144 "Does the following sentence make sense if the string WIND is changed to WILL?"

John WINDingly changed his WIND.


John willingly changed his will.

The correct answer was "No." But the resulting sentence is both grammatically correct, albeit rendundant, and capable of bearing significance. After all, one can willingly redirect one's willpower. I do it all the time. The only available answers were 'yes' and 'no', but the test's "correct" answer is easily reproached.

For the record, I scored quite well. But I worry that another would score poorly, and internalize the matter unduly. Such tests merit little respect, IMO.
144 Furthermore, perhaps he altered his final documents. 080521
u24 "perhaps he altered his final documents."

exactly my interpretation. I saw it makes perfect sense.
Lemon_Soda The Word "will" and "willpower" do not bare the same definition and thus are not interchangable. Your thinking conceptually. 080523
morning curmudgeon bare and bear do not have the same definition.
your and you're do not have the same definition.
you're typing sloppily.

Lemon_Soda :) 080523
somebody The original poster's use of "will" is correct, albeit awkward.

Look at it from a different angle:

"It was his will to eat." (correct)
"It was his willpower to eat." (incorrect)

"He willingly changed his will to eat." (correct)
"He willingly changed his willpower to eat." (incorrect)

Merriam-Webster's first definition of "will" is "desire, wish; used to express or in negative constructions refusal. [...]" Thus, one can willingly change one's will.

Willpower, on the other hand, is primarily defined as "resoluteness" and secondarily as "energetic determination." M-W offers no other definitions for willpower, although I acknowledge there are other dictionaries. It would make almost no sense to willingly change one's resoluteness; either one is resolute or one is not. "Change" implies modification; while one can change WHAT one is resolute about, one cannot change the properties of resoluteness without ceasing to be it altogether. In the case of "energetic determination", I suppose one could "willingly change" it. However, this reads even more awkwardly than the former, and eschews all clarity of meaning.
also "interchangable" is not a word 080523
Shitting Bull These arguments further highlight the relative inanity of IQ tests. Clearly (two) intelligent people can reach totally opposite conclusions about the same question. Yet one party would receive points on the test, while another would not. In such situations, an answer of "true" is as unrevealing as an answer of "false". Amusing to think that some still put stock in their IQ score. 080523
skeptIQal one of my friends, he is very smart about computers, but he misses the nuance in social interactions a lot, sometimes it is seriously annoying. his iq is high, but he cannot handle himself on the street, and he does not know how to handle the emotions of others very well.

another friend of mine is techno-stupid, and bad at math and sciences, but he finds the poetry in everything. in complicated human situations he really calls it like it is, without reducing it all to juvenille simplicity. he has an uncanny ability to read the social landscape.

obviously the first guy i mentioned would score better on an iq test, but all things considered, i consider the second guy to be more intelligent. of the types of problems i might need assistance with, i would go to the second guy five times before i'd go to the first guy once.

yeah, there's definitely a problem with the way iq tests assess intelligence. i do think that one must be somewhat intelligent to do well on an iq test, but i think there are many highly intelligent people who would do poorly on 'em. funny that they're even still used.
or can we we cannot understand what we cannot quantify 080525
minnesota_chris I would rather date someone with nice tits, or who had a pretty voice or could tell funny jokes even. 080525
hsg und... er.. score_much? 100611
oren I've found that many of_the visual problems on IQ_tests have more_than_one correct_answer. Most_annoying. 100611
hsg I am a fan of open_ended questions for that reason.

A test made by stupid teacher might be best flunked by a smarter person. They maybe won't make the bestudent, but should they? If you are failing though, it is best to know you are failing at someone'stupid game.

Sometimes there is a best_fit answer for a spatial_reasoning question. Sometimes the're multipullayers. Sometimes the attention "not_necessarily", beyond someone's grasp.
what's it to you?
who go