Well, I just couldn't allow myself not to contribute to this thread. Honestly, there have been very few posts that I think are objective or at least
making any sense. (Btw, please do not argue with me on this claim because I'm not in the league of my own so I'm afraid I might lose such debate
The most ridiculous thing to read here was some arguments which claim that an individual who made a post possesses a unique thinking
having a strong personal opinion makes you a genius? Some have strong opinions but at the same time are idiots because they can’t accept even the
unquestionable evidence that contradicts their thoughts. This is a conspiracy forum, so this implies that people who come here are capable of making
their own mind. Still, IQ of the ATS members is on a wide range, a shocking conclusion, right? There are more questions which I couldn’t handle
myself. Please, could you show me two people on earth that share an identical thinking? Or could you define the measure used to distinct other
people's thinking from yours? That would be of interest to me.
I feel so sorry to admit that I do not qualify for the 140+ elite... Well, I actually did...once...
I think I was at the age of 15 (could be 14)
when I performed my first online IQ test. The score then was 167 and, needless to say, this was quite a surprise to me, though my parents were less
astonished by that. However, the test itself undoubtedly was not a reliable one. Then at the age of 18 I did a test of 3 parts and the average score
was somewhat above 130 (again it was online but this time in my native language; the site also claimed it to be a translation of some famous test).
Just to show where I'm heading, I have to say that a couple of days ago I tried the test on High IQ Society's webpage and received 126 there.
Additionally, I accidentally found one part of those 3 just mentioned - got only 122 this time. And I'm nearly 20 now.
What does this recession prove? It opposes the statement that IQ does not change with time. Of course, this single case is not what you would accept
as a proof but having performed some tests through years (not all mentioned above but with similar results) I can state that environment DOES matter
and it actually has quite a big impact. By the age of 16 I wasn't what you would call an outgoing person - liked staying alone, solving various
puzzles, crosswords or just studying for school. Then during the following two years I totally abandoned these activities, parties and friends became
a lot more important
And now at the university I'm even less mentally challenged. This is perhaps that I don't have much interest in the subjects
I'm being taught. I suppose I don’t have to say that people tend to adapt, so less demanding circumstances could possibly change your thinking as
IQ, as tests measure it, can equally successfully change in the positive way. Absolutely! No obstacles for that. Spend several months doing IQ
test-like puzzles and you will notice an improvement. By definition this should be impossible, shouldn't it? IQ is supposed to be something that
you're born with, right? Yeah, here come the problems. The pattern of questions involving graphics does not differ that much as one might think and
I’m confident that one’s mind could cope better with similar problems after some training. Moreover, is a question about some stupid theorem,
which name I couldn’t even translate to my mother-tongue, a problem for someone with 3 master’s degrees and a couple of PhDs? Obviously, those who
make such tests strangely perceive intelligence. To my mind, as much appropriate question would be about the number of cylinders in Aston Martin DB9.
This is something you LEARN. Coming back to those visualized questions, these are much easier to handle for people who are good at arts. Do you think
it is right to "measure" Einstein and Van Gogh on the same scale? Due to these reasons, IQ tests to me seem nothing more than another puzzle for
I know one guy who studies with me, he can play multiple musical instruments, he’s hyperactive and always full of ideas, and still his academic
performance is good – I’m certain he would get 140+ on IQ tests, but… he’s also a person from whom you might hear the dumbest questions, e.g.
you want to watch a boring movie, take that guy with you then at least you’ll have what to laugh from. This is not an exception from the rule. We
have lecturers making jokes one about the other that if you put them in the new room they couldn’t find a way out. And this is true; I often wonder
how some of them don’t get hit by a car while crossing the street. Of course, I’ve met different type of exceptions (but those are much rarer than
the bell-curve suggests) – people who really seem to have a superior thinking in a way how they perceive things from many unusual perspectives (or
maybe it’s their self-confidence that fools you). The latter individuals could not be distinguished from the “nerds” with the help of IQ
I have to apologize to a 13 year old gentleman for my spelling; you know English is not my native language
Yeah, I also started reading
encyclopedias for several times at the very young age but the creation of the planet Earth got me bored just after 20 pages. It’s a pity nobody
forced me to continue, maybe now I would also be among the members of one of the Sigma societies
At high school teachers thought I was gifted more
than my peers in nearly all subjects except arts (anyway, I’m still planning to learn playing the guitar in the upcoming 5 years
) but I never
received any special treatment, although, e.g. math lessons seemed as a waste of time to me and could have been spent more efficiently.
I have a few more critiques to the IQ tests. Firstly, is 100 really the average for the whole population? I really doubt that and think that the test
has a developed country bias. As far as I understand, pupils and students in the US and some other countries have their IQs tested by the education
institutions. Hence, the percentage of population of those states constitutes not a proportional part in IQ score database. On the other hand, China
and India has inferior education but more than 2bn inhabitants, I wonder how many people have been tested there. The conclusion to be drawn is that
the real average is lower, as well as other percentiles used as a threshold by High IQ organizations.
The time constraint is something that I hate most about the IQ test. If I’m a slowly thinking person, am I dumber if I still come up with the
solution in a twice longer time? I agree that such a constraint is important in the job application tests, but it does not make much sense in
I would be grateful if you could spend some time criticizing my reasoning.
Have a good time!