybe reading promotes achievement would be a better angle or perspective because evidence has shown this. Even my views may even be wrong unless I cite. This matters more in the academic context.

The nature versus nurture debate will always be important, there are more effective teachers than others.

[Hittfler]

What I see is nothing but an emoji where's the nonfiction?