anymore help: If you have a high IQ, does your opinion have anymore clout, - Help.com

The character of an individual, in general, has no bearing on the verity of their positions. What is relevant is logical argument and explicable reason. If the person of average intelligence has a reasonable argument that is backed by evidence or which does not contain logical fallacies, then that is more valuable than an argument made by someone of higher “IQ” but which lacks critical evidence or committs logical fallacies.

Keep in mind, also, that IQ is not considered today to be a complete measure of intelligence. There are 11+ modes of intelligence that are generally known and IQ tests measure only a couple of them.

OK, thank you, may I put you on my friend list

Mr. Green wrote:
The character of an individual, in general, has no bearing on the verity of their positions. What is relevant is logical argument and explicable reason. If the person of average intelligence has a reasonable argument that is backed by evidence or which does not contain logical fallacies, then that is more valuable than an argument made by someone of higher “IQ” but which lacks critical evidence or committs logical fallacies.

Keep in mind, also, that IQ is not considered today to be a complete measure of intelligence. There are 11+ modes of intelligence that are generally known and IQ tests measure only a couple of them.

IQ doesn’t make much difference, but expertise does. If a high IQ person and a low/average IQ person have the same knowledge, their opinions are of equal value. If neither has any expertise in the subject, I’d probably give slightly more weight to the deductions of the more intelligent person, but if the low/average IQ person had more expertise on a subject, I’d definitely give their opinion more weight than the opinion of a more intelligent person with little or no knowledge of the subject.

Mariam_the_Lioness wrote:
IQ doesn’t make much difference, but expertise does. If a high IQ person and a low/average IQ person have the same knowledge, their opinions are of equal value. If neither has any expertise in the subject, I’d probably give slightly more weight to the deductions of the more intelligent person, but if the low/average IQ person had more expertise on a subject, I’d definitely give their opinion more weight than the opinion of a more intelligent person with little or no knowledge of the subject.

Even with this, however, an appeal to authority may be committed. Authority may in general be correct more frequently than a non-expert, this does not mean that experts are never incorrect or never deceive. Particularly when it comes to politics! There are many VERY intelligent people who may be “experts” of a sort, but who hold conflicting opinions on politics. These opinions may sometimes be based on faulty information, or may be intentionally misleading. Political pundits on television or on radio, for example, are prime sources for propaganda - no matter what country you live in.

When it comes to science, such as the issue of global warming, strong evidence is required. Appealing to an expert authority may be useful, but that alone does not make one’s position more tenable. In science, the intelligence or authority of a person making a claim are irrelevant so long as they have the evidence and documented experiments to back up their conclusions.

Wow, I like your response…. .

Mr. Green wrote:

Mariam_the_Lioness wrote:
IQ doesn’t make much difference, but expertise does. If a high IQ person and a low/average IQ person have the same knowledge, their opinions are of equal value. If neither has any expertise in the subject, I’d probably give slightly more weight to the deductions of the more intelligent person, but if the low/average IQ person had more expertise on a subject, I’d definitely give their opinion more weight than the opinion of a more intelligent person with little or no knowledge of the subject.

Even with this, however, an appeal to authority may be committed. Authority may in general be correct more frequently than a non-expert, this does not mean that experts are never incorrect or never deceive. Particularly when it comes to politics! There are many VERY intelligent people who may be “experts” of a sort, but who hold conflicting opinions on politics. These opinions may sometimes be based on faulty information, or may be intentionally misleading. Political pundits on television or on radio, for example, are prime sources for propaganda - no matter what country you live in.

When it comes to science, such as the issue of global warming, strong evidence is required. Appealing to an expert authority may be useful, but that alone does not make one’s position more tenable. In science, the intelligence or authority of a person making a claim are irrelevant so long as they have the evidence and documented experiments to back up their conclusions.

Mr. Green, you make very good points, and I think your answer is more correct than mine.

In my original answer, I was assuming that each person had honest motivations. But even with that, experts are sometimes wrong, and evidence, logic, and reason hold more weight than “expertise”.

Yep, I’m pretty much an expert on these things. lol :P