Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#726 01/26/03 10:02 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126

Just wondering, how many people here have experienced "IQ" gains as a result of their ISing? I konw all about the Reinert study. The reason I ask is that I am trying to establish the nature of an "upper-limit" for IQ gains as a result of ISing. Win Wenger indicates that no such barrier can be established. For all you veteran ISers- meaning over 25 hours practice-- what has your experience been? Under what conditions did you practice? Did you follow Wengers technique precisely? Did you ask specific, or general questions? How much did you feature-question? Did you use over-the-wall procedure? Anything..?!
K.Olafsson






#727 01/26/03 10:55 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Search the forum

Alex






#728 01/26/03 11:19 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
I may have missed it, but nobody seems to talk about having greater than 25 hrs. ISing practice. The Reinert study satisfies me about the gains expected below 25 hrs. Have you ISed for longer than that?







#729 01/26/03 11:28 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Makes no difference to me if I did. I got more interesting things to do than play with so called IQ test.

Alex






#730 01/26/03 11:48 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126

Granted, the IQ test is boring and doesn't assess the full range of a persons abilities. But honestly! If people could really reliably improve their IQ's 30, 50, 100 points, than this technique would soon spread over the entire world, and become mainstream! As it is 20 pts. is highly significant, but it can be written off to opening up latent abilities in an individuals repertoire of problem-solving- all these participants in the Reinert study began with an avg. IQ 95. 50 pts. absolutely couldn't be written off. The full-range of benefits for Image-Streaming are much more important than just IQ, but IQ is the easiest quantifiable one. If you want to get people impressed with this technique than quantifiable data is the way to go. And, yes, I do practice Image-Streaming...I find it one of the most fascinating, and beneficial, things espoused on this board.








#731 01/27/03 12:43 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 80
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 80
trying to keep this post alive, he has a point, although IQ doesnt really mean much (mine personally jumped 30 points after a mere attitude change) it can be used to attract more people and increase their confidence! so please reply if you can






#732 01/27/03 01:15 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
What you concentate upon improving you eventually do improve. If you want to improve mastery of of accounting you work at it study it and learn it... measure the before accountancy quotient you get a low score... work at study it for x hours and lo and behold the accountancy quotient goes up.

Get someone with low academic skill You got a low academic quotient... give that individual reason or a want and they spend x hours studying to improve this skill then measure again you have an improvement in the academic quotient.

As already mentioned in another post having a High IQ does not a genius make... that research was already carried out some years ago.

Now heres some other interesting findings.

People with High IQ tend to be employed by people of Average IQ. For some reason people with High IQ spend more time needing proof while people with average IQ are action oriented. The get results by trial and error. The ones with High IQ's tend to be push through the path of highly educated. Where they learn proof must be on paper before they try the test on themselves.

If you want to know if it works... test your own IQ and do image streaming for 25 hours and see the results yourself.

A forum with people posting I had an IQ of 60 and I did image streaming and now its 90 is extraordinary poor reseach data.

Alex






#733 01/27/03 02:30 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126

Obviously peoples IQ would not become the sole focus of this forum. Your analogy of people working at a particular skill and improving at it does not hold for image-streaming. Image-streaming does not work at all on a persons analytical abilities, yet, according to the Reinert studies, and Wenger, that ability improves along with the other abilities one would expect-- such as creativity, subconscious access, awareness, etc. They said that analytical abilities improve even with just pure image-streaming-- i.e. little decoding effort--and that seems verified by some peoples posts here. In your message you imply that I am not practicing image-streaming myself; in fact, I am. As for numerics I have a general range of where I would log in on an IQ test, and after I log around 50 hrs. practice-- if I notice my "intelligence" having noticeably improved, which I expect-- I plan on getting a more accurate assessment.
If we had people posting gains-- whether or not you like the IQ measurement-- of 40 pts. or more, and we made other people aware of the reason for it, I think that ISing would catch on very rapidly. Because, despite the limited scope of the IQ test it does still measure a certain type of thinking ability, which conventional wisdom says cannot change more than + or - 5-10%. Furthermore, it would be remarkable that a technique involving no direct practice of analytical abilities would affect it at 40%!
K.Olafsson








#734 01/27/03 03:12 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 205
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 205
AlexK, I can see your point--IQ gains (and tests) are useless and futile if that's all your worried about. However, Kristoff, I understand what you mean too.

I think that if one can jump 40, 50 iq points, which seems to be entirely possible, the public would just get rid of the IQ test and make a new intelligence test--to them, the test has to be reliable and jumping 50 points is not.

The most effective way to catch the public's attention would probably be something like, "I imagestreamed this much, and I passed this class without studying." Or "I IS'ed so much, now I got a raise," etc.






#735 01/27/03 04:41 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
quote:
Originally posted by Kristoff Olafsson:

Image-streaming does not work at all on a persons analytical abilities, yet, according to the Reinert studies, and Wenger, that ability improves along with the other abilities one would expect-- such as creativity, subconscious access, awareness, etc. They said that analytical abilities improve even with just pure image-streaming-- i.e. little decoding effort--and that seems verified by some peoples posts here.

It either does or it doesn't - who is the authority that said it doesn't - based on what test? You named who does.

There is a fundamental reason why you won't get people like me involved with IQ test - life; there are other things that matter more and some games are just a waste of time.

Alex






Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Wendy_Greer 

Link Copied to Clipboard
©, Learning Strategies Corporation, All Rights Reserved
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 5.6.40 Page Time: 0.151s Queries: 33 (0.031s) Memory: 3.2427 MB (Peak: 3.6001 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-06-20 11:29:36 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS