If the voter cannot judge himself on the basis of what the candidate has to report, then such numbers do not help either.
It’s not an IQ score that matters most, it’s first and foremost integrity that makes someone fit for a public office.
What is needed to be a leader?-Executive Finance-
And after that, things like plans can be presented simply and enthusiastically, and yes, analyse and think laterally, basically everything that makes a man a wise, empathic and decisive man.That combination: integer, wise, empathetic, decisive, is quite rare. In America they do it with three times 0 percent and decisiveness with only 50 percent.
In wartime it can be a little simpler, then we can add with the motto of Amsterdam: Heroically determined merciful.
I think I will go against the flow here by saying that I think IQ is absolutely correlated with suitability as a politician, in the sense that a relatively high IQ is a necessary but not sufficient condition. In other words, a high IQ is, in my view, necessary, but I would of course never vote for a politician on the basis of IQ.
I see a lot of things below that it is not IQ but it is integrity and emotional intelligence that counts.That is, of course, absolutely true, but I think that a politician should also be able to process complex information from different sources and come to sensible conclusions. That is something that IQ tests and I believe that is relevant.
So yes, IQ is a useful tool.Whether the voter and therefore is entitled to it, that is something completely different again.I do not see it happening quickly in practice. A large proportion of voters will pay little attention to it, or will misinterpret the results. The voters who do pay attention and are able to interpret the results correctly will probably already vote for the politicians with the higher IQ. So it might change little.
The results of an IQ test remain stricto sensu medical and therefore confidential information and also politicians are entitled to privacy.If they want to release the results themselves, that is of course not a problem, but obliging them to release medical information seems to me a step too far.
In spite of the fact that I find IQ a useful tool to evolve the competences of a politician (in spe), I do not find that the voter is entitled to the IQ scores.
No.The voter does have the right to refuse to vote for someone who does not want to lose his IQ.
The same applies to the religion, sexual orientation, star mark and favorite underpants color of the politician.
If I were to be in the administration of a political party, I would like us to reveal whether our candidates have financial interests or are friends with influential people.Maybe even if they have a criminal journal, I am not quite over.
But IQ?What a nonsense. May be useful for an air traffic controller or a stock broker who needs to be able to take decisions very quickly. For a politician it does not seem so relevant to me. But, if some voters find it important, that is of course their right.
Has no added value.IQ says nothing about the views of the politicians or how they deal with others. The only thing I expect from all members of the 1st and 2nd room is that they know how everything works on the Buitenhof and what the GE and bans are.
I don’t think so.If the voter IQ finds important, it agrees to a candidate who voluntarily releases it.
Where does the thought come from that IQ is a gauge of the wisdom of a human being?
I know people with extraordinarily high IQ, which I don’t trust, or that I find extraordinarily un-wise and people with relatively low IQ with great wisdom.If I had to choose which of these I would prefer to see the country reign I would really go for the last group.
Intelligent is fun, but wisdom is much more valuable, in almost all things in life.And the two have nothing to do with each other.
The IQ measures above all rational and cognitive abilities.A politician does need something, but it is certainly so important that the EQ. Politician is really a profession that you learn in practice, so if you are going to measure these two, it still says little about how successful someone is going to exercise.
I also think that as a citizen I do not have much right to all sorts of personal information about a person.This just needs to do its job well. That is the most important thing, the rest is a side issue.
Deep inside, I wish to return to the time when people went to vote from a certain conviction/vision of life.
Where not the delusion of the day reigned, but matters that are also important in 10 or 15 years.I know that there are people with a deviant vision of life, and if the majority vote on something I am unhappy with, I am unlucky.
But the current policy is far too much busy with fire extinguishing.
If voters want to know the IQ of politicians we are doing wrong.Because a government is not only the ministers and parliamentarians but also a huge number of civil servants. And we also do not know the IQ, but they often have much more influence on the policy (and the long-term objectives) as the public representatives.
I would be delighted if a quarter to half of the voters would say: Let me not vote today, but on where I want to see the Netherlands in five or ten years ‘ time.In that context, IQ is a non-issue.
Everything is relative and also the IQ does not escape this rule.
An anecdote for illustration.
For my newspaper I had written an article in response to a study that showed that while in secondary girls the better students are, once at the university the boys did better.
The next day I get phone from a reader who is a member of MENSA, the International Association of and for people who score in an IQ test in the top 2% of the population.
That went about as follows.
芒 鈧?艗madam, I am a member of Mensa and I am constantly consulted by people who think I am very well placed by my IQ to give advice and solve problems. 芒 鈧?/p>
芒 鈧?艗but Madam, it’s not because I have a high IQ and so good score for the IQ test, that I also have a pr脙 ktische intelligence. 芒 鈧?/p>
芒 鈧?艗madam, I confess: I can’t even cook an egg. 芒 鈧?/p>
My conclusion: Why should you want to know the IQ of politicians if that does not say anything about their ability, honesty and especially their healthy farming sense?
Was Einstein a good politician?