Malcolm Gladwell Iq Research Paper

1106 Words3 Pages

IQ. An acronym that is not heard as much in today’s world but was a major decision maker back when it was introduced. An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from one of the several standardized tests designed to assess human intelligence (dictionary). In his famous book,Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell indites, “The relationship between success and IQ works only up to a point. Once someone has reached an IQ score of somewhere around 120, having additional IQ points doesn’t seem to translate into any measurable real-world advantage.” (Gladwell 79). When referring to IQ results, I have found that Malcolm Gladwell and his reasoning which he builds off of psychologist and author Liam Hudson is incorrect. The more innate talent a person has, the more, the better off that person is going to be. Hard work pays off. Gladwell clearly has no reasoning to support his claim and there is strong evidence that proves him to be incorrect. The Beatles got the opportunity to be so great since they needed to perform their music four hours a day (eight days a week) amid their two-year stint in Hamburg. Bobby Fischer turned into a grandmaster at chess following quite a while of sharpening his skills at the Brooklyn Chess Club. …show more content…

On page 80 he relates IQ to basketball. He says that to a certain extent, height is a major factor in whether a person has a chance of playing professional basketball but after that, once the height is above six feet, he indites that height stops mattering. This is not the argument though. The main problem is that his claim was that there is no advantage as the IQs reach a certain high score which he set as 120 and if you look closely at his basketball analogy, almost everything but the fourth sentence in the second paragraph on page 80 makes sense. He admits that there is an advantage to being six foot two than six one. Here, he is proving his own claim wrong with his

Open Document