Your 140 IQ Is NOT Impressive

a reply to: Metallicus

Meh... Mines 141. I like to think I'm fairly intelligent or at the very least not an idiot. I also have pretty severe, untreated, ADHD. IQ means nothing in reality really. For example I'm sure there is a fairly large number of people with an IQ of 110 that are far more successful financially than I am and at the end of the day, at least for me, it's all about being able to provide for my family and survive. People who boast about their IQ are almost as bad as the people who need to show off their Mensa card as soon as they meet you.

Dangit, I was gonna start a thread bragging about my 135 IQ, but you guys really burst my bubble.

What about the fact that my dog has an IQ of about 40...do you think that will impress people??

a reply to: Metallicus

IQ Tests don't measure Intelligence. They only measure one's ability to succeed or fail in the education system.

I've never really tested my IQ , but I do know that it sometimes lowers itself and other times it seems to exceed itself to my surprise, but I expect an upgrade in the near future...

ive got an IQ of 110 the last i checked about 10 yrs ago when i was 26 or so, which is average i think. no matter i read a Derren Brown book called tricks of the mind, and he introduced me to a memory system called the method of loci, because i learned how to do this i was able to remember 3x 1000 word answers to three pre told questions without forgetting 1 word and was able to get an A and get into UNI at the mature age of 32, this method is thousands of years old, yet i had to read a book by a magician to find it, If this stuff was taught in schools none of us would need to work long hours in the industrial machine to make ends meet................ oh sorry my bad ive just answered why its not taught in schools.


good thread bud

originally posted by: ModeSeven
a reply to: Metallicus

Hi Mode seven, welcome to ATS!

IQ Tests don't measure Intelligence. They only measure one's ability to succeed or fail in the education system.

Thanks for that enlightened reminder. IQ is good for comparing peoples intelligence quotient in highly developed civilizations, where everything is provided for us.

Take most people out of the city though, place them in the wilderness they would freeze and or starve…

Can you build simple shelter, start a fire, stay warm and dry, secure a food and water source?

How about hands on fixing things? I may know all the math and have a big word index, spell and write perfectly, but can't fix a thing…

So learning the academia is useful when added to experience. IQ tests don't measure much experience.

a reply to: intrptr

totally agree dude, XP beats IQ all day XP will keep you alive if the sh*t ever does hit that fan.

originally posted by: ModeSeven
a reply to: Metallicus

IQ Tests don't measure Intelligence. They only measure one's ability to succeed or fail in the education system.

Nope, actually: folks with really high IQ's often find it quite hard to succeed in the education system - or in any other system. They often suffer from social isolation, their behaviour is often seen as clumsy, anti-social and irritating. Hence we have organisations like Mensa, whom in fact can be seen as a patient support group (or self help group) for highly intelligent people.

Being proud of having a high IQ is a bit like being proud of having blue eyes: you were simply born that way. Nothing to be proud of. But the guy (or gal) that has stamina, sets a goal and achieves it - that person has reason to be proud of his/her achievement. High IQ or not.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Nope, actually: folks with really high IQ's often find it quite hard to succeed in the education system - or in any other system.

What IQ test is that? The only ones ever given to me were in the school system.

a reply to: intrptr

There are many, many intelligence test out there, e.g. Cattell, WAIS or Stanford-Binet. They all have different scales, so you can score say 160 on one and 130 on the next (same person, same conditions). In fact, if you say "I have an IQ of 140" that's meaningless unless you say on which test you scored that number. The way Mensa deals with this is simple: they simply say you need to be in the 98th or better percentile. So, regardless the test and the scale, you should score better than 98 percent of the population.

originally posted by: ArJunaBug
Beginning with the OP this thread reads like one big penis measuring contest. Especially the OP.

Yep.

But at least we won't get a bunch of penis-pics in this thread. I hear Trump reads these threads while he's pooping and measuring his hands.

Double post!

originally posted by: intrptr
So learning the academia is useful when added to experience. IQ tests don't measure much experience.

They measure potential. What you do with that potential is up to you.

BTW: intelligence is quite useful to survive in harsh situations.. Look at us humans - hardly of any importance: weak, hairless and slow - easy prey. But we survived because we're social and intelligent creatures.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: intrptr

There are many, many intelligence test out there, e.g. Cattell, WAIS or Stanford-Binet. They all have different scales, so you can score say 160 on one and 130 on the next (same person, same conditions). In fact, if you say "I have an IQ of 140" that's meaningless unless you say on which test you scored that number. The way Mensa deals with this is simple: they simply say you need to be in the 98th or better percentile. So, regardless the test and the scale, you should score better than 98 percent of the population.

Do any of those tests include feeling, emotions, empathy? How to get along and play well with others? Understanding human nature is at least as important as rote knowledge, probably more.

In fact I bet the most dysfunctional types have the highest IQ's. You did address that, I think.

originally posted by: intrptr
Do any of those tests include feeling, emotions, empathy? How to get along and play well with others? Understanding human nature is at least as important as rote knowledge, probably more.

Apart from IQ tests, there are also EQ tests, which measure your emotional intelligence. Your emotional intelligence is an important part of your general intelligence and is generally regarded to be more important than cognitive intelligence.

One of the better known EQ tests is the Bar-On EQ-i test. It tests various important facets of general intelligence: emotional self-awareness, assertiveness, self-regard, self-actualization, independence, empathy, interpersonal relationship, social responsibilty, problem solving capacity, reality testing, flexibility, stress tolerance, impulse control, happiness and optimism.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

BTW: intelligence is quite useful to survive in harsh situations.. Look at us humans - hardly of any importance: weak, hairless and slow - easy prey. But we survived because we're social and intelligent creatures.

What you call survival, I call the rape of the natural world.

The higher IQs made bridges, electric power plants, cities, now everyone's interned in them. The geniuses thought up weapons of war, bombs aircraft, nuclear weapons, now they threaten everyone. Geniuses invent industry, now everyone is choking from the effluent runoff from our advanced civilization. How intelligent is that?

a reply to: ForteanOrg

One of the better known EQ tests is the Bar-On EQ-i test. It tests various important facets of general intelligence: emotional self-awareness, assertiveness, self-regard, self-actualization, independence, empathy, interpersonal relationship, social responsibility, problem solving capacity, reality testing, flexibility, stress tolerance, impulse control, happiness and optimism.

According to certain linear yardsticks. Standards of acceptability across a broad spectrum. Switching from whats called "Civilization", to "Society" standards approved by the top. A laughing idiot in a mental asylum is happy, isn't he?

Then being a little more aware than others is a certain kind of hell, too. Id rather be aware and sad, than ignorant and happy.

I think IQ tests create a division among peoples, substituting conformity to a standard for everyone to aspire too, for diversity of individuals, their equality and rights.

Its the same division they promote along other lines, class, religion, education, skin color, etc. They promote a hierarchy or ranking to give some an elite status and the rest an inferiority complex.

The higher you score the better you are?

Divide and Rule.

i have no idea what my IQ is. never tested it. i consider myself not a genius, not stupid, and happy enough with that.

originally posted by: geezlouise
-- snip --
I've only just suspected that some people I interact with are probably geniuses and I always like them normally. I'd have liked to meet Einstein or Hawking or Tesla... I am kinda curious about really smart people, I wanna know what it's like for them. I wanna be around them and feel it and get to know it, lol. I'm a weirdo.

You're not a weirdo.

There've been a few times I've mentioned the story here at ATS but I've still never taken the trouble go back and source it. If memory serves, it was in the "all Einstein" issue of Discover Magazine. Anyway, one of the very few times they ever spoke face to face Einstein lost interest in his own (adult) son and walked away mid-conversation when he realized he couldn't discuss physics on his father's level. Being really smart doesn't necessarily make you decent, let alone nice.

To have spent some time with Tesla, though, yes that is something to dream of. Having read several books about him, he apparently was gracious and humble with everyone he met.

Having worked for two genius level programmers in a row, my preference would be the opportunity to spend some casual time in the presence of someone with great wisdom, instead.

originally posted by: intrptr
I think IQ tests create a division among peoples, substituting conformity to a standard for everyone to aspire too, for diversity of individuals, their equality and rights.

Yes, any norm has its darker side. Many that apply for a job are refused by ignorant HR drones simply because they don't fit the "knock out criteria". So, it actually might happen that a surgeon, who has worked in the field for 20 years and has done thousands of successful operations is "knocked out" by the requirement to prove to have an IQ of 130 or better (not to mention the common foolishness of just mentioning a target number without specifying which test to use to measure it).

In my country I've seen quite laughable requirements for certain jobs. Simple work, that used to be done by people with just a few years of basic education now suddenly requires A-levels, and even a simple secretary has to have a college degree or better. OTOH, this may indicate the erosion of standards in our educational system, because what typically was done during the last 30 years was to lower the standard if too many pupils failed the exams.

Its the same division they promote along other lines, class, religion, education, skin color, etc. They promote a hierarchy or ranking to give some an elite status and the rest an inferiority complex.

Well, part of it may be something I call "glorification". In many situations the bosses don't know what the requirements are for a certain type of job. So, typically the boss asks the existing workers to help him out. "Well, to be honest, in the old days we simply got trained on the job, but nowadays I'd say you should require at least a MSc economics". So the boss tells the HR department that "having an MSc economics is a knock out requirement". And when they finally find a guy that wants to take that job, his new collegues in effect have qualified their existing job on Masters level

The higher you score the better you are?

Nope, the higher you score, the more intelligent you are (if you're referring to IQ tests that is).